Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

[Tucker_R]

:tsktsk:

Wow… you are getting far too emotional… whats really going on ?

how dare you put a political spin to the death of a young black boy! as someone who is highly intuitive, you are on the verge of being a racist… actually, i know and am positively sure of that.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Baloney. FACTS based on the evidence presented at trial. No where did I say that TM started the confrontation. If TM had stopped with punching GZ in the face to get him to back off, that MIGHT have been self-defense. Beating him to the ground and continuing to assault him is attacking the other person.

I disagree. Assuming GZ does’nt just back off after being hit. If GZ turned it physical, than Martin would be justified in continuing to use force until there is no longer a threat. Dead, unconcious/incapacited, or clearly given up. The witnesses stated it was an ongoing struggle with no indication at any point that one party was trying to withdraw from the conflict or had ‘surrendered’. (Yes, hard to withdraw from a conflict when mounted, incredibly risky to try and ‘tap out’ or ‘surrender’ and trust the other party will stop also.)

 

[Tucker_R]

Yet again… you are assuming.

Yet again, it could have been that TM saw GZ go for his gun, and everything that followed was in self-defense.

 

[Robert_Sock]

And you’re asuming he didn’t.

Yet again, yes my scenario is an assumption, but it provides an alternative to the scenario that TM initiated the confrontation.

 

[Dawnia]

Yet again, it could have been that TM saw GZ go for his gun, and everything that followed was in self-defense.

Whatever. You apparently have your mind made up that Zimmerman was in the wrong and will make up any scenario no matter how ludicrious to support said opinion.

Self-defense is NEVER a license to pin someone to the ground and attack them. Period.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Yet again, it could have been that TM saw GZ go for his gun, and everything that followed was in self-defense.

Inconsistent with the description of the fight though, it was not described as a struggle over control of a weapon. Mounted, using both fists to rain down blows on the person below them.

 

[Havard]

Yet again, yes my scenario is an assumption, but it provides an alternative to the scenario that TM initiated the confrontation.

The default assumption for Christians is the benefit of the doubt. Only Satan likes it when we start off pointing fingers and accusing each other.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Yet again, it could have been that TM saw GZ go for his gun, and everything that followed was in self-defense.

The evidence, the facts and the law have been pointed out to you repeatedly. So have the rules of concealed carry. So, in choosing to repeatedly ignore all that, you basically are saying that Zimmerman just decided to draw his weapon and shoot Martin outright, for no apparent reason at all? Is that your contention?

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Though the “Not Guilty” verdict is acceptable, a problem with the law would be if one is losing a fight, one can pull a gun to win it. That does not seem fair if one were to pick a fight with someone, one is losing it, so one uses a gun as an equalizer.

My father (who is a veteran) always taught me that, “there is no such thing as a fair fight. If you are in a life or death situation, you do what it takes to win; you don’t keep to Marquis de Queensberry’s rules. If you have a weapon use it, and any tool is a weapon if you hold it right. If there is an environmental advantage [such as a staircase or a street with oncoming traffic] then exploit it, because if it is either you or the other guy coming home I want you to do whatever it takes to make sure I don’t have to bury my son.”

Of course he also taught me when to fight and when to do everything in my power to avoid it.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Whatever. You apparently have your mind made up that Zimmerman was in the wrong and will make up any scenario no matter how ludicrious to support said opinion.

Self-defense is NEVER a license to pin someone to the ground and attack them. Period.

Again I disagree. I do think the most plausible scenario is that Martin punched Zimmerman starting the altercation.

This more a general observation on the use of lethal force in self-defense. If the conditions exist for lawful use of lethal force in self-defense- it continues to be lawful as long as the threat continues to exist, regardless of the means- be it feet/hands/blunt object/knife/gun.

If someone attacks me, and it degenerates into hand-to-hand and I get the advantage- like Martin, mounted on top of my opponent- I can utilize that advantage up until there is no longer a threat of serious bodily harm/death. I do not have to give up my advantage. So, yes in a self-defense situation you can pin someone to the ground and (I wouldn’t say attack) rain blows on them, continue to use lethal force. Advantage in a fight can be momentary, if my opponent continues to struggle they may regain it.

I can’t keep using lethal force when the threat ceases. Consistent with the catholic churches teaching- when the threat to my life stops, I stop. I don’t chase, I don’t seek retribution, I used force only as long as necessary to preserve my life.

 

[2ndcoming]

Why do you persist in repeating falsehoods? Further your post calling Zimmerman a “nutbag” and claiming YOU know more than the FBI which had already done an investigation regarding the racial aspects of the case is most uncharitable.

So you know more than the FBI that did the investigation? You interviewed more than the three dozen witnesses that the FBI interviewed?

You know what was going on inside of Zimmerman’s head?

Really?

Lisa

I am sorry you feel that way about me. Your assumptions and judgements are skewed. And let me repose something that is bothersome to many readers…

Originally Posted by LisaA View Post
The “problem” with young males is that their testosterone and bodies are developed but their impulse control is not. This is a reason more young men are involved in high risk activities, crime, drugs and violence. Apparently the part of the brain that regulates impulse control isn’t developed until the mid 20s.

So yes Martin was young as far as emotional maturity. But he was virtually an adult when it came to height, strength and physical ability. His history which was NOT allowed into the court room included drugs and a strong suspicion he was involved in a robbery.

He was not the little angel that the race baiters and the prosecution kept pushing. If I saw that sweet baby big brown eyes picture one more time I thought I was going to throw something through the TV screen. How about the one with the snarl and the gang signs?

