Didn't Trayvon Martin deserve a fair trial too?

[DanTex]

Question for the Zimmerman apologists.

Yes, we get it, Z deserves a fair trial. Obviously. I think he racially profiled and then killed an unarmed teenager for no good reason. I don't know whether Trayvon attacked him or not, but if Z wasn't going around looking for bad guys to vigilanticize, if he had just called the police and left T alone, then T would still be alive.

But I don't think Z should be imprisoned based on my opinion. He deserves his day in court.

The problem with the vigilanteism that Florida's SYG law (along with the conceal-carry gun culture) encourages is that Trayvon didn't get a fair trial. He was killed on the spot, based on the split-second judgement of a self-appointed gun hero.

Isn't that a thousand times more troubling than the fact that Zimmerman has been "tried and convicted in the media"?

[AH1Apache]

1. First things first, who here is an apologist for G. Zimmerman?

As far as Trayvon deserving a fair trial, yes, if he had been arrested for a crime, but he was committing no crime when he was walking back to his house, so, no, he doesn't deserve a fair trial because he didn't do anything wrong at that point in time.

I got called a "racist vigilante apologist" yesterday by jpak for defending Zimmerman's right to a fair trial, do you agree with that statement?

[jpak]

38. LOL! The Gungeon Memory Hole strikes again

yup

[AH1Apache]

41. What the are you on about now?

Please do enlighten us with you wisdom.

[shadowrider]

43. Pssssst. He's gotta run to a dictionary to find out what wisdom means, based on his posts

[AH1Apache]

46. That some funny shit there.

[DanTex]

49. Yes that was truly hilarious! What piercing humor!

[AH1Apache]

55. You obviously have no fucking clue do you?

Just another jpak supporter, thats too bad because I enjoyed reading your posts, I don't always agree with you, but at least you make arguments that are concise and reasoned most times unlike jpak, who yesterday called me a "racist vigilante apologist". Do you agree with that depiction of me?

[DanTex]

76. No clue about what?

Relax, just having a little fun. I thought it was kind of funny that you found shadow's utterly unfunny attack on jpak to be so funny. Sorry if I offended you. If you don't want to read my posts anymore, you don't have to.

I never called you a racist. I don't think you're racist. You might be a Zimmerman apologist -- I was speaking generally about people who seem to be making excuses for Zimmerman, and posting negative stories and rumors about Trayvon Martin, most likely in an effort to paint Z's actions in a more positive or excusable light. If that's not you, then fine.

On the other hand, you keep claiming that there are posters here who would like to deny Zimmerman a fair trial. That's not true, at least not that I know of.

[shadowrider]

78. And Jpak launches utterly unfunny attacks on pro-gun people all the time.

Are you mad about that too?

[DanTex]

83. I'm not mad. I was just having a laugh.

It was a cheap-shot, I admit it. I apologize. Now back to our show.

[AH1Apache]

80. Your right and I apologize

I am most certainly not a Zimmerman apologist, I'm just withholding my decision on whether he's guilty or not guilyt until the trial and all the facts come out and yet yesterday when I defended Zimmerman's right to a fair trial, jpak launched an attack on me by calling me a racist vigilante apologist. I have never posted anything negative about Trayvon nor will I, as far as those that want to deny Zimmerman a fair trial, just read some of the posts from H*yt and jp*k.

I haven't seen anyone making excuses for Zimmerman, all I've seen is support for his right to a fair trial which I would give any defendent regardless of the charge.

[ellisonz]

112. "I haven't seen anyone making excuses for Zimmerman"

It's mostly in GD. That's where the hardcore attack trolls go to troll.

Also, Hoyt and jpak hate you for your freedom, rinse and repeat.

[Frustratedlady]

2. Trayvon also had the right to defend himself...thus the supposed injuries to Z.

He probably used the iced tea can to hit him. What was he supposed to do, lie there and take it?

I don't see that mentioned much...all Zimmerman this and Zimmerman that.

[gejohnston]

3. this is not an example of vigilaneism

Unless you are talking about Spike Lee and Roseanne Barr. They are the vigilantes in the story. Zimmerman is either a murderer or some guy who didn't want his head bashed in on the concrete. Neither one fits the definition of "vigilante". How is Florida's SYG law any different than Illinois?

Trayvon get a fair trial for what? He was either murdered or shot in self defense.

[DanTex]

8. Of course it's vigilanteism.

A non-vigilante wouldn't have kept following TM after the police told him to stop. Z thought he was protecting his neighborhood.

