Zimmerman found not guilty

Hypothetical.

Your Trayvon and God gives you a second chance.

Your allowed to re-live the night over again, you know the first time round you get shot by a guy who thinks your a burlgar so you have to change tactics to stop history repeating.

Do you

A) Sneak up on Zimmerman and hit him harder or try to disarm him
B) Run and try to get to your dads house hoping that Zimmerman can't keep up
C) Keep still and Phone the police

Depending on your personality any of these is a possibility.

Now put yourself in the head of a 17 year old scared kid.

Empathising is easy for me, I hope this helps other people do the same.

If everything I hear about Zimmerman's good nature is true and I hope it is, he would have also given everything for Trayvon to pick B or C.

 

http://youtu.be/07-E2n-1t8g

 

Please check this out

Thanks:major


A Few Questions for Those
Upset by the Zimmerman Verdict

http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/

 

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-911-call-zimmerman-made-to-sanford-police/vGZq9/



Is WFTV mistaken?

 

No, it could mean he successfully prevented someone from shooting him to death. The man had a gun, so it would be reasonable to assume he had no intention to punch Martin but to shoot him instead. The right of self-defense is not exclusive to gun owners.

 

I agree. And that is what we don't know. Was GZ 'ambushed' or did he overstep and attack TM?

GZ should have stayed in his truck, and TM should have called the cops or just gone home. I repeat, conflict avoidance. GZ sees a potential criminal, and goes after him, TM sees a creepy a@@ saltine, and goes towards him? Epic fail on both sides, in my opinion.

Passion, or ignorance of youth vs a wanna be cop, in my opinion. But, the evidence in the trial seems to be on GZ's side.

When I practice with my self defense gun, I shoot at 7 yards or less. Anything more than that is something I might keep my eye on, or retreat from.

And there is a reason I train at 7 yards or less.

Lots of videos for this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

So, even if GZ was armed, if TM, a younger 17 year old, was within 7 yards...

 

Holy mother of Justice I'm in consensus with Fred:-D Must be full moon or something...

One of things I've been pondering is the issue of how this could be stopped with legislation, what you've learned in conflict avoidance could be included in legislation. I think something should be said for actively pursuing someone while armed and GZ did chase him on foot, I don't see how any good can come of that unless your the police and you need A LOT of training before they allow you to do that in any country.

I have no problem with deadly force to defend yourself but citizens running around the streets while armed:confused Then they are literally looking for trouble and while I wouldn't use this case as an argument for or against gun control it's most definitely an argument against vigilantism IMO.

 

Ahh, murder, assault is already illegal. How are we going to legislate common sense?

I have seen no proof from the trial evidence that GZ chased TM at all. And keep in mind, a 17 year old vs a 29 year old when you say 'chase'.

I suspect we may be the cause of them finding life on Mars now. :-D The RikkyFred fossil might be found Wednesday.:cool

 

Well vigilantism laws cover that common sense anyway so I guess it's already covered.

This is the least bias account I can find taken from Zimmermans court transcript corroborated with police calls on wikipedia, if it's wrong then I hold my hands up and retract my argument, I don't want to get chewed out while we're bonding:-D On the phonecall you can also hear Zimmerman running and panting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin#George_Zimmerman.27s_account_of_events

Prosecution.

What isn't clear to me is how far he ran away from his vehicle, I don't even know if that number would matter, the word 'Chase' is immaterial also, pursue, follow, go after. While armed any I would still argue is vigilantism.

 

Hard to say Rikky, again, either one of them could have avoided the whole thing. If GZ had just stayed in his truck, or if TM had headed home when he saw the creepy saltine.

Interesting thought. But everyone with some sense is always armed. Well, unless they don't have arms... Seriously, use of hands and fists kill a lot of people.

 

I'm making it up as I go along and so I can't find any laws regarding vigilantism anywhere, this has surprised me. The only reference I find is to summary judgements and punishment outside the law which is totally different to self defence.

Drifting away from the Zimmerman case slightly - Makes me wonder what if all these costumed hero's you see on the streets were legally armed and pro actively went looking for bad guys:confused Obviously lots more fatal confrontations would happen, is there anything in law that stops this or is considered every citizens right? If anyone knows I'd like to know, I can't find anything from the US or UK

From my perspective this wouldn't be a good thing for any society, better left to the police.

