Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[Clifford]

Good question on SC. I have no idea. I also have no idea how anyone can advance a claim of self-defense when his victims are hiding from him.

I realize that Zimmerman was in legal possession and that is not part of this case. What I am asking (and this is not a legal question Christo) is can you look at this situation and honestly say that had Zimmerman not been in possession of a gun, that he would be dead right now instead of Trayvon. It's a total hypothetical, so you can answer however you want and not be wrong. Maybe Zimmerman was enough of a wannabe hero he would have followed Trayvon without it. Maybe Trayvon was so unhinged he would have beaten Zimmerman to death just for following him.

But I find it much more likely that it was the fact that Zimmerman was carrying which gave him the bravado to follow Martin, and I also find it unlikely that Trayvon was so enraged by someone following him he would have beaten or suffocated his follower to death.

Had a gun not been present, then it's likely that Zimmerman would be alive, and Trayvon would be in jail for battery. JMO.

Which is why I feel Zimmerman may have acted appropriately from the time Trayvon got on top of him until he was shot. Personally I wouldn't have followed armed or unarmed. However, as I have stated before this wasn't the first time Zimmerman has followed a suspicious person. Was he carrying at that time? I would be curious to know as well. However, it did lead to the arrest of the suspicious person, Zimmerman was considered a hero, and from what I read, he did not need to pull the gun. Why would he think it was wrong to follow a suspicious person if that was the case? The police did not arrest or repremand him at that time.

Given the Joe Horn case, I don't think police action or inaction should really have a bearing as to whether guns contributed to a problem or solved it.

 

[BoneYardDog]

Good question on SC. I have no idea. I also have no idea how anyone can advance a claim of self-defense when his victims are hiding from him.

I realize that Zimmerman was in legal possession and that is not part of this case. What I am asking (and this is not a legal question Christo) is can you look at this situation and honestly say that had Zimmerman not been in possession of a gun, that he would be dead right now instead of Trayvon. It's a total hypothetical, so you can answer however you want and not be wrong. Maybe Zimmerman was enough of a wannabe hero he would have followed Trayvon without it. Maybe Trayvon was so unhinged he would have beaten Zimmerman to death just for following him.

But I find it much more likely that it was the fact that Zimmerman was carrying which gave him the bravado to follow Martin, and I also find it unlikely that Trayvon was so enraged by someone following him he would have beaten or suffocated his follower to death.

Had a gun not been present, then it's likely that Zimmerman would be alive, and Trayvon would be in jail for battery. JMO.

Which is why I feel Zimmerman may have acted appropriately from the time Trayvon got on top of him until he was shot. Personally I wouldn't have followed armed or unarmed. However, as I have stated before this wasn't the first time Zimmerman has followed a suspicious person. Was he carrying at that time? I would be curious to know as well. However, it did lead to the arrest of the suspicious person, Zimmerman was considered a hero, and from what I read, he did not need to pull the gun. Why would he think it was wrong to follow a suspicious person if that was the case? The police did not arrest or repremand him at that time.

If he could carry legally, you can bet your backside he was carrying in all the incidents...Why was it this time and only this time there was ever a confrontation that caused him to shoot someone???

Like you said he was considered by many in his neighborhood to be a hero not a nut or troublemaker...

Do you really think a white police department would not arrest a "minority" if they had ANY reason to???

 

[Guest]

If you don't want to be tried for murder, don't shoot people.

This might be one of the more simplistic and idiotic posts in this thread.

ORLY?

It did seem like you were channeling BustedKnuckles or TexanFan and going for the cheap joke with that one.

Whatever he may be, Zimmerman is no martyr. If you're stalking someone with a loaded weapon you should expect that there may be consequences to what you're doing. So it may have been reductionist, but it was no joke.

 

[timschochet]

I live in Alabama. Everyone has a gun here too.Zimmerman was not protecting his family from anything.You mentioned property in addition to family meaning you would shoot someone for stealing, correct?Do you believe that Zimmerman would have left his car and followed Martin had he not been carrying? We'll never know, and you can easily say yes.But in order to believe that the gun did not escalate the situation, you have to believe that he would have followed without a gun, and that Trayvon would have killed him had Zimmerman not killed him first. Put together that's a major stretch.Also, if you can't respond with blatant twisting of words ("dumbest things I have ever heard" in reference to more guns being the appropriate reaction to this incident became "defending your family is one of the dumbest things you can do") then let's save ourselves the trouble and just end this right here.

