Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
All I’m saying is if Zimmerman walks you still ain’t gonna be happy and the race baiters will still blame it on race.
Where do you come off questioning our motives and calling us race baiters, when we just want a trial? Have I called you a racist for your irrational defense of the killer? No, I haven’t, in fact I have never even mentioned race (until this post answering you). Shame on you.

Now, if you want to talk about your own issues, feel free.
 
Where do you come off questioning our motives and calling us race baiters, when we just want a trial? Have I called you a racist for your irrational defense of the killer? No, I haven’t, in fact I have never even mentioned race (until this post answering you). Shame on you.

Now, if you want to talk about your own issues, feel free.
I wasn’t referring to you as a race baiter.
 
Thank you for writing this. But your plea for compassion, understanding and justice will only be met with nitpicking and hateful reaction. It’s the internet. Disappointing that it even happens on a Catholic site, but oh well.
Compassion, understanding and justice is a necessity for both parties involved.
 
A “witch hunt” against *** the one living man who walked out of this encounter***? :confused:
Good afternoon, seekerz,

My apologies for taking so long to answer you.

Yes, I don’t see how you can call the entry of the FBI and Department of Justice into this local shooting with no national nor interstate trimmings anything but a witch hunt.

God loves you,
Don
 
The most interesting part of the 911 call to me is the end. It sounds like George lost him and was going to wait for the police at the mailboxes. The dispatcher said, “We don’t need you to do that” and his response was “Ok”. At what point did he run into Martin again? Did Martin double back and come after Zimmerman or did Zimmerman not wait where he said he would and continue driving around for a minute?
Good questions.
 
Difference?
First victim is alive.
Second victim is dead.

Enormous difference.
Good afternoon, Catharina,

Both Mauzer and Scipio saw the true gist of my post: powers that be are using the teenager’s death to attack gun laws that protect ordinary citizens from vicious criminals.

Why can’t you see that?

God loves you,
Don
 
I saw an article in Slate that pointed out that in most cases the police & DA control the narrative; they get their man, the media repeat verbatim law enforcement’s version of the facts, the perp and the victim. Because the police did so little investigating in this case (move along, nothing to see here) the family go its version out first and ever since it’s the police who have had to resort to leaking witness statements.

From the first it sounds like the cops pretty much just took Zimmerman’s word that he acted in self-defense. “This guy jumped you? Okay . . . bruises . . . scratches . . . grass stains, yeah, that’s consistent. You can go.”

I’d like to know how much crime-scene investigation was done, was an autopsy performed and why was there no grand jury?
Self-defense is an affirmative defense. All homicides should be investigated as crimes even when self-defense is claimed and the results sent to a grand jury. If the shooter was justified they can no-bill it.
Good afternoon, Didymus,

I disagree with your last paragraph, because such legal proceedings abridge, infringe and suffocate our God given and Constitutional right to keep and bear arms; and to use lethal force in the face of imminent and evident danger to our lives.

The USofA is not Europe nor England and those laws or laws like them have no business in American courts. I don’t know about you, but my forebears came here to get away from unjust laws that could get them killed without recourse to self-defense.

Well, it’s time for me to feed the dogs. I’ll be back later.

God loves you,
Don
 
Good afternoon, Catharina,

Both Mauzer and Scipio saw the true gist of my post: powers that be are using the teenager’s death to attack gun laws that protect ordinary citizens from vicious criminals.

Why can’t you see that?
Ah, the conspiracy theory. It’s the “powers that be” who want to take away everyone’s guns because they don’t want you protected from “vicious criminals”. Really? I thought it was people interested in the rule of law and justice who were simply calling for a trial. But now you’ve cleared it up, it’s a conspiracy?
 
Ah, the conspiracy theory. It’s the “powers that be” who want to take away everyone’s guns because they don’t want you protected from “vicious criminals”. Really? I thought it was people interested in the rule of law and justice who were simply calling for a trial. But now you’ve cleared it up, it’s a conspiracy?
Trial? In this country there needs to be proof that a crime was even committed. But I guess some people are fine with even that basic legal technicality being waved aside.
 