Like I said, I don't know what happened immediately before the shooting. Maybe they did get into a fight and Z was getting his ass kicked, so at that very moment, it was self defense.

But what Z did leading up to the confrontation was vigilanteism. Very clearly.

[shadowrider]

13. Wrong, but thanks for playing

Zimmerman would have been guilty of being a vigilante IF Martin had done something to him 3 days earlier and Zimmerman went hunting for him.

That didn't happen. This in no way is a vigilante incident.

Vigilante (definition)

vig·i·lan·te
   /ˌvɪdʒəˈlænti/ Show Spelled[vij-uh-lan-tee]
noun
1.
a member of a vigilance committee.
2.
any person who takes the law into his or her own hands, as by avenging a crime.

Zimmerman wasn't avenging a crime. Spike Lee, Rosanne Barr and the NBPP are vigilantes.

[DanTex]

18. Did you read your own definition?

any person who takes the law into his or her own hands

= George Zimmerman

[shadowrider]

22. Dang, your copy button didn't get the entire thing there Dan

2.
any person who takes the law into his or her own hands, as by avenging a crime.

Now, what crime, specifically, was Zimmerman avenging?

[DanTex]

23. Do you not understand what the word "as" means?

Do I really need to explain this to you?

[shadowrider]

27. I won't argue what the meaning of "as" is. Won't do it

You tell me, what crime was Zimmerman avenging?

[DanTex]

28. OK, I'll explain.

The word "as" indicates that "by avenging a crime" is an example of one way that a person can "take the law into his or her own hands". It doesn't mean that's the only way.

Do you really think that avenging a crime is the only type of action that qualifies as vigilanteism?

Tell me you're just playing dumb. Please.

[shadowrider]

31. *Yawn* - For the third time, what crime was Zimmerman avenging?

[DanTex]

35. Really, shadowrider? You really don't get it?

[shadowrider]

40. I look at the definition as a whole. You want to split hairs on what individual words mean

That is the difference. Doesn't make you right or wrong.

Fourth time, what crime was Zimmerman avenging?

[Phlem]

45. No he doesn't

don't waste your time.

I clearly heard during his recorded message "these guys always get away with it", right there was his motivation.

I know the mentality, he'd rather be right about the argument rather than the incident.

-p

[AH1Apache]

48. You know about the mentality?

That statement right there tells us all we need to know about your mentality.

[Phlem]

54. oooh good one!

but no real meat in the argument. Just a kindergarten jab.

ha ha ha ha ha ha!

-p

[Phlem]

50. you know why your getting these insane arguments?

Cause your dealing with pro gun morons.

-p

[AH1Apache]

63. Oh look everyone

another mantra to add to the growing list
now it's "pro gun morons.
You've got some fine company there.
Have a good day, enjoy your stay here

[DanTex]

66. Pretty crazy, huh?

Glad you're here to witness.

It's like: do I really need to explain what "as" means? Is there no recourse to sanity?

[Phlem]

70. you said it I didn't chief.

-p

[ellisonz]

113. Did you not listen to his 911 call?

It's been all over the media for a month, how have you missed it?

Zimmerman states that he suspects Martin is a burglar and that "these assholes always get away."

I don't know how you've missed this key fact to the case, but you should probably concede the point. Zimmerman fashioned himself a vigilante.

[shadowrider]

116. What burglary was Zimmerman avenging?

[ellisonz]

121. He was avenging the prior break-ins.

It's very clear in the tape. There is also corroborating testimony from neighbors about how focused Zimmerman was on this issue. Concede.

[shadowrider]

125. By the way, you need to call the prosecution with your thoughtful insight

and tell them of this evidence. It's a case breaker for sure.

[AzWorker]

77. Sooo.....

If Travon attacked Zimmerman because he felt threatened by GZ's following.....does that make Trayvon a vigilante?

Seems he "took the law into his own hands"

[WinniSkipper]

93. You might like the word, but he is not a vigilante

He may have been out looking for something to happen. He may be a cop wannabe with an urge. He may be a racist hunting black men

But he is not a vigilante. And this is actually helpful to your side. The minute you call him a vigilante you give people a reason to defend him, since Zimmerman was, if he is what you call him, "avenging a crime".

Bronson in Death Wish is a vigilante. Zimmerman is more like an un-deputized Barney Fife. With a persecution complex.