Lisa

 

[livingwordunity]

I disagree. Assuming GZ does’nt just back off after being hit. If GZ turned it physical, than Martin would be justified in continuing to use force until there is no longer a threat. Dead, unconcious/incapacited, or clearly given up. The witnesses stated it was an ongoing struggle with no indication at any point that one party was trying to withdraw from the conflict or had ‘surrendered’. (Yes, hard to withdraw from a conflict when mounted, incredibly risky to try and ‘tap out’ or ‘surrender’ and trust the other party will stop also.)

I don’t get what you are saying. You are saying that TM hit first but that GZ is the one who “turned it physical”?

If TM wanted to play fair he wouldn’t have been the one to throw a punch in the first place when, at the most, all GZ did prior was follow him (which isn’t a crime) and ask him “what are you doing here?”.

And people seem to be arguing that it was GZ’s fault for placing himself in a dangerous position. Well, if TM was so innocent why would it have been a dangerous position GZ was putting himself into?

.

 

[SwizzleStick]

I am sorry you feel that way about me. Your assumptions and judgements are skewed. And let me repose something that is bothersome to many readers…

Please use the quote feature to keep posts and ownership clear. Thanks!

 

[Robert_Sock]

The evidence, the facts and the law have been pointed out to you repeatedly. So have the rules of concealed carry. So, in choosing to repeatedly ignore all that, you basically are saying that Zimmerman just decided to draw his weapon and shoot Martin outright, for no apparent reason at all? Is that your contention?

No, he could have went for his gun to detain TM, and TM could have seen it as a threat for his life. Why would TM risk life in jail by beating GZ’s head into into the ground? Surly TM must have felt threatened.

 

[styrgwillidar]

I don’t get what you are saying. You are saying that TM hit first but that GZ is the one who “turned it physical”?

If TM wanted to play fair he wouldn’t have been the first to throw a punch in the first place when, at the most, all GZ did prior was follow him (which isn’t a crime) and ask him “what are you doing here?”.

.

Sorry, I think I was responding to the hypothetical that if Martin was defending himself he could have just hit Zimmerman once in the nose to back him off.

It becomes problematic, because there’s no guarantee that GZ will back off after one blow. What then? And if Martin’s first blow is in response to a perceived threat other than a physical blow, but a reasonable person in the same circumstances would believe they were in imminent fear of serious bodily harm to themselves or others, than in effect GZ turned this physical and Martin’s actions in continuing to use lethal force continues as long as the threat exists.

 

[2ndcoming]

:tsktsk:

Wow… you are getting far too emotional… whats really going on ?

i can relate to this anger and emotion… it’s just so maddening that some people are twisting a gesture of obama’s human sympathy and compassion for a death of person as a political ploy. doesn’t he have, as a president and as a human being, a right to do something like that without being seen or perceived as political or taking advantage of the situation? that is why im so mad that some people are looking at this more as political… just my sentiment… that’s all.

 

[pnewton]

Surly TM must have felt threatened.

I do not know how surly Trayvon was, but there are many reasons one person attacks another other than being threatened.

Everyone does know the trial is over, right? Re-hashing the evidence is now moot. The decision has been rendered by the ones chosed to make a decision.

 

[Joe_5859]

I haven’t been following this story closely enough to know every detail. I guess I figured the jury was in a better position to sort it all out than I would be.

But it is interesting to me how stories like this get latched onto and then we attach some sort of meta-significance to them as though the outcome irrefutably acts as a benchmark for race relations in the United States.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

So, in other words, you are condoning a murder! Wow!

Assuming you don’t know the meaning of the words “condoning” and “murder,” then yes. I also traded my cow for some magic beans earlier today, ate an apple that made me fall into a deep sleep,only to be awakened with a kiss from prince (made even more awkward when he found out I was a dude), and flew to work today on the back of Falcor from the Neverending Story to avoid traffic.

Yes, all true.

 

[SwizzleStick]

I am sorry you feel that way about me. Your assumptions and judgements are skewed. And let me repose something that is bothersome to many readers…

The “problem” with young males is that their testosterone and bodies are developed but their impulse control is not. This is a reason more young men are involved in high risk activities, crime, drugs and violence. Apparently the part of the brain that regulates impulse control isn’t developed until the mid 20s.

So yes Martin was young as far as emotional maturity. But he was virtually an adult when it came to height, strength and physical ability. His history which was NOT allowed into the court room included drugs and a strong suspicion he was involved in a robbery.

He was not the little angel that the race baiters and the prosecution kept pushing. If I saw that sweet baby big brown eyes picture one more time I thought I was going to throw something through the TV screen. How about the one with the snarl and the gang signs?

Lisa

I’m guessing what you and “many readers” find most “bothersome” is this part of Lisa’s post?

…He was not the little angel that the race baiters and the prosecution kept pushing. If I saw that sweet baby big brown eyes picture one more time I thought I was going to throw something through the TV screen. How about the one with the snarl and the gang signs? …

That fact is that the media, rather than objectively just reporting facts, did deliberately distort and mislead by editing the 911 tape to make Zimmerman appear racist and did present grainy video to obscure Zimmerman’s injuries to his head. They “reported” in such a way as to make Zimmerman appear to be a much heavier, white (and later a “white Hispanic” to fit the narrative), aggressive racist who shot an unarmed little 12-year old boy who was simply walking home. Facts and evidence proved most of that to be false. About the only thing the media reported correctly and without bias and spin is that Zimmerman did shoot and fatally wound Martin.