Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetcharity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please stop twisting the facts to fit your agenda.
Why did an innocent 17 year old die that night? It was the irresponsibility of GZ; and Florida state law that issues gun permits into the hands of amateur law enforcement personal.

Talk about twisting the facts, what about all the talk on this thread that GZ shot TM in self defense. Again, self defense is a misnomer.
 
Calling the TM case self defense is a misnomer. It’s manslaughter.
Wrong fact of law it was self-defense so says a jury of his peers. State couldn’t prove murder or manslaughter. TM is dead because he went MMA on a guy with a gun. Not smart.
 
Are you also glad that an innocent 17 year old is now dead due to the irresponsibility of GZ? Again, where are people’s Catholic virtues when it comes to a senseless killing?

And I suppose that the violence in Chicago would magically come to an end with gunslingers bent on being vigilantes? What are you getting at here?
Again with the questioning of faith and Catholic virtue and name calling of those who carry? Is that charitable?

Guns are not the problem. The rot in our culture and the lack of respect for human life are contenders there. If guns disappeared from the face of the earth, those people who currently behave in an inhumane and violent fashion would continue to do so.
 
Why did an innocent 17 year old die that night? It was the irresponsibility of GZ; and Florida state law that issues gun permits into the hands of amateur law enforcement personal.

Talk about twisting the facts, what about all the talk on this thread that GZ shot TM in self defense. Again, self defense is a misnomer.
It’s a complete disgrace; a young innocent man dead for walking in the rain. GZ was not the type of person who should have had a gun. I disagree that those who note his
previous issues of domestic abuse, having a restraining order against him for “trolling
around the neighborhood” and assaulting a police officer are of no import.

Granted he may have had alcohol problems but not everyone is violent when they are drinking.
 
Wrong fact of law it was self-defense so says a jury of his peers. State couldn’t prove murder or manslaughter. TM is dead because he went MMA on a guy with a gun. Not smart.
Where is the conclusive evidence to back your assumption? The self defense could easily have been that TM attacked GZ after GZ went for his gun. We do not know what immediately led up to the deadly confrontation. What we do know is that GZ was issued a gun permit even though he was acting as an amateur law enforcement personnel.

Where are our Catholic virtues on this thread?
 
Why did an innocent 17 year old die that night? It was the irresponsibility of GZ; and Florida state law that issues gun permits into the hands of amateur law enforcement personal.

Talk about twisting the facts, what about all the talk on this thread that GZ shot TM in self defense. Again, self defense is a misnomer.
Innocent people do not bang other people’s heads into cement. That is a grave injustice.
 
Are you inferring that the high crime rate will be magically eliminated by allowing gunslinging vigilantes the right to carry concealed weapons? The crime rate will only escalate, with innocent people like TM being shoot dead. Calling the TM case self defense is a misnomer. It’s manslaughter.
Please consider facts instead of hysteria. The crime rate has DECREASED substantially in recent decades. Gun crimes/homocides are DOWN not up. The “high crime rate” is pretty much isolated in certain urban areas…ironically those with the most strict gun laws. There are no armed “gunslingers” in America other than on the screen of the recent Lone Ranger movie.

Further to oldcelt no one SENT GZ out on a patrol or mission. He encountered Martin on his way to Target. He believed, as did the jury, that being a responsible citizen meant noticing something unusual in his neighborhood and reporting it.

He did not HUNT DOWN Martin. He was NOT the aggressor. Please consider the facts. You so quick to believe GZ’s ex fiance in what sounds like a mutual ‘lovers quarrel’ should also listen to Jeantel who was on the phone with Martin that night, not someone making a report a decade ago. Jeantel said Martin had fled and could have simply walked into his dad’s home instead of confronting GZ. HE chose confrontation, not GZ. He is partially responsible for the sad ending to the story. And before you go off half cocked no I am in no way saying he DESERVED to die but his actions CONTRIBUTED to his death.

Why didn’t he keep running? Why didn’t he go home?

Get some facts Robert. You sound completely overwrought rather than rationally considering the evidence of the case.

Lisa
 
Again with the questioning of faith and Catholic virtue and name calling of those who carry? Is that charitable?

