Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The bolded part stated with such conviction, yet not a shred of proof. Zimmerman was damn tired of young men/teenagers performing burglaries in his neighborhood. That is the entire reason he was out on neighborhood watch.
It wasn't his job or responsibility to confront Martin, He called the police and they specifically told him to stay put and he didn't listen. Had he not had a gun, he wouldn't have confronted Martin and instead let the police do their job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snebarekim
Bolded is your opinion only. If Martin had known Zimmerman was armed, he very likely would not have ambushed Zimmerman, and started a physical confrontation. At least a smart person would not have.
Martin was in the act of beating Zimmerman's head into a sidewalk repeatedly when Zimmerman shot him. Once.
Martin did not know what Zimmerman's intentions were. Imagine walking home at night and having a man with a gun in his hand following you.
Had Martin been armed he could have justified shooting Zimmerman. You see the problematic paradox that arises by having an armed society.
It wasn't his job or responsibility to confront Martin, He called the police and they specifically told him to stay put and he didn't listen. Had he not had a gun, he wouldn't have confronted Martin and instead let the police do their job.
Martin did not know what Zimmerman's intentions were. Imagine walking home at night and having a man with a gun in his hand following you.
Had Martin been armed he could have justified shooting Zimmerman. You see the problematic paradox that arises by having an armed society.
The night of the confrontation, Zimmerman called a police non-emergency line to report Martin as a suspicious person in the community, and told the dispatcher he was following the teen. West said there was "no suggestion" that Zimmerman continued to follow the teen after the dispatcher told him not to. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-...attorney-says/
It wasn't his job or responsibility to confront Martin, He called the police and they specifically told him to stay put and he didn't listen. Had he not had a gun, he wouldn't have confronted Martin and instead let the police do their job.
Zimmerman was on an approved watch cycle to be out there as watch for the compound. Yes, the 911 dispatcher told him he "didnt need to do that" when Zimmerman stated he was going to follow Martin when he ducked out of site, but that does not mean he was doing it simply because he was armed. That is only your opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno
Martin did not know what Zimmerman's intentions were. Imagine walking home at night and having a man with a gun in his hand following you.
If you are going to give revisionist history, you lose credibility. There is zero evidence that Zimmerman had his handgun in his hand while following Martin. It only came out once Martin started a physical fight and then discovered Zimmerman had the holstered gun. Martin then went for the gun, telling Zimmerman he was "going to die". Zimmerman obviously got the gun first. Self defense on Zimmerman's behalf.
"Zimmerman, a married insurance underwriter who studied criminal justice at Seminole State College, told police that Trayvon approached him from behind as he was returning to his car.
He told police, his family and his attorney that Trayvon decked him in the nose hard, causing him to hit the ground. Then, he says, Trayvon started punching him and slamming his head on the concrete."
Zimmerman was on an approved watch cycle to be out there as watch for the compound. Yes, the 911 dispatcher told him he "didnt need to do that" when Zimmerman stated he was going to follow Martin when he ducked out of site, but that does not mean he was doing it simply because he was armed. That is only your opinion.
You really think Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he not had a gun with him. I'm not buying that. The gun gave Zimmerman false confidence, and he put himself in a horrible situation because of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snebarekim
If you are going to give revisionist history, you lose credibility. There is zero evidence that Zimmerman had his handgun in his hand while following Martin. It only came out once Martin started a physical fight and then discovered Zimmerman had the holstered gun. Martin then went for the gun, telling Zimmerman he was "going to die". Zimmerman obviously got the gun first. Self defense on Zimmerman's behalf.
I didn't say Zimmerman had a gun in his hand when we encountered Martin. I am saying if you knew an armed person was following you home at night, you might consider ambushing them before they have a chance to kill you. Martin didn't know what Zimmerman wanted, all he knew was that Zimmerman was following him. While I think Martin should have called the police instead of taking matters into his own hands, he wasn't unjustified in attacking Zimmerman. The sad truth of this case was that neither men were committing a crime and both had justification for how they reacted. This sad ordinal wouldn't have occurred if Zimmerman didn't have a gun on him.
You really think Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he not had a gun with him. I'm not buying that. The gun gave Zimmerman false confidence, and he put himself in a horrible situation because of it.
I didn't say Zimmerman had a gun in his hand when we encountered Martin. I am saying if you knew an armed person was following you home at night, you might consider ambushing them before they have a chance to kill you. Martin didn't know what Zimmerman wanted, all he knew was that Zimmerman was following him. While I think Martin should have called the police instead of taking matters into his own hands, he wasn't unjustified in attacking Zimmerman. The sad truth of this case was that neither men were committing a crime and both had justification for how they reacted. This sad ordinal wouldn't have occurred if Zimmerman didn't have a gun on him.
According to Martin's girlfriend in her testimony, Trayvon made it back to the house but did not go in. He waited and confronted Zimmerman.
According to Martin's girlfriend in her testimony, Trayvon made it back to the house but did not go in. He waited and confronted Zimmerman.
Do you blame him. Would you want a strange man with a gun coming to your home when your loved ones live there? Or would you ambush them on the way? Martin was immature and should have instead called the police, but you can't fault him for his wanting to confront Zimmerman away from his home. Tragic incident that was a byproduct of a heavily armed society.
You really think Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he not had a gun with him. I'm not buying that. The gun gave Zimmerman false confidence, and he put himself in a horrible situation because of it.
Yet you still have no proof the gun itself "emboldened" Zimmerman to follow. Just your opinion. Seems you may be projecting some on how you may have acted if in the same situation. "I'm not going to follow that potential burgler, too scary!", but not everybody shirks their duty when unarmed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno
I didn't say Zimmerman had a gun in his hand when we encountered Martin. I am saying if you knew an armed person was following you home at night, you might consider ambushing them before they have a chance to kill you. Martin didn't know what Zimmerman wanted, all he knew was that Zimmerman was following him. While I think Martin should have called the police instead of taking matters into his own hands, he wasn't unjustified in attacking Zimmerman.
There is zero evidence that Martin had knowledge that Zimmerman was armed. None. Simply assumptions on your part.
The ambush attack on Zimmerman would have been downright stupid if he had known Zimmerman was armed. But I agree, he was confronting somebody that was creeping him out. Unfortunately Martin thought to turn it into a fight, and Zimmerman defended himself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno
The sad truth of this case was that neither men were committing a crime and both had justification for how they reacted. This sad ordinal wouldn't have occurred if Zimmerman didn't have a gun on him.
Again, your opinion only. Zimmerman was tired of all the break ins where he lived, as were his neighbors. That much is obvious. Armed or unarmed, he very well could have followed through on tracking down a potential burgler. I think I would have.
If Zimmerman hadnt been armed, he could have likely had his skull bashed in on that sidewalk that night.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