Clifford, you're one of the many intelligent posters I have read in this forum. There are plenty of intelligent posters in this thread who have offered good and valuable information and argument on this issue: Christo, Carolina Hustler, Matthias, Busted Knuckles, Renesauz, ATC1 just to name a few. I disagree with many of their posts, but they make this thread a pleasure to read, as do you.Please do not waste your time with BoneYardDog.

 

[Guest]

Whatever he may be, Zimmerman is no martyr. If you're stalking someone with a loaded weapon you should expect that there may be consequences to what you're doing. So it may have been reductionist, but it was no joke.

Or let me put it this way. Most people would agree that if you get behind the wheel while drunk you accept that there is a risk of negative repercussions even if you don't have ill intent.I'd say walking around with a loaded weapon carries about that same level of acceptance of risk responsibility especially once you further stipulate that you actually pulled the trigger and killed someone.

 

[ATC1]

Good question on SC. I have no idea. I also have no idea how anyone can advance a claim of self-defense when his victims are hiding from him.

I realize that Zimmerman was in legal possession and that is not part of this case. What I am asking (and this is not a legal question Christo) is can you look at this situation and honestly say that had Zimmerman not been in possession of a gun, that he would be dead right now instead of Trayvon. It's a total hypothetical, so you can answer however you want and not be wrong. Maybe Zimmerman was enough of a wannabe hero he would have followed Trayvon without it. Maybe Trayvon was so unhinged he would have beaten Zimmerman to death just for following him.

But I find it much more likely that it was the fact that Zimmerman was carrying which gave him the bravado to follow Martin, and I also find it unlikely that Trayvon was so enraged by someone following him he would have beaten or suffocated his follower to death.

Had a gun not been present, then it's likely that Zimmerman would be alive, and Trayvon would be in jail for battery. JMO.

Which is why I feel Zimmerman may have acted appropriately from the time Trayvon got on top of him until he was shot. Personally I wouldn't have followed armed or unarmed. However, as I have stated before this wasn't the first time Zimmerman has followed a suspicious person. Was he carrying at that time? I would be curious to know as well. However, it did lead to the arrest of the suspicious person, Zimmerman was considered a hero, and from what I read, he did not need to pull the gun. Why would he think it was wrong to follow a suspicious person if that was the case? The police did not arrest or repremand him at that time.

Given the Joe Horn case, I don't think police action or inaction should really have a bearing as to whether guns contributed to a problem or solved it.

If you are saying that the gun is the reason for Martin being killed, then I would say police action or inaction is a reason for Martin being killed as well.

 

[Clifford]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

 

[BoneYardDog]

I live in Alabama. Everyone has a gun here too.Zimmerman was not protecting his family from anything.You mentioned property in addition to family meaning you would shoot someone for stealing, correct?Do you believe that Zimmerman would have left his car and followed Martin had he not been carrying? We'll never know, and you can easily say yes.But in order to believe that the gun did not escalate the situation, you have to believe that he would have followed without a gun, and that Trayvon would have killed him had Zimmerman not killed him first. Put together that's a major stretch.Also, if you can't respond with blatant twisting of words ("dumbest things I have ever heard" in reference to more guns being the appropriate reaction to this incident became "defending your family is one of the dumbest things you can do") then let's save ourselves the trouble and just end this right here.

Clifford, you're one of the many intelligent posters I have read in this forum. There are plenty of intelligent posters in this thread who have offered good and valuable information and argument on this issue: Christo, Carolina Hustler, Matthias, Busted Knuckles, Renesauz, ATC1 just to name a few. I disagree with many of their posts, but they make this thread a pleasure to read, as do you.Please do not waste your time with BoneYardDog.

Tim there is no bigger time waster than you... The amount of your inane posts verify that, heck they are even keeping track... I speak more truth in one post than you have in all yours...

 

[identikit]

I understand how the courts work Christo, but thanks for your vigilance. Read a good quote about Mitch McConnell yesterday. "He has a considerable knack for being scrupulously accurate and rarely honest."No idea why that came to mind here.

I think what bothers you so much is that I am accurate and honest. I'd love for you to point out where you think I've been dishonest in this thread.

The most glaring difference between you and the rest is that you are dealing with the realities of how things really work vs others framing their comments with the lens of how they THINK things should work.

Exactly.

 

[Charlie Frown]

George Zimmerman's new attorney will speak after Zimmerman's first appearance at 1:30 p.m.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

No. Christo is making a legal argument. I'm making a moral one. There's no particular reason they should agree. So that's not my issue with him.

My issue is that he's a weasel.

 

[Christo]

No. Christo is making a legal argument. I'm making a moral one. There's no particular reason they should agree. So that's not my issue with him.My issue is that he's a weasel.

