Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetcharity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LisaA said:
I believe that Martin was overcome by rage at the “creepy a** cracka” following him. It may have been he thought he was being targeted as a young black man. He may have been of the mind that Zimmerman was a sexual predator. Whatever the reason, I think he was a young man high on testosterone and low on impulse control. Everything about the initial encounter, Jeantel’s words and the testimony of Zimmerman while speaking to the dispatcher indicates Martin initially “got away.” But somehow they re-connected. It makes far more sense that Martin confronted Zimmerman than the alternative.

I am sure Martin didn’t realize Zimmerman was armed or he probably would not have picked a fight with him. What he saw was a nosy neighbor, a potential predator, a 'creepy a** cracka…" As a young man with athletic ability and some apparent fighting skills he probably thought he could easily teach Zimmerman a lesson. He was wrong and paid with his life

Lisa
Click to expand...
I think he also had been conditioned by prior experiences with opponents where the fight was ‘mutual’ and they were at least acquainted. Where both considered it a form of sport with lines they wouldn’t cross, intentional permanent blinding of the opponent, crushing the windpipe. There was going to be a winner and a loser and they’d both go on with their lives. I think his attitude was I can beat this guy, as you said teach him a lesson, not I’m going to kill this guy.

I think this is also why many people don’t understand those who choose to carry weapon if its legal to do so. They see it as a desire for conflict, an enabler, whereas it is normally an indication of a willingness to only fight when their life is at stake, and if their life is at stake they want the most effective means available. I don’t know if this was Zimmerman’s attitude, I’m basing it on the people I’ve known.
 
styrgwillidar said:
There is nothing about carrying a gun for self-defense which is incompatible with the catholic faith-

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.66

To have the means to defend oneself is consistent with the faith.
Click to expand...
Picture of two young ladies in Switzerland

 
Robert_Sock said:
And there are MANY more priests who do not. What’s your point relative to Catholic morals and virtues? Not all priests practice Catholic virtues the way they ought. If they possessed true faith, and were following the Gospels, perhaps they would not carry a gun.
Click to expand...
How about practicing a Catholic virtue and turn the other cheek towards Zimmerman?

🤷
 
Robert_Sock said:
Re-read what I wrote and tell me where I’m committing rash judgment? Pay attention to where I say ‘perhaps.’
Click to expand...
Weasel words. :rolleyes:

Have any other irreverent, insulting idle speculation not grounded in facts or evidence that you don’t really mean for us?
 
The jury has decided it, and the only other option is lynch mob justice which the civil rights movement is supposed to be against.
 
Robert, is your distrust of firearms perhaps rooted in your belief that humans aren’t intelligent enough to have designed and built them? Do you think they are demonic in origin?
 
livingwordunity said:
How?
Click to expand...
I don’t know, but I just get the feeling there are those who attribute some mystical powers to pieces of steel, metal, plastic and wood assembled in such a way that they can accurately propel a small metal object up to a mile.

Superstition, but apparently, in their view when assembled in that manner they can control a persons mind and will; forcing the possessor to act in accordance with the desires of said assembly of parts. One cannot possibly own one of these without it forcing the owner into worship and obedience. The assembly of peices, when properly constituted, are attributed to having the capability to over-ride free will.
 
fix said:
So GZ made TM violently attack him without cause? I find it troubling that we let off the hook some guy who pounces on other and beats him while he cries for help.
Click to expand...
I think you may have confused me. I am saying the case is closed, the jury has decided.
I don’t have to agree with the jury. I have to accept it but I feel very sorry about the loss of a young life. I have a different view of the circumstances and would have chosen a verdict of negligent homicide.
 
styrgwillidar said:
I don’t know, but I just get the feeling there are those who attribute some mystical powers to pieces of steel, metal, plastic and wood assembled in such a way that they can accurately propel a small metal object up to a mile.

Superstition, but apparently, in their view when assembled in that manner they can control a persons mind and will; forcing the possessor to act in accordance with the desires of said assembly of parts. One cannot possibly own one of these without it forcing the owner into worship and obedience. The assembly of peices, when properly constituted, are attributed to having the capability to over-ride free will.
Click to expand...
http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif
 
styrgwillidar said:
You’re not serious, right? You do realize this happens all the time in court? Its extremely common for women to allege domestic violence? It gives them the advantege in custody, amount they’ll be awarded? If the woman is vindictive, and believe me many are, it can screw up a mans job (it can affect their securty/bond rating), mess up their reputation with friends and neighbors? Does it surprise you that some women would lie? In the emotional situations of divorce you think that never happens-- buddy it happens a lot.

Naive. Its naive to think that our judicial system, particularly at the lower levels is completely fair and just. You’re questioning a high level case with incredible national scrutiny, yet now contend lower level CHARGES, much less convictions are flawless.

Why would a judge issue them? In most jurisdictions they’ll issue a temporary restraining order simply on an allegation. Why? Well, it doesn’t cost anything, its the prudent thing to do, if the person who has the restraining order against them objects, they can contest it at the hearing to determine if it will be longer.

In the case where both parties file? Easy for the judge— hey you are both asking for the same thing, to stay away from each other. GRANTED!!! Bailiff, lets’ get some lunch.

Would it surprise you that some folks look at the cost of defending against a charge which will cost 1,000s of dollars and may take years, and you still may lose, against a rehab program that supposedly will do the same thing, only cost a couple hundred and be over with in perhaps a few months with a guarantee of no felony conviction? Do the math, what’s the smart call? How much money do you have? How much faith do you have in all juries?

Hear about the high school football player who was accused of rape, yet completely innocent? He took a plea deal because of his risk assessment. A he said she said case. Yet, if the jury ruled against him he would have gone to jail for decades. So he chose to plea and ‘only’ do a couple of years. Yet the woman had lied just so she could sue the school. She won too.ETA: actually, the district paid her off, I don’t think they went to court on it…
Click to expand...
You have not proven that his fiancée has lied. She is innocent of your charge of lying until she is proven guilty in a court of law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top