[Hoyt]

95. You guys need to quit reading word for word for word while pointing your finger.

Read in chunks of words, phrases and thoughts. You won't get caught parsing words. Most of us understand what is meant by "vigilante" in this context. Only the "flat earthers" and "gun culture" crowd seems to have a problem.

[gejohnston]

98. no,

you just need to learn better word usage.

[Clames]

99. Funny.

Could dedicate a thread to all the posts you've made parsing words of other's posts in this group. You need to quit calling the pot black, Mr. Kettle.

[gejohnston]

14. 911 operators are not police

and the operator did not say don't, it was you don't need to do that. I have a narrower definition of vigilantism than you do.

[shadowrider]

17. Small point of correction

Zimmerman did not call 911. He called a direct number into dispatch and spoke to a civilian dispatcher.

[shadowrider]

9. Don't forget the NBPP and their $10k reward for Zimmerman dead or alive.

[freshwest]

12. Decried by Martin's family, the BPP, Sharpton and others. But you didn't mention that.

[shadowrider]

15. Wrong, but thanks for playing

Decrying something doesn't mitigate the FACT Lee, Barr and the NBPP acted as vigilantes. Let them decry all they want.

[freshwest]

67. Did I mention Lee and Barr? Yes, they're assholes for taking advantages. And I could refer to you to

Thread where it's argued that the NBPP are likewise full of it and have so few members they are a joke, but this hysteria about them is mainly from escapees from FR.

And vigilantism is not what I'm calling Zimmerman. He's a very troubled man with a record of assault and breaking the law and lying. Which no one on this board is claiming abourt themselves, so why identify with him?

BTW, I am not against the right to carry. I like guns. I like having one when it's useful. I am against following and provoking shit.

Which is what is happening on any thread that argues against the NRA with its 'God, guns and gays' theme.

[shadowrider]

71. Hysteria?

Lee tweeted the wrong address. The people had to move and Lee financially settled. They hit him in the wallet

NBPP? Far as I know, that bounty still exists. They have not rescinded it unless you can prove otherwise. Someone somewhere will try to collect.

Barr? Has been crackpot who tweeted the home address

Hysteria? Those 3 examples above are the epitome of the word.

[freshwest]

75. I know all of that and decried their recklessness on threads at the time. So?

Oh, wait, I see the crew is here. No one can express an opinion about any issue on Guns without being attacked. I didn't even know this thread, which was on Latest Threads, was in the Gungeon.

This is why I don't post here. If I'd known it was in this forum when I was speaking to the OP, I wouldn't have bothered. You guys can enjoy fighting with each other. I've owned guns and am a supporter of the Second and the Right to Carry.

But I have learned today that my personal opinion when trying to answer what seemed to be a heartfelt request for an answer is distorted and anything I say is utter bullshit. Have at it. Bye.

[sylvi]

105. "so why identify with him? "

When you enter these discussions accusing the skeptics of identifying with George Zimmerman, or in the words of some posters, "defending" or being an "apologist" for him, you are insulting them. The implication being, "George Zimmerman is a racist. Therefore, if you are not reflexively sure of his guilt and agree with everything I say, you must be a racist, too."

This kind of black/white, with us/against us binary thinking is baffling from certain members within a group who in any other situation would consider themselves objective, rational and reality-based. It's like on certain subjects a switch gets flipped and reason just goes out the window. I have a difficult time believing intelligence just comes and goes like that in an individual, so the only answer I'm left with is that it's just a dishonest and cowardly tactic to silence others, which further indicates there is an agenda in play that does not lend itself well to the truth.

[AzWorker]

107. Well said

We should be persuing the truth no matter where it leads.

[DanTex]

25. Right, NBPP are a bunch of vigilantes.

And so is George Zimmerman.

[ellisonz]

114. You know what is hilarious about all this...

...most everyone agrees that the NBPP are a massive joke of a political and/or criminal organization.

[shadowrider]

117. Regardles how massive of a joke they are, they have $10k REAL dollars for

Zimmerman, Dead or Alive. You don't think someone wants that?

[ellisonz]

120. Has anyone seen the money?

I don't think so.

[shadowrider]

122. C'mon man. If someone THINKS the money is there, and they see Zimmerman

they'll act, whether or not it actually is.

[Hoyt]

96. Does the fact the 6 members of the so-called New Panthers made a stupid statement change the fact

that Zimmerman is a murderer. Who cares what they or Barr said. Go to the Free Republic and you'll find a lot worse. In fact, got to almost any gun website and find the same.