 

[ATC1]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

If Zimmerman was considered a hero previously for following a suspicious person, what makes you think he wouldn't do it again?Both times Zimmerman was not sure if a crime has been or was going to be committed. The first time it happens that his speculation was correct. If he truely thought Martin appeared to be up to no good, there is no reason for me to believe he had a different intent then the last time he was considered a hero until Martin became physical. Could it be possible Zimmerman tried to physically apprehend Martin? maybe, we don't know, but did Zimmerman physically detain the last suspicious person? The police make it seem like he did nothing wrong if he did.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Trayvon Martin's mom thinks his shooting was an accident:

I believe it was an accident," Fulton said. "I believe that it just got out of control, and he couldn't turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager and that he did not have a weapon? I would ask him that I understand that his family is hurting, but think about our family that lost our teenage son. I mean, it's just very difficult to live with day in and day out. I'm sure his parents can pick up the phone and call him, but we can't pick up the phone and call Trayvon anymore.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/trayvon-martin-mom-sybrina-fulton-zimmerman-shooting-accident-122512394.html

 

[TexanFan02]

No. Christo is making a legal argument. I'm making a moral one. There's no particular reason they should agree. So that's not my issue with him.My issue is that he's a weasel.

More like a ferret, imo.

 

[identikit]

Trayvon Martin's mom thinks his shooting was an accident:

I believe it was an accident," Fulton said. "I believe that it just got out of control, and he couldn't turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager and that he did not have a weapon? I would ask him that I understand that his family is hurting, but think about our family that lost our teenage son. I mean, it's just very difficult to live with day in and day out. I'm sure his parents can pick up the phone and call him, but we can't pick up the phone and call Trayvon anymore.

http://news.yahoo.co...-122512394.html

Pretty strong, compassionate woman there.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Is selecting murder as the charge really any different from what the prosecutor in the Anthony trial? Going for a big charge since the trial is public, and likely overreaching? Not only is manslaughter more appropriate (given what we know now) would it not be easier to achieve?

So watched interview with George's brother last night on Piers Morgan. His brother got into detailing the account of what happened in the confrontation, which he went into once before on same show. What he was saying was hard to make sense of:

Trayvon punched Zim, breaking his nose and sending him to the ground. Tray then sat on Zimmerman's chest, and covered his mouth and nose with his hands, essentially trying to suffocate Zim. His brother claims that Zim was about to lose consciousness, and at this point Tray and he struggled for the gun. During this struggle, his brother claims that Zim is still about lose consciousness, and fearing what will happen if he does, he shoots and kills Tray.

His brother is also claiming that Zim was the one on the neighbor's 911 call screaming for help and "No" just before the shot was fired. So this particular account (which might have come straight from Zim) raises several questions:

1. If Tray is bigger than Zim, and sitting on his chest, how would Zim be able to pull the gun which reports state was in a holster tucked into his waistband?

2. If Tray is holding his hands over Zim's mouth cutting off his air to the point where Zim fears losing consciousness, how is he able to scream for help?

3. While it's possible that Tray kept one hand covering nose and mouth and used the other for struggling with the gun. this seems like it would be hard to do.

I posted this story about 50 pages ago and no one wanted to address those exact points. It's just his brother talking though.

I didn't answer because there's nothing in those exact points that makes sense to me. 1. Nothing in question one prevents someone from pulling a gun. I can whip my #### in most wrestling matches and it's better attached than a gun. My guess is he pulled his gun by using his hand and arm. In fact, I guarantee it.

2. Nothing in two prevents a struggling person from screaming. Hell I can't even cover a struggling 5 year olds mouth. If you listen to the 22 second recording it fits perfectly. first some moaning. Then mouth covered. Then some loud clear cries for help. Then mouth covered. Then incoherent wailing and gunshot. Works fine.

3. I think at the point it became a struggle for the gun Tray would have abandoned muffling Zimmerman.

You're trying too hard to make exactly what the brother said be consistent for the entire assault. They were parts of the assault. For example, I doubt Tray tried to cover Zim's mouth until after Zim first yelled for help. See how that works? It's common sense really. Now Zim is struggling to yell so there's seconds of silent struggle and seconds of yelling. Then boom. Nothing in the brother's story hurts Zimmerman.

