Trayvon Martin: Before the world heard the cries

[rlg94086]

Does nobody find it totally ridiculous that a gun-toting vigilante supposedly ended up a victim? So what’s the real reason guys walk around toting loaded weapons if they’re going to end up losing schoolyard fights?

Not ridiculous at all. While he was “gun-toting,” I don’t know that he is a “vigilante.” As far as “losing schoolyard fights,” I don’t know the circumstances that brought the gun into play. Certainly, he could have prevented such a fight by shooting the young man first. Apparently, he didn’t do that, which lends more credence, not less, to his self-defense claim.

 

[SwizzleStick]

He may not be racist; I’ve always thought that was neither here nor there, because you don’t have to be racist to profile - which I believe, based on the 911 call, is what he did.

You mean the suspicious behavior, but nothing specific, mentioned in the 911 call, I guess? Maybe we’ll learn more about that during the trial.

 

[rlg94086]

What you claim is a schoolyard fight is assault in the real world.

There goes that superpower theory again. Guns don’t give anyone superpowers to fend off attacks…I think you have to have tights or something to accomplish that.

“No capes!” - Edna Mode

 

[seekerz]

What you claim is a schoolyard fight is assault in the real world.

There goes that superpower theory again. Guns don’t give anyone superpowers to fend off attacks…I think you have to have tights or something to accomplish that.

I agree that guns don’t give superpowers, but surely if you’re following a ‘suspicious’ person, your weapon surely is not far from your reach or your mind. How on earth then do you find yourself fighting for your life.

BTW, how exactly does one decide to turn one’s back on said ‘suspicious’ person? Maybe this is not about guns at all but about the gun holders…?

 

[catharina]

You mean the suspicious behavior, but nothing specific, mentioned in the 911 call, I guess? Maybe we’ll learn more about that during the trial.

It still staggers me that anyone who is walking in an unfamiliar
neighborhood, looking around in the rain, would be thought to be "suspicious-looking.

To me, Trayvon’s action seems to be the norm and predictable.
Suspicious? Maybe to the suspicious.

 

[seekerz]

Not ridiculous at all. While he was “gun-toting,” I don’t know that he is a “vigilante.” As far as “losing schoolyard fights,” I don’t know the circumstances that brought the gun into play. Certainly, he could have prevented such a fight by shooting the young man first. Apparently, he didn’t do that, which lends more credence, not less, to his self-defense claim.

Credence? I’m not sure what credence there is in the story of someone who follows a kid in the dark, a kid whom he suspects to be up to no good, and then for reasons not quite clear, decides to turn his back on him…

 

[rlg94086]

It still staggers me that anyone who is walking in an unfamiliar
neighborhood, looking around in the rain, would be thought to be "suspicious-looking.

To me, Trayvon’s action seems to be the norm and predictable.
Suspicious? Maybe to the suspicious.

Being that you weren’t there to actually observe his actions, you have no way of knowing whether they appeared suspicious.

 

[rlg94086]

Credence? I’m not sure what credence there is in the story of someone who follows a kid in the dark, a kid whom he suspects to be up to no good, and then for reasons not quite clear, decides to turn his back on him…

Whatever the reason, if he turned his back on him, he presumably wasn’t a vigilante intent on killing him.

 

[catharina]

Credence? I’m not sure what credence there is in the story of someone who follows a kid in the dark, a kid whom he suspects to be up to no good, and then for reasons not quite clear, decides to turn his back on him…

Not to mention the facts:
he was told ‘do NOT follow’
and
he had no plans to offer assistance
to this “suspicious” person.

 

[catharina]

Credence? I’m not sure what credence there is in the story of someone who follows a kid in the dark, a kid whom he suspects to be up to no good, and then for reasons not quite clear, decides to turn his back on him…

Maybe Zimmerman was tired of walking in the rain?

 

[maryjk]

I agree that guns don’t give superpowers, but surely if you’re following a ‘suspicious’ person, your weapon surely is not far from your reach or your mind. How on earth then do you find yourself fighting for your life.

BTW, how exactly does one decide to turn one’s back on said ‘suspicious’ person? Maybe this is not about guns at all but about the gun holders…?

According to what Zimmerman told the dispatcher, he lost sight of Martin and Zimmerman was on his way back to his truck. Then Martin approached him from behind.

As a person that has a concealed carry permit, I understand him not pulling his weapon at that time. While he was walking back, there was no threat. There wasn’t a threat until Martin approached.