[gejohnston]

97. It is not stupid if

someone takes them up on it and tries to collect. Barr gave the correct address, while Lee sent people to the wrong address.
Zimmerman may very well be a murderer, but we shall see.

[Hoyt]

100. Nobody is going to take them up on it. And they wouldn't pay anyway because you can't find the 6

members. You guys believe anything that makes you reach for your gun to make sure it is still there. I suspect the 6 New BPs are laughing their asses off at over the whole thing.

[gejohnston]

101. since I don't carry, I won't be reaching for much.

and if you are wrong? Still advertising murder for hire.

[rl6214]

126. Yeah, kinda like you guys were calling for ted nugget to be arrested by the SS.

He is probably laughing his ass off over the whole thing, and I believe he is a huge ass.

[Hoyt]

129. I suspect he messed his pants meeting with them without a gun or bow.

[rl6214]

130. English translation please

[Hoyt]

131. Like Zimmerman and many other toters, he's a coward without a gun.

Typing on phone with auto-speller sucks also.

[rl6214]

134. "Typing on phone with auto-speller sucks also."

Gotcha

[Phlem]

39. Shot in self defense?

Really?

give me a fricken break. There was only one gun in this scenario which was being carried by a lunatic.

my god people.



-p

[gejohnston]

44. number of guns doesn't matter

bare hands and concrete sidewalks are also lethal weapons.
Have you heard the expression "trial by media"?

[Phlem]

47. Sure I have.

But it's not happening in this case. Z was the aggressor carrying a gun and following T. even after he was told not to. I'm seeing just as many apologists for z as I am supposedly seeing media judgement on him.

-p

[shadowrider]

51. He was never told not to follow Martin.

I'm NOT a Zimmerman apologist. All I've ever said is wait for the facts. Nothing more, nothing less

If wanting facts makes me an apologist in your eyes, you need glasses.

[gejohnston]

53. if it wasn't a case of trial by media then

why the inaccurate descriptions of SYG
celebrity vigilantes

[Clames]

79. Really?

But it's not happening in this case.

Sure it isn't.

[Phlem]

85. and the rest

"I'm seeing just as many apologists for z as I am supposedly seeing media judgement on him."

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .............ad nauseum.

-p

[Phlem]

86. PS.

I AM pro gun. And I believe in the right to bear arms.

-p

[Clames]

89. So what?

You really felt that somehow justifies anything here? Laughable...

[Phlem]

106. your working on Zimmerman level.

It takes an adult to responsible with a gun.

Glad you've mastered the smilies cause your just killing me.

-p

[Clames]

109. You should focus on being an adult...

...who has a better understanding of basic grammar.

[rl6214]

127. "It takes an adult to responsible with a gun"

What does this mean?

[Clames]

4. I don't think anyone is making that argument.

The problem with the vigilanteism that Florida's SYG law (along with the conceal-carry gun culture) encourages is that Trayvon didn't get a fair trial.

Anyone who has actually read the necessary statutes knows that vigilantism is not encouraged by SYG laws nor CCW laws.

[DanTex]

6. I have read the statutes.

Yes, both SYG and CCW laws encourage vigilanteism. You think Z would have confronted Trayvon Martin if he didn't have a gun on him?

In a way, I consider Zimmerman to be a victim here too. He got caught up in the CCW gun hero mentality. Instead of doing what was prudent, and what was actually best for his neighborhood, he got carried away with the idea the role of being a "sheepdog", looking out for bad guys, and "standing your ground" rather than avoiding confrontation and letting trained law enforcement officers enforce the laws.

[Clames]

11. Obviously you haven't...

...or you have an incredibly skewed interpretation of what is written.

You think Z would have confronted Trayvon Martin if he didn't have a gun on him?

Possibly. It's impossible for you or anyone else to come to the conclusion that confrontation was solely because he was carrying a gun. You simply don't have the facts.

He got caught up in the CCW gun hero mentality.

You and Hoyt much be trading these jems...

[DanTex]

16. Actually I have. Have you?

And as much as you like to dismiss the vigilante mentality that pervades the gun culture, it remains the case that the NRA crowd very much glorifies the idea of armed citizens taking justice into their own hands.

Without CCW, Trayvon would be alive. Without the empowerment from the gun, the knowledge that he could stand his ground, and the gun culture that glorifies DGU, Trayvon would still be alive.

You have to be willfully ignorant to think that GZ would have gone around playing vigilante if he hadn't felt empowered by his gun. And even if he did, TM wouldn't have been shot, and would have lived to tell his side of the story.