 

[Marvin]

THIS WILL SETTLE EVERYTHING

 

[Chaos Commish]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

 

[Clifford]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

If Zimmerman was considered a hero previously for following a suspicious person, what makes you think he wouldn't do it again?Both times Zimmerman was not sure if a crime has been or was going to be committed. The first time it happens that his speculation was correct. If he truely thought Martin appeared to be up to no good, there is no reason for me to believe he had a different intent then the last time he was considered a hero until Martin became physical. Could it be possible Zimmerman tried to physically apprehend Martin? maybe, we don't know, but did Zimmerman physically detain the last suspicious person? The police make it seem like he did nothing wrong if he did.

I'm sorry but this hero thing has no source. However we do have an event that took place in the form of a neighborhood meeting where residents got together and at least one of the residents actually issued formal complaints about Zimmerman to Sanford police. So I don't think the "hero" reference which never had an identified source is pretty much nullified by the complaints, which do have a source (no, not going to look it up, we all know it's there). Maybe the source for the "hero" comment has surfaced, but even so it's +1 and -1 on that score.Regardless, we're no longer talking about my point here: the presence of the gun was detrimental to both lives. Trayvon is dead, and Zimmerman is facing murder charges. Had Zimmerman not had a gun, I think it's very unlikely that anyone is dead or facing murder charges.

 

[ATC1]

Trayvon Martin's mom thinks his shooting was an accident:

I believe it was an accident," Fulton said. "I believe that it just got out of control, and he couldn't turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager and that he did not have a weapon? I would ask him that I understand that his family is hurting, but think about our family that lost our teenage son. I mean, it's just very difficult to live with day in and day out. I'm sure his parents can pick up the phone and call him, but we can't pick up the phone and call Trayvon anymore.

http://news.yahoo.co...-122512394.html

Pretty strong, compassionate woman there.

Doesn't this say she doesn't think it was 2nd degree murder? Also, that's all good, but they do realize that that is not how the system operates?

If Zimmerman did not "have" to pull the weapon and Trayvon was arrested for battery, then they would be screaming that Trayvon was falsly arrested because he was being followed thus feeling threatened.

 

[Clifford]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

He's saying police inaction was at fault. We are led to believe that the shooting occurred during the confrontation. So if Trayvon's only crime was the battery that occurred in the confrontation, I fail to see how police could be held accountable for not intervening once the initial crime had occurred to prevent the shooting.Trayvon was not committing a crime at the time the police were called.

 

[Guest]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

:christobatsignal:

 

[ATC1]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

If Zimmerman was considered a hero previously for following a suspicious person, what makes you think he wouldn't do it again?Both times Zimmerman was not sure if a crime has been or was going to be committed. The first time it happens that his speculation was correct. If he truely thought Martin appeared to be up to no good, there is no reason for me to believe he had a different intent then the last time he was considered a hero until Martin became physical. Could it be possible Zimmerman tried to physically apprehend Martin? maybe, we don't know, but did Zimmerman physically detain the last suspicious person? The police make it seem like he did nothing wrong if he did.

I'm sorry but this hero thing has no source. However we do have an event that took place in the form of a neighborhood meeting where residents got together and at least one of the residents actually issued formal complaints about Zimmerman to Sanford police. So I don't think the "hero" reference which never had an identified source is pretty much nullified by the complaints, which do have a source (no, not going to look it up, we all know it's there). Maybe the source for the "hero" comment has surfaced, but even so it's +1 and -1 on that score.Regardless, we're no longer talking about my point here: the presence of the gun was detrimental to both lives. Trayvon is dead, and Zimmerman is facing murder charges. Had Zimmerman not had a gun, I think it's very unlikely that anyone is dead or facing murder charges.

In the source for the complants, was Zimmerman ever confronted by the police for those complants? My point is that the gun is but one factor of the case, but since it is the most important factor to you, then you'll run with it. Fine, I'll concede that if there was no gun, Martin would still be alive. Come take mine away from me now.

 

[the moops]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

 

[ATC1]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

He's saying police inaction was at fault. We are led to believe that the shooting occurred during the confrontation. So if Trayvon's only crime was the battery that occurred in the confrontation, I fail to see how police could be held accountable for not intervening once the initial crime had occurred to prevent the shooting.Trayvon was not committing a crime at the time the police were called.

If police acted before by telling Zimmerman that he should not follow suspicious characters, this may have been prevented.

 

[Clifford]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

If Zimmerman was considered a hero previously for following a suspicious person, what makes you think he wouldn't do it again?Both times Zimmerman was not sure if a crime has been or was going to be committed. The first time it happens that his speculation was correct. If he truely thought Martin appeared to be up to no good, there is no reason for me to believe he had a different intent then the last time he was considered a hero until Martin became physical.