Guns are not the problem. The rot in our culture and the lack of respect for human life are contenders there. If guns disappeared from the face of the earth, those people who currently behave in an inhumane and violent fashion would continue to do so.
But TM was not behaving in an inhumane and violent fashion until he was confronted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman is not a police officer and he has no right to demand knowing why everyone is in the neighborhood. Call the "real " police and be done with it.
This should never happen again.
 
That premise has been disputed several times and you just keep ignoring it because it does not fit with your narrative that Zimmerman was simply a racist murderer.
Yep another instance of facts getting in the way of a good theory :rolleyes:
Lisa
 
Please consider facts instead of hysteria. The crime rate has DECREASED substantially in recent decades. Gun crimes/homocides are DOWN not up. The “high crime rate” is pretty much isolated in certain urban areas…ironically those with the most strict gun laws. There are no armed “gunslingers” in America other than on the screen of the recent Lone Ranger movie.

Further to oldcelt no one SENT GZ out on a patrol or mission. He encountered Martin on his way to Target. He believed, as did the jury, that being a responsible citizen meant noticing something unusual in his neighborhood and reporting it.

He did not HUNT DOWN Martin. He was NOT the aggressor. Please consider the facts. You so quick to believe GZ’s ex fiance in what sounds like a mutual ‘lovers quarrel’ should also listen to Jeantel who was on the phone with Martin that night, not someone making a report a decade ago. Jeantel said Martin had fled and could have simply walked into his dad’s home instead of confronting GZ. HE chose confrontation, not GZ. He is partially responsible for the sad ending to the story. And before you go off half cocked no I am in no way saying he DESERVED to die but his actions CONTRIBUTED to his death.

Why didn’t he keep running? Why didn’t he go home?

Get some facts Robert. You sound completely overwrought rather than rationally considering the evidence of the case.

Lisa


That someone disagrees with you does not mean they don’t have the facts.
They may have the same facts and simply disagree with some of your perception of the facts. Zimmerman was the initial aggressor.

There are many that do not feel Zimmerman in an way was responsible for how this ended
and some disagree with that. It’s really not as black and white as some make this out to be.
 
But TM was not behaving in an inhumane and violent fashion until he was confronted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman is not a police officer and he has no right to demand knowing why everyone is in the neighborhood. Call the "real " police and be done with it.
This should never happen again.
Bolding mine above. It is not acceptable to beat someone merely because they ask a question, and a reasonable question at that.
 
But TM was not behaving in an inhumane and violent fashion until he was confronted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman is not a police officer and he has no right to demand knowing why everyone is in the neighborhood. Call the "real " police and be done with it.
This should never happen again.
TM had no right to violently attack an innocent person. None.
 


That someone disagrees with you does not mean they don’t have the facts.
They may have the same facts and simply disagree with some of your perception of the facts. Zimmerman was the initial aggressor.

There are many that do not feel Zimmerman in an way was responsible for how this ended
and some disagree with that. It’s really not as black and white as some make this out to be.
Please present the facts that support your claim.
 


That someone disagrees with you does not mean they don’t have the facts.
They may have the same facts and simply disagree with some of your perception of the facts. Zimmerman was the initial aggressor.

There are many that do not feel Zimmerman in an way was responsible for how this ended
and some disagree with that. It’s really not as black and white as some make this out to be.
What aggression by GZ? What did he do that required a life threatening violent attack by TM?
 
But TM was not behaving in an inhumane and violent fashion until he was confronted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman is not a police officer and he has no right to demand knowing why everyone is in the neighborhood. Call the "real " police and be done with it.
This should never happen again.
The facts do not support your claim.

Zimmerman did call the police.

Agreed, this should never have happened.
 
We need to stop this type of senseless violence! Carrying concealed weapons needs to be outlawed. Where are people’s Catholic virtues when we Catholics condone such senseless violence in the name of self defense? We are headed to an era of wild gunslingers.
You’re ignoring the fact that self defense is allowed per the CCC. I’ve already cited it more than once on this thread but some people seem to want to ignore the fact that self defense is a right and duty according to the church.

We do need to stop senseless violence. The senseless violence that resulted in Zimmerman needing to protect himself from imminent great bodily harm or death. There is no evidence that Martin was ever in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death until he was attacking Zimmerman.
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful… Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.
Why do you ignore the teaching of the church on this issue?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top