[Clames]

24. I have.

As well the versions of the law in my state and the states I frequently travel too.

Without CCW, Trayvon would be alive.

Bullshit. Zimmerman could just have easily carried a gun without a permit. Not holding a drop of water with that bucket.

You have to be willfully ignorant...

Only willful ignorance I see here is what you are doing with that broad brush you are swinging around. Your opinions do not equal facts, you should learn that lesson.

[DanTex]

33. Zimmerman was a "law abiding" CCer. A "sheepdog".

He bought into the DGU BS from the gun culture. The "armed citizen"/"sheepdog" stuff. You know, all those people who post things like "good riddance" on gun forums in response to stories where a CCer shoots a fleeing thief in the back.

GZ thought he was doing himself and his community a favor. He thought of himself as a good guy, a law abiding gun owner. Without the CCW permit and the gun culture, he would have found some other hobby, and wouldn't have ended up shooting an innocent unarmed kid. And most likely ruined his own life in the process.

[Clames]

81. So to you...

...all CCW permit holders are "sheepdogs"? That about as baseless as the rest of your rant.

[DanTex]

87. So you think Trayvon "had it coming", huh? Wow!

Or maybe we could stop intentionally misreading each other's posts...

[Clames]

91. Nope.

I've never said that but I'm Jack's complete lack of surprise you'd say that. If you don't want your posts misread then you should do a better job typing them up. So far you have several posts equating CCW holders to "sheepdogs" so there really isn't much misinterpretation going on.

[TheCowsCameHome]

36. Who is this "Hoyt" you refer to?

I don't see that name in this thread.

Or do you just enjoy throwing out DU member names?

[shadowrider]

42. I've seen my name thrown out there too on a thread in which I'm not participating

Where's your question over that?

[TheCowsCameHome]

102. Dunno.

Got a link handy?

[Clames]

69. Well go look in other threads...

...and maybe you'll understand the reference.

[spin]

82. You may have read the statutes ...

but I feel that you may have read them and allowed you own prejudice against CCW and Stand Your Ground to cause you to interpret the wording in a far different manner than a reasonable man would.

But I could be wrong and I might have missed something that you caught. Therefore please point out in the actual statutes where the Florida law encourages vigilantism.

While the following is not a Florida statute, it does come from the State of Florida web page for concealed carry.

3. The law permits you to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense. Carrying a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman or a "good samaritan."
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html

It would seem logical that if Florida wanted those with carry permits to be vigilantes, the above quote would have been worded differently.

[rl6214]

128. "gun hero mentality"

Did you make this one up because I can't find anything in doing a google search for it?

[sylvi]

5. What is the insistence on the part

Why this insistence on the part of so many of you prosecutor wannabes on characterizing those trying to look impartially and critically at the evidence as "apologists' and "defenders"? It is very dishonest and seems to me to be an attempt to simply have a chilling effect on those who might disagree with you. Surely your egos aren't so easily bruised that you can't stand someone disagreeing with you or questioning your assumptions. Or are they?

[krispos42]

7. Martin was murdered.

Everybody accused of a crime deserves a fair trial. In a few hundred cases a year, the accused doesn't make it to trial because he or she was killed by their intended victim, who killed them to prevent death or serious injury to themselves.

Martin, as not being criminal, had no need of a trial. The person that killed him, Zimmerman, needs one.

[Union Scribe]

104. Exactly.

The OP's entire argument is nonsensical because of the idea that Martin 'deserved a trial.'

[freshwest]

10. Some don't believe they'd ever be in Martin's shoes, and are pushing away that terror.

Part of it is they can't empathize with Martin, but they can do that with Zimmerman. After all, he had a gun, and so do they. It makes a sense of kinship that is hard to break. If they don't defend Z, their own actions may become suspect.

So they must defend him in defense of themselves, see?

They can put on their blinders to his record of domestic violence and other assaults on women and LEOs, but the gun counts for a lot and the record gets glossed over. Because none of us are perfect, and someone might come and take their guns, if Z can't have one, too. Many people, not just gun owners, visualize themselves in Z's shoes. Mainly from media dramas, but sometimes from events in their lives or their communities.

So he's their blood brother, and always will be.

Whereas Martin, whoever he really was, we don't know, fits the same demographic that some people fear. Would they fear him if they felt they had something in common with him? Or even more painful, if they could imagine their own fear in a similar situation, being followed by a stranger in a vehicle who gets out and acts belligerent?