Could it be possible Zimmerman tried to physically apprehend Martin? maybe, we don't know, but did Zimmerman physically detain the last suspicious person? The police make it seem like he did nothing wrong if he did.

I'm sorry but this hero thing has no source. However we do have an event that took place in the form of a neighborhood meeting where residents got together and at least one of the residents actually issued formal complaints about Zimmerman to Sanford police. So I don't think the "hero" reference which never had an identified source is pretty much nullified by the complaints, which do have a source (no, not going to look it up, we all know it's there). Maybe the source for the "hero" comment has surfaced, but even so it's +1 and -1 on that score.Regardless, we're no longer talking about my point here: the presence of the gun was detrimental to both lives. Trayvon is dead, and Zimmerman is facing murder charges. Had Zimmerman not had a gun, I think it's very unlikely that anyone is dead or facing murder charges.

In the source for the complants, was Zimmerman ever confronted by the police for those complants? My point is that the gun is but one factor of the case, but since it is the most important factor to you, then you'll run with it. Fine, I'll concede that if there was no gun, Martin would still be alive. Come take mine away from me now.

Doesn't the absence of one single factor, with all other factors remaining the same, changing the entire outcome and it's effect on both people involved make it pretty damn important?No, Zimmerman was never confronted by the police as far as I know. That doesn't change the fact that not everyone considered him a hero, and at least one resident considered him a problem.

ETA: I am not saying no one should be able to own a gun. I'm saying that the legal system's broad definition of self-defense, along with many states now carrying SYG statutes which make the self-defense argument without bounds, has created a public perception that as long as one can make a case of feeling in any way threatened, use of deadly force is condoned by our society. Looking at the cases (there's another one today) I can't say that perception is off-base.

Furthermore, if you look at what our culture both promotes and consumes, I think a case can be made that while we may be taught on some level that violence is wrong (maybe school or church), there are stronger forces in our culture that violence is not only cool and glamorous, but is also a more effective way of solving problems. Look at any source you like, from our foreign policy, to movies, to posts in this thread. Using violence to solve problems, specifically using a gun, seems to meet with a certain amount of admiration by some.

Combine these cultural currents with laws that make attaining weapons easier as well as laws that make using these weapons safer in terms of facing prosecution, and you get what we have today. Personally, having lived outside the US, I attained enough separation from our culture to start asking why things have to be this way. I know people think this it is ridiculous to question the right to gun ownership, and perhaps it should be. But I hope that something makes us question if the way we handle gun ownership is the best way, for gun-owners and non-gun-owners alike.

 

[humpback]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

If Martin was going for his gun.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

 

[kentric]

Is selecting murder as the charge really any different from what the prosecutor in the Anthony trial? Going for a big charge since the trial is public, and likely overreaching? Not only is manslaughter more appropriate (given what we know now) would it not be easier to achieve?

So watched interview with George's brother last night on Piers Morgan. His brother got into detailing the account of what happened in the confrontation, which he went into once before on same show. What he was saying was hard to make sense of:

Trayvon punched Zim, breaking his nose and sending him to the ground. Tray then sat on Zimmerman's chest, and covered his mouth and nose with his hands, essentially trying to suffocate Zim. His brother claims that Zim was about to lose consciousness, and at this point Tray and he struggled for the gun. During this struggle, his brother claims that Zim is still about lose consciousness, and fearing what will happen if he does, he shoots and kills Tray.

His brother is also claiming that Zim was the one on the neighbor's 911 call screaming for help and "No" just before the shot was fired. So this particular account (which might have come straight from Zim) raises several questions:

1. If Tray is bigger than Zim, and sitting on his chest, how would Zim be able to pull the gun which reports state was in a holster tucked into his waistband?

2. If Tray is holding his hands over Zim's mouth cutting off his air to the point where Zim fears losing consciousness, how is he able to scream for help?

3. While it's possible that Tray kept one hand covering nose and mouth and used the other for struggling with the gun. this seems like it would be hard to do.

I posted this story about 50 pages ago and no one wanted to address those exact points. It's just his brother talking though.

I didn't answer because there's nothing in those exact points that makes sense to me. 1. Nothing in question one prevents someone from pulling a gun. I can whip my #### in most wrestling matches and it's better attached than a gun. My guess is he pulled his gun by using his hand and arm. In fact, I guarantee it.

2. Nothing in two prevents a struggling person from screaming. Hell I can't even cover a struggling 5 year olds mouth. If you listen to the 22 second recording it fits perfectly. first some moaning. Then mouth covered. Then some loud clear cries for help. Then mouth covered. Then incoherent wailing and gunshot. Works fine.