 

[catharina]

According to what Zimmerman told the dispatcher, he lost sight of Martin and Zimmerman was on his way back to his truck. Then Martin approached him from behind.

As a person that has a concealed carry permit, I understand him not pulling his weapon at that time. While he was walking back, there was no threat. There wasn’t a threat until Martin approached.

That is ‘according to Zimmerman.’

 

[rlg94086]

Not to mention the facts:
he was told ‘do NOT follow’
and
he had no plans to offer assistance
to this “suspicious” person.

Yes, the known facts (thus far) of the case don’t add up…to anything. The only thing we do know is that a fight ensued, a gun was fired, and a young man is dead. The details between the 911 call and the fight that found Martin on top of Zimmerman are sketchy. The details of the actual fight and discharge of the gun are sketchy. Those details are the pertinent ones that are critical to determining the guilt of the accused.

 

[rlg94086]

That is ‘according to Zimmerman.’

Of course. I’m sure he will probably offer that up in his trial. What counter evidence do you think the prosecutors will present to refute his account?

 

[catharina]

Yes, the known facts (thus far) of the case don’t add up…to anything. The only thing we do know is that a fight ensued, a gun was fired, and a young man is dead. The details between the 911 call and the fight that found Martin on top of Zimmerman are sketchy. The details of the actual fight and discharge of the gun are sketchy. Those details are the pertinent ones that are critical to determining the guilt of the accused.

You insisted that I cease and desist in regard to your posts.
I am doing that. You should do the same in regard to my posts.

Your opinions carry no weight with me.
I do not look for further interactions with you.

As I said, good bye and God bless you.

 

[maryjk]

That is ‘according to Zimmerman.’

Of course it is. The question was about** why **he did what he did. Who better to ask or listen to, then Zimmerman?

I guess we could make up why he did what he did. We can accuse him of being racist or of racial profiling. We can say anything. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.

 

[rlg94086]

You insisted that I cease and desist in regard to your posts.
I am doing that. You should do the same in regard to my posts.

Your opinions carry no weight with me.
I do not look for further interactions with you.

As I said, good bye and God bless you.

My apologies. I was asking you to cease and desist on the discussion of my blamelessness and “lethal” nature of my posts. I certainly wasn’t asking you to cease and desist posting about the topic. Amazingly, this didn’t stop you from making several posts about my alleged diversion tactic by posting a line from a movie you haven’t seen. Odd priorities - focus on the irrelevant, protest the relevant.

Nonetheless, I will not expect any answers from you on any topic. However, I will comment on your posts whenever I feel like it is germain to the discussion at hand. You are free to put me on ignore, if you wish.

God bless, and I wish you well.

 

[rlg94086]

Of course it is. The question was about** why **he did what he did. Who better to ask or listen to, then Zimmerman?

I guess we could make up why he did what he did. We can accuse him of being racist or of racial profiling. We can say anything. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.

Obviously, his testimony is worthy of question, since he is the accused. The problem for the prosecution is that they don’t appear to have a way to refute his some of his testimony. Perhaps they do, but it hasn’t been shared with the court of public opinion.

 

[pnewton]

It seems that Martin was banging Zimmerman’s head against the sidewalk. This is a very dangerous thing to do and can cause major harm and possibly death. I don’t think someone has to wait until they are in need of hospitalization to shoot in self-defense, even when the person banging his head against the sidewalk doesn’t have a weapon.

I think if you refrain from banging people’s heads against hard surfaces and similar activities, you will probably be all right. And several other states have laws similar to Florida’s…

The law specifically quotes firearms. It was hand to hand combat. No, I have no business where one is allowed to shoot you if he is losing a fight. I call it a fight and not an assault because of the chain of events that led to the gunshot. Maybe I am wrong, but the prosecutor does not agree with you. I have never heard of this level of assault justifying use of deadly force. If you read the chapter prior to the one on deadly force, it seems to fit the scenario better where force, but not deadly force is allowable. I am not the juror, but I would not deem it reasonable if I were.

It is not a matter that one has to simply refrain from banging someone’s head. You also have to refrain from being in a position where someone says you did this and he was sooooo afraid that he had no choice but to kill you.

 

[pnewton]

It’s going to be VERY hard for the prosecutor to prove that Zimmerman was NOT afraid for his life or serious bodily injury (people seem to forget that part).

That is unless the prosecutor has a mind reader.

This is not the standard though. Zimmerman has to make his case of self-defense. The prosecutor only has to prove Zimmerman killed Martin. They do not have to make a case for his state of mind.