People don't want to admit their helplessness and fear. The same fear that made Martin scream for help and then whimper as he lay dying. That's traumatic, so it gets sanitized by all the talk of what he must have done.

Because to face that moment when you are without any power is humiliating. To face pain and death, when you least expected it, is terrifying. It destroys the confidence one needs to walk around on this planet and live life.

I think that's what we're dealing with here. You decide.

[shadowrider]

26. I've decided. I've decided you're full of it

I am NOT Zimmermans blood brother, I do not defend him to defend myself.

We do NOT know it was Martin screaming for help. Care to prove that?

[freshwest]

56. Wow, your name is Dan Tex. I didn't know he had a twin.

[AH1Apache]

34. What utter bullshit

So you equate those of us saying that the justice system says Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers, to being his blood brother? What utter BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!

You have no, none, nada, clue of what we're about do you?

Your whole post is filled with distortions and untruths.

[freshwest]

61. Getting a bit riled up about my explaination to Dan Tex, huh? If it doesn't apply to you, forget it.

[AH1Apache]

65. Nope not riled up

just calls it as I sees it and I'm calling your whole post utter bullshit and highly distorted.

[freshwest]

72. Your hyperbole over one post shows you to be riled up.

The post was MY OPINION, and just like anyone else on this board, I have a RIGHT TO HAVE ONE.

You just went on a tirade after I tried to talk and give my impressions to the OP writer. He wanted to have a discussion, a reasoning out. I wrote my thoughts as I typed. He hasn't answered me yet, but I doubt he would categorize my post that way.

Distorting what?

MY OWN OPINION?

Where did that come from?

Yes, everyone who doesn't agree with whatever you are keeping hidden inside your own skull that you refuse to reveal, whatever they say, is utter bullshit.

Flaming another poster and not saying anything but they are wrong, giving no analysis of the points. Bye.

[AH1Apache]

74. Correct

you are entitled to your own opinion and I am entitled to my own opinion that your whole post was utter bullshit and chock full of distortions.
Bye

[lacrew]

19. This case certainly has a polarizing effect.

Martin is either a completely innocent victim, or somebody who was shot in self defense.

1. Innocent victim - the notion of a trial is absurd.
2. Shot in self defense - the notion of a trial is absurd.

SYG Law? I still fail to see how SYG is even in this discussion.

1. You don't believe Zimmerman's story, andf he initiated the fight, SYG is moot.
2. You believe Zimmerman, and he shot in self defense, while on the ground, SYG is moot.

Too many people trying to make this incident fit into their worldview or agenda.

I still don't know what happened that night (which places me in the same group as another 319,999,999 people). All I know is that a confrontation occurred, and Martin is dead.

Would Martin be alive if Zimmerman didn't have a gun? Yes (although Zimmerman might be dead, if you believe his story)...and Zimmerman broke no law by possessing the gun.

Would Martin be alive if Zimmerman had stayed in his truck? Yes...but Zimmerman broke no law by getting out of his truck and following Martin (donning the Nomex right about now).

What about Zimmerman's disobeying the dispatcher? If you listen to the audio of the 911 call, Zimmerman has clearly stopped his pursuit, and is afraid to give his address out to the dispatcher...because he has no idea where Martin is. So the initial contact is OVER.

What happened in the next 90 seconds is the important part - who re-initiated contact? Who started the fight? And you know what? Nobody will ever be able to prove what happened in those 90 seconds; and, in our system, that lack of the ability to prove anything works to Zimmerman's favor.

That's just the way it is. I don't know why this has become such a political hot topic. It shouldn't be.

[shadowrider]

30. This stopped being about Martin long ago

It's now a frontal assault on SYG laws with Martin being used as a pawn in that battle.

Pro-gun people see this, so they dig in their heels (including me). THAT is the political hot topic, not Martin.

[lacrew]

52. Several hot topics

Let me count the ways this has ben politicized:

1. Push for gun control
2. Call to end concealed carry
3. Denouncement of SYG law
4. Our own president made it about race
5. A class argument, when we were initially told this was a 'gated community'...but didn't understand it wasn't exactly 'high end'.

Why can't this just be a story about an overzealous guy, and the confrontation?

BTW, since I've already put on the Nomex suit, I'm going to come out from under the rock a little further. Zimmerman's call to the police lasts a little over 4 minutes. Around 2:08 in to the call, Zimmerman states that Martin is running. Subsequently, Zmmerman gets out of his truck, pursues, is told he doesn't need to do that, stops the pursuit...and is discussing the mechanics of meeting with the police, once they get there. And, the call stops, a full 2 minutes after Martin 'ran'.