3. I think at the point it became a struggle for the gun Tray would have abandoned muffling Zimmerman.

You're trying too hard to make exactly what the brother said be consistent for the entire assault. They were parts of the assault. For example, I doubt Tray tried to cover Zim's mouth until after Zim first yelled for help. See how that works? It's common sense really. Now Zim is struggling to yell so there's seconds of silent struggle and seconds of yelling. Then boom. Nothing in the brother's story hurts Zimmerman.

The three points aren't necessarily the facts, but if Zimmerman was being smothered to the point where he was close to passing out, it is difficult to imagine him being able to belt out "help" the way it appeared the word was being screamed in the 911 tapes. Again, all this is speculation.

 

[kentric]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

If Martin was going for his gun.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

 

[The Commish]

Good question on SC. I have no idea. I also have no idea how anyone can advance a claim of self-defense when his victims are hiding from him.

I realize that Zimmerman was in legal possession and that is not part of this case. What I am asking (and this is not a legal question Christo) is can you look at this situation and honestly say that had Zimmerman not been in possession of a gun, that he would be dead right now instead of Trayvon. It's a total hypothetical, so you can answer however you want and not be wrong. Maybe Zimmerman was enough of a wannabe hero he would have followed Trayvon without it. Maybe Trayvon was so unhinged he would have beaten Zimmerman to death just for following him.

But I find it much more likely that it was the fact that Zimmerman was carrying which gave him the bravado to follow Martin, and I also find it unlikely that Trayvon was so enraged by someone following him he would have beaten or suffocated his follower to death.

Had a gun not been present, then it's likely that Zimmerman would be alive, and Trayvon would be in jail for battery. JMO.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Always loved that argument. If he's not carrying the gun then you're right, iin all likelihood, there is not dead body. Only a battered Zimmerman.

I'm not even sure about this part. Not sure why, but I don't believe he would have followed him to begin with.

 

[Guest]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

If Martin was going for his gun.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

If aliens materialized in front of him before dematerializing out.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

 

[Christo]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

:christobatsignal:

It is funny how people keep insisting they know what happened.

 

[Christo]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

What?

 

[humpback]

In what scenario would Zimmerman be the one yelling "no"? If he was getting beat up, I can understand "help".

If Martin was going for his gun.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

If aliens materialized in front of him before dematerializing out.Disclaimer: I'm not saying that's what I think happened.

So witty.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

Assault and battery is a crime. There is no way around the fact that Trayvon could have safely walked home but chose to double back and confront Zimmerman.

:christobatsignal:

Yep. My bad. We cannot deny Trayvon doubling back. Who chose the confrontation is debatable, but Tray's girl seems to concur with Zim and his family that Tray at least started the conversation after doubling back. Spin it however you like from the known knowns:At 7:11 and 40 seconds give or take a couple, Trayvon ran down the sidewalk that led directly to his dad's place 70 yards away. He could have been there by 7:12 if he ran or made it easily by 7:13 if he strolled. Between 7:15 and 7:16 he's in a fight all back down that sidewalk closer to Zimmerman's car than his dad's house. At about 7:16 and 50 seconds we hear the gunshot. Zimmerman stays on the phone until 7:13 and 30 seconds give or take a few but from 7:12 to the end of the call he clearly has no sight of Trayvon. It's been suggested Trayvon hid between buildings and never ran down that sidewalk. Something like that works but it doesn't change the fact he had plenty of time to walk home, he was reported acting oddly, he did run, he did show up back at the spot he was reported running from.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I'd like to stick to the case but, Clifford, here's a fairly recent look at murder and gun ownership in other countries.

 

[ATC1]

By NBC News and msnbc.com staff

Updated at 1:15 p.m. ET: Trayvon Martin's mother retracted her comments that she believes her son's fatal shooting by George Zimmerman was an accident, telling MSNBC-TV on Thursday afternoon that she actually believes "George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood."

In an interview Thursday morning on NBC's TODAY show, Sybrina Fulton had said: "I believe it was an accident. I believe that it just got out of control and he couldn't turn the clock back."

After Fulton's remarks drew widespread media attention, Ryan Julison, a spokesman for the Martin family, emailed a statement to MSNBC TV saying her comments had been "mischaracterized."

Advertise | AdChoices

"When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident," Fulton said.

"My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that," she said, clarifying that the "accident" was that Martin and Zimmerman ever crossed paths.

Here's the full statement:

Earlier today, I made a comment to the media that was later mischaracterized. When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident.