Ah, the conspiracy theory. It’s the “powers that be” who want to take away everyone’s guns because they don’t want you protected from “vicious criminals”. Really? I thought it was people interested in the rule of law and justice who were simply calling for a trial. But now you’ve cleared it up, it’s a conspiracy?
where have you been? it’s no conspiracy that all of a sudden, people are calling for hearings on “stand your ground” laws.

miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/04/miamidadecommissionersurge.html
 
Good afternoon, Catharina,

Both Mauzer and Scipio saw the true gist of my post: powers that be are using the teenager’s death to attack gun laws that protect ordinary citizens from vicious criminals.

Why can’t you see that?

God loves you,
Don
I think that is correct. I feel duped and manipulated by the media and others. I was thinking about this case and thinking about my own son being misjudged so often because of his appearance and reacting in an emotional way, though I still wanted facts. I was aware that the media was race baiting and not representing facts honestly almost immediately when they indicated Zimmerman was White. Then later, he was identified as White Hispanic. Even though I realized we weren’t getting the entire story and certainly not the truth (baby pic of Martin, mug shot of Zimmerman, edited 911 tape, bad video with Zimmerman’s head covered by a logo and the outright lie indicating he had sustained no injuries at all, etc.). I let my emotions cloud reality because I too have a teen son. No more.
 
Which does not equate with some take-away-our-guns conspiracy
That may be true, but the media has certainly been manipulative to suit an agenda. Back several posts ago, someone asked some pretty good questions.
This post is about media bias/manipulation.

My local evening news referred to the incident as the “gunning down” of … Now when I hear that someone was gunned down, I think that someone purposefully sought out an innocent, defenseless person and shot them with a gun. Like something out of a western. This case had a fistfight first, and we don’t know yet who started it.

Hannity’s TV show played a clip from NBC news where they edited the 911 tape, leaving out the police dispatcher’s questions, making it sound like Zimmerman said something like “he looks suspicious, he’s black.”

This is wrong for the media to do. And I hate being manipulated with, not lies, but words whose purpose is to make me believe a lie. Dissembling, misleading, shading, whatever you want to call it.

So why? As someone else wrote, is it to disarm our citizens? Is it to get the race issue forward to re-elect Obama? Is it to distract us from the religious rights (HHS) issue? IS it simply just to divide and conquer?
SwizzleStick;9125921:
The media has behaved in a descipable manner in the way they have handled this case. You ask very good questions as to why they have done what they have done.
 
I think that is correct. I feel duped and manipulated by the media and others. I was thinking about this case and thinking about my own son being misjudged so often because of his appearance and reacting in an emotional way, though I still wanted facts. I was aware that the media was race baiting and not representing facts honestly almost immediately when they indicated Zimmerman was White. Then later, he was identified as White Hispanic. Even though I realized we weren’t getting the entire story and certainly not the truth (baby pic of Martin, mug shot of Zimmerman, edited 911 tape, bad video with Zimmerman’s head covered by a logo and the outright lie indicating he had sustained no injuries at all, etc.). I let my emotions cloud reality because I too have a teen son. No more.
I waited for nearly week to voice an opinion on this too. The first I had heard was basically “Redneck cop wanna be let go after he guns down black youth for straying into an exclusive gated community”.

I thought “Looks like some moron is going to get what he has coming”. When it was revealed that the guy was a “White Hispanic” I thought “This doesn’t sound right anymore”. After some critical reading I was astounded by the yellow journalism at work.
 
Which does not equate with some take-away-our-guns conspiracy
show me where anyone said that. i do believe you are referring to donsnow’s post and if so, then you are twisting his words (if not outright making things up). go back and read it again.

are you going to deny that because of this case there aren’t groups that want to go after the stand your ground laws? even when i just gave you a link proving it is so. there are plenty others if you do a search.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top