The 911 calls started around 2:30 later. That's a time window of 4:30, for Martin to get back to his house. Now people couldn't instantaneously call 911, I understand that...but it is reasonable to assume that Martin had between 2-4 minutes to get to his house...with enough of a lead over Zimmerman, for Zimmerman to lose sight of him.

How far was it from Zimmerman's truck, to Martin's house? 105 yards.

105 yards...in 2- 4 minutes. Track stars do it is 9 seconds. At a slow walk, it would take a little over a minute. So why didn't Martin get to his house? In fact, the fight occurred 35 yards from Zimmerman's truck...at a slow walk, 30 seconds gets you that far. How did he go such a short distance, in 2-4 minutes?

I think the answer is obvious...and its admittedly a reaction that I might have. Martin did not just turn tail and run. He stopped, turned around, and went to see who Zimmerman was, and why he was chasing him. Nothing wrong with that...but I just get tired of the notion that Zimmerman chased him down, and shot him in the back. M artin had a very normal reaction, and stood up to Zimmerman.

What happened next, we don't know, and probably will never know.

[shadowrider]

57. Put on your flame suit.

[AzWorker]

84. The timeline you mention is KEY...

It WILL be clearly demonstrated to the jury that Martin had ample time to 'get away' if infact he was as afraid as the media is attmepting to portray him.

The fact that he did not make better distance as those MINUTES passed gives us insight into his possible state of mind at the time, a state of mind that likely did not contain fear at that point.

The world has been sold a bill of goods on this one.

The narrative has shifted from an apparant 12yr old looking child being ran down by a 250lb man and shot in the back from a distance with no prior struggle (remember the CBS animation on the subject?) To.... "well ya, Martin probably hit him first becuse he was scared, ya he was on top of Zimmerman and had the upper hand, Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked and thats why he shot...."

[shadowrider]

88. See the timeline here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=33840

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Apparently Zimmerman appointed himself judge, jury and executioner.

That's as close as Trayvon Martin ever got to having a "fair trial".

This won't be the last time, either, thanks to SYG laws.

[saras]

20. Martin didn't do anything. He didn't deserve a stop, arrest, trial, OR murder.

What he deserved was to not have this butthead intrude into his life in any way, shape, or form. Nothing less. But that's because Zimmerman 'deserved' to be in jail for PREVIOUS crimes, and not be loose in the neighborhood in the first place.

[AH1Apache]

29. I'm with you on this

however we have several here who would rather just skip the trial and go straight to the penalty phase and one certain poster, who shall remain nameless, will call you a "racist vigilante apologist" if you that Zimmerman is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers.

[shadowrider]

32. And what crimes was he convicted of that would require he "deserve" to be in jail?

Just curious.

[eilen]

60. Manslaughter at the least nt.

[shadowrider]

64. I'm confused

Your words:

But that's because Zimmerman 'deserved' to be in jail for PREVIOUS crimes, and not be loose in the neighborhood in the first place.

My question, when was he convicted that he deserved to be in jail?

You said:

Manslaughter at the least

When did he kill someone previously he should have been convicted of manslaughter?

[eilen]

68. I think I misunderstood your question. nt.

[saras]

111. He wasn't convicted. His daddy got him off. And you know this already.

Implying that "conviction" is a higher or better standard than "truth" suggests that you may think all those innocents with death penalties should die anyways, to make the justice system seem more trustworthy.

What REALLY needs to happen is that a whole bunch of cops need to be charged with felonies - as many as the evidence can be stretched to justify, the same way we treat other criminals. Using those charges as threats, we get all the relevant officers to stop lying to defend Zimmerman and tell the truth on the stand. Poof, instant conviction, for murder, not manslaughter, as he has both and established habit of going after people, and a whole bunch of "stop harassing him" that he ignored in this case. Clear intent and willful pursuit.

[pneutin]

115. Not sure if serious

Be careful, you're starting to sound like Obama birthers and 9/11 truthers.

[shadowrider]

118. What I know is, he wasn't convicted of anything

[eilen]

58. Unfortunately, we will never hear Trayvon's side.

Since Zimmerman violated his civil rights and silenced him forever. Unless a witness steps forward that has not been tampered with by the local police. All we have is forensic evidence from Trayvon's body as the crime scene seems not to have been secured well nor the gun taken in evidence at the time of the altercation.