We believe that George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood. The 'accident' I was referring to was the fact that George Zimmerman and my son ever crossed paths. It was an accidental encounter. If George Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his vehicle, this entire incident would have been avoided.

My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/12/11159111-update-trayvon-martins-mom-retracts-accident-characterization-says-zimmerman-killed-him-in-cold-blood?lite

 

[Christo]

By NBC News and msnbc.com staff

Updated at 1:15 p.m. ET: Trayvon Martin's mother retracted her comments that she believes her son's fatal shooting by George Zimmerman was an accident, telling MSNBC-TV on Thursday afternoon that she actually believes "George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood."

In an interview Thursday morning on NBC's TODAY show, Sybrina Fulton had said: "I believe it was an accident. I believe that it just got out of control and he couldn't turn the clock back."

After Fulton's remarks drew widespread media attention, Ryan Julison, a spokesman for the Martin family, emailed a statement to MSNBC TV saying her comments had been "mischaracterized."

Advertise | AdChoices

"When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident," Fulton said.

"My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that," she said, clarifying that the "accident" was that Martin and Zimmerman ever crossed paths.

Here's the full statement:

Earlier today, I made a comment to the media that was later mischaracterized. When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident.

We believe that George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood. The 'accident' I was referring to was the fact that George Zimmerman and my son ever crossed paths. It was an accidental encounter. If George Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his vehicle, this entire incident would have been avoided.

My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that.

Sounds like some of the people in this thread. When I said "accident" I meant "stalked him and murdered him in cold blood."

 

[ATC1]

Given that Martin was not committing a crime I don't follow. Are you speaking in general or specifically in this case?

If Zimmerman was considered a hero previously for following a suspicious person, what makes you think he wouldn't do it again?Both times Zimmerman was not sure if a crime has been or was going to be committed. The first time it happens that his speculation was correct. If he truely thought Martin appeared to be up to no good, there is no reason for me to believe he had a different intent then the last time he was considered a hero until Martin became physical.

Could it be possible Zimmerman tried to physically apprehend Martin? maybe, we don't know, but did Zimmerman physically detain the last suspicious person? The police make it seem like he did nothing wrong if he did.

I'm sorry but this hero thing has no source. However we do have an event that took place in the form of a neighborhood meeting where residents got together and at least one of the residents actually issued formal complaints about Zimmerman to Sanford police. So I don't think the "hero" reference which never had an identified source is pretty much nullified by the complaints, which do have a source (no, not going to look it up, we all know it's there). Maybe the source for the "hero" comment has surfaced, but even so it's +1 and -1 on that score.Regardless, we're no longer talking about my point here: the presence of the gun was detrimental to both lives. Trayvon is dead, and Zimmerman is facing murder charges. Had Zimmerman not had a gun, I think it's very unlikely that anyone is dead or facing murder charges.

In the source for the complants, was Zimmerman ever confronted by the police for those complants? My point is that the gun is but one factor of the case, but since it is the most important factor to you, then you'll run with it. Fine, I'll concede that if there was no gun, Martin would still be alive. Come take mine away from me now.

Doesn't the absence of one single factor, with all other factors remaining the same, changing the entire outcome and it's effect on both people involved make it pretty damn important?No, Zimmerman was never confronted by the police as far as I know. That doesn't change the fact that not everyone considered him a hero, and at least one resident considered him a problem.

ETA: I am not saying no one should be able to own a gun. I'm saying that the legal system's broad definition of self-defense, along with many states now carrying SYG statutes which make the self-defense argument without bounds, has created a public perception that as long as one can make a case of feeling in any way threatened, use of deadly force is condoned by our society. Looking at the cases (there's another one today) I can't say that perception is off-base.

Furthermore, if you look at what our culture both promotes and consumes, I think a case can be made that while we may be taught on some level that violence is wrong (maybe school or church), there are stronger forces in our culture that violence is not only cool and glamorous, but is also a more effective way of solving problems. Look at any source you like, from our foreign policy, to movies, to posts in this thread. Using violence to solve problems, specifically using a gun, seems to meet with a certain amount of admiration by some.

Combine these cultural currents with laws that make attaining weapons easier as well as laws that make using these weapons safer in terms of facing prosecution, and you get what we have today. Personally, having lived outside the US, I attained enough separation from our culture to start asking why things have to be this way. I know people think this it is ridiculous to question the right to gun ownership, and perhaps it should be. But I hope that something makes us question if the way we handle gun ownership is the best way, for gun-owners and non-gun-owners alike.

Yup, that's why I bring up all factors. I agree guns should be regulated better to be only in the right hands. Regaurdless of whatever law there is though, criminals will break it, the responsible citizen will not.