[rrneck]

62. The gun was confiscated. nt

[shadowrider]

73. This just shows how people who have decided the case have no clue what's going on

Zimmermans gun was taken the night of the crime. It's in the Sanford PD to be used as evidence.

What other pearls of wisdom do you know I can shoot down?

[sylvi]

92. Isn't it amazing?

The thought that some of them might actually be called to sit on a jury someday is disturbing.

I can see them now, sitting in the jury box, playing Angry Birds on the their iPod until the judge finally sends them into deliberation...

[shadowrider]

94. Who needs to sit on a jury? They make up their minds, facts be damned. Now execute.

[jpak]

59. yup

[rrneck]

37. At issue to my mind

is how do we write rules of engagement for any confrontation, armed or unarmed, and justly enforce them when there may be no evidence or evidence can be created to conform to the law?

The same problem exists with "duty to retreat" and "stand your ground".

[sarisataka]

103. You spoke my thought

by that standard, should a woman who is jogging and gets pulled into a secluded area wait until she is actually raped before using lethal force?
Or should she be charged with murder. After all did the man not deserve a fair trial?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

90. I'm thinking...

Last edited Sun Apr 22, 2012, 06:53 PM - Edit history (1)

...there's an oxymoron here somewhere...
Where could it be?
I can smell it.
Oh! There it is.

"I think he racially profiled and then killed an unarmed teenager for no good reason. I don't know whether Trayvon attacked him or not..."

However, if Zimmerman is charged, as he has been, then bail should be set, fairly.

Have a nice day.

[AzWorker]

108. Sure, but....

Zimmerman did not outweigh Martin by 100lbs, infact it might not even be 25lbs...

Nor did he use a racial slur during the 911 calls.

The case the media built around this incident is falling apart and it's going to backfire.

[jeepnstein]

110. The question is this.

"Would Zimmerman have shot Martin if it weren't for the fact that Martin was attacking him?" I guess if you say the best defense is a strong offense then Martin could be seen as defending himself, but I'm not buying it. Zimmerman was spotted by Martin. Martin got angry. Martin then proceeds to put a beating on Zimmerman and during the fight Zimmerman shoots Martin. Nothing on the 911 tapes indicates to me that Zimmerman was ever intending to get physical with Martin, or even was going to attempt to detain him.

Lots of questions, very few answers so far. The few facts that have made it out the to public lead me to believe Zimmerman acted in self defense.

No doubt Martin thought there wouldn't be any consequence for his actions, especially his own death. But it still appears that Martin initiated the physical confrontation that Zimmerman ended with a gun shot. Had he simply beaten Zimmerman for a while and then left him on the sidewalk he probably would have never been prosecuted. The problem with that is under Florida law Zimmerman was under no obligation to suffer the beating.

[TPaine7]

132. How do you know all of this?

"Would Zimmerman have shot Martin if it weren't for the fact that Martin was attacking him?" I guess if you say the best defense is a strong offense then Martin could be seen as defending himself, but I'm not buying it. Zimmerman was spotted by Martin. Martin got angry. Martin then proceeds to put a beating on Zimmerman and during the fight Zimmerman shoots Martin. Nothing on the 911 tapes indicates to me that Zimmerman was ever intending to get physical with Martin, or even was going to attempt to detain him.

Lots of questions, very few answers so far. The few facts that have made it out the to public lead me to believe Zimmerman acted in self defense.

You admit there are lots of questions, but your question have some very interesting premises.

[jeepnstein]

133. Police reports, 911 tapes, Martin's GF's statement about the call.

It's all subject to change, of course, as the case unfolds. I'm pretty sure that's close to the the way things unfolded. I have yet to see anything remotely official that states Zimmerman was the primary physical aggressor in the fight that ultimately ended with Martin's death.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

119. The problem with giving assailants a fair judge/jury/trial... their victim might be dead by then.

SYG is not about justice or vigilantism. It's SUPPOSED to be about self defense. If someone is breaking into my house I don't have time to wait for a grand jury and then trial - I need the threat stopped immediately. CCW and SYG are legal safety nets in place to protect victims of actual crime. Unfortunately, as with every other social safety net, it is occasionally abused by a few assholes.

I don't think Martin was doing anything wrong so Zimmerman was not being a vigilante. No justice was served and therefore no trial was needed, IMO. Trayvon was a homicide victim. This is not the kind of behavior SYG is designed to protect.