Whatever his intensions may have been, I have yet to determine which Geroge Zimmerman is. I don't think Zimmerman should have a permit to carry since he has a prior history of violence.

 

[Clifford]

I'd like to stick to the case but, Clifford, here's a fairly recent look at murder and gun ownership in other countries.

What is this supposed to show?More guns = less murder? This obviously ignores tons of variables.

Besides, I am not trying to prove anything with what I am saying. All I am basing my thoughts on are anecdotal evidence in the Horn, Zimmerman, and now the case in Phoenix. There are tons of others that happen right around here. Someone was shot and killed for cutting someone else off in traffic on 459 outside of Birmingham.

I'm not even saying that we should rethink gun ownership entirely or adopt a system akin to the UK where gun ownership is heavily limited and regulated. I'm just saying that we could be smart about.

 

[Chaos Commish]

By NBC News and msnbc.com staff

Updated at 1:15 p.m. ET: Trayvon Martin's mother retracted her comments that she believes her son's fatal shooting by George Zimmerman was an accident, telling MSNBC-TV on Thursday afternoon that she actually believes "George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood."

In an interview Thursday morning on NBC's TODAY show, Sybrina Fulton had said: "I believe it was an accident. I believe that it just got out of control and he couldn't turn the clock back."

After Fulton's remarks drew widespread media attention, Ryan Julison, a spokesman for the Martin family, emailed a statement to MSNBC TV saying her comments had been "mischaracterized."

Advertise | AdChoices

"When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident," Fulton said.

"My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that," she said, clarifying that the "accident" was that Martin and Zimmerman ever crossed paths.

Here's the full statement:

Earlier today, I made a comment to the media that was later mischaracterized. When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident.

We believe that George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood. The 'accident' I was referring to was the fact that George Zimmerman and my son ever crossed paths. It was an accidental encounter. If George Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his vehicle, this entire incident would have been avoided.

My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman, and there was nothing accidental about that.

Sounds like some of the people in this thread. When I said "accident" I meant "stalked him and murdered him in cold blood."

Her attorneys should quit for her speaking without their permission.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I'd like to stick to the case but, Clifford, here's a fairly recent look at murder and gun ownership in other countries.

What is this supposed to show?

Yeah, I'll stick with the case. Sorry, I just don't care that much.

 

[Da Guru]

With T-Marts mother saying it was an accident, T-Mart walking back to confront Z...I think Z walks on the second degree charge. Seems like manslaughter would have been the call here to get a conviction.

 

[timschochet]

With T-Marts mother saying it was an accident, T-Mart walking back to confront Z...I think Z walks on the second degree charge. Seems like manslaughter would have been the call here to get a conviction.

Somehow I doubt this will come up in court testimony.

 

[Two Deep]

With T-Marts mother saying it was an accident, T-Mart walking back to confront Z...I think Z walks on the second degree charge. Seems like manslaughter would have been the call here to get a conviction.

Comes back to negligent homicide/manslaughter. With the charge of second degree murder the jury can still find him guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

 

[Da Guru]

http://www.cnn.com/

Zimmerman facing the judge. Judge does now even know it is Zimmerman standing there. Probably has been looking at old picture. Zimmerman seems small.

 

[ATC1]

With T-Marts mother saying it was an accident, T-Mart walking back to confront Z...I think Z walks on the second degree charge. Seems like manslaughter would have been the call here to get a conviction.

Somehow I doubt this will come up in court testimony.

Everything will come up in court.

 

[Two Deep]

http://www.cnn.com/Zimmerman facing the judge. Judge does now even know it is Zimmerman standing there. Probably has been looking at old picture. Zimmerman seems small.

Who did the judge think was standing there in a jail jumpsuit.

 

[Charlie Frown]

Trayvon Martin's mom thinks his shooting was an accident:

I believe it was an accident," Fulton said. "I believe that it just got out of control, and he couldn't turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager and that he did not have a weapon? I would ask him that I understand that his family is hurting, but think about our family that lost our teenage son. I mean, it's just very difficult to live with day in and day out. I'm sure his parents can pick up the phone and call him, but we can't pick up the phone and call Trayvon anymore.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/trayvon-martin-mom-sybrina-fulton-zimmerman-shooting-accident-122512394.html

I see she is back peddling on these comments now.

However, she later released a statement to CNN saying that the fact that Zimmerman and her son had ever met was an accident."My son was profiled, followed and murdered by George Zimmerman and there was nothing accidental about that," she said.

Didn't know you could leave skid marks in reverse.