 

I like this term.

 

Rikky, I would think vigilantism would be covered under existing laws. I have no right to 'punish' a criminal, even if I see them commit a crime. I am not sure about the so called 'citizen's arrest' thing. I don't see myself detaining anyone for the cops.

Now, under Louisiana law, I can use deadly force to protect my property, and some other times, don't remember the exact wording of the law. That law also extends to my car. Deadly force is permitted to prevent some crimes, but I would be VERY unlikely to get involved in a situation where I did not know exactly what was going on. Too many ways that could go wrong.

 

Me too I forgot to mention it:-D

The situation I mean is not punishment it is self defence just as in the Zimmerman case.

Just some fun, not really comparable to the GZ case.-

Batman stalks the streets looking for criminal activity he ends up cornering a burglar, he notifies commissioner Gorden he has the suspect cornered in an alley. Feeling trapped the suspect turns and decides to attack Batman, Batman takes out his Battarang and stabs the burglar in the chest/heart killing him.

Is this legal, is Batman a hero?

I get a conceal and carry then walk into the projects alone, I see a 6'6 drug dealer and his friends on the corner then move in close to observe, he notices me comes over and knocks me on my butt then him and his friends decide give me the beating of my life, I draw and kill them all.

Both instances the perpetrator acts typically as you would imagine a criminal to act, it's predictable, Batman and I act like a man who is in immediate mortal danger.

I think these situations are covered under 'intent' or would be argued as such by prosecution, what did Batman and I expect to happen?

 

Well, Batman has the resources to get non-lethal technology. :-D

You might be justified, like GZ was. But, why involve yourself into that environment if you don't have to?

Conflict avoidance...

Wait, you said drug deals in the projects... Ain't no drug deals on your side of town? :-D:-D

 

Why do vigilantes do what they do? Not my bag, I'm in enough danger trying not to trip over myself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE7Id0NBQC4

I used an American example because the law is different over here, we don't have handguns at all for one and if you did your looking at 5-10 just for having one so self defence wouldn't matter, if you legally own a shotgun and shoot and kill someone who enters your property you'd expect 2-5 for manslaughter, guns are only for sport, self defence is a big no no.

We have project type slum areas with gang violence but I don't know what they're called? Shit holes?:-D Doesn't have the same clarity, I've also never seen anyone selling drugs on the street, in the uk they all operate from a property similar to a crack house, too many video cameras on the street.

So I did think about a uk example but it got complicated:-D You fart too hard and you become a destructive weapon roflmao Think I've burned up enough of Tim and Jim's bandwidth for one thread anyhoo...

 

Just wow, never heard of people dressing up like that and 'fighting crime'. What a bunch of want to be mall ninjas dumb arse jackwagons.

We have self defense laws here, but many people, like myself, would only use that as a last ditch effort. OK, sure, I can protect my property legally, but do I want to go that route? Now, if they break into my house and threaten me, that is a different story, and I have the legal right to shoot.

Remember that whole 2a thingy we have here, makes it a little different than what you have. Castle law is a beautiful thing.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/07/louisiana_stand_your_ground_zi.html

 

OT

For the record, here is a link, to how mall ninjas think. Caution, may be some language.

http://doodiepants.com/2009/12/09/the-legend-of-the-mall-ninja-gecko45/

Be glad the tacticool ones protect you when you shop. Or you would be in trouble.

 

I read the stand your ground legislation when hearing about the GZ case and I agree with his defence teams decision not to mention it as it wasn't really appropriate an also why I haven't mentioned it. It could be perceived that both stood their ground and that's the only caveat I see, what happens when a dispute escalates in public and both parties stand their ground? I guess then the lawyers fight over who got physical first.

I'm gonna write some legislation that says "Take a deep breath and have a cup of tea before doing anything silly." Life is short enough.

Gnight...

 

Wearing a costume like that in public, unless it is Halloween, could be seen as a serious breach of Man Law. :-D

 

If both teams put their defense on the football field, neither can score. SYG, as I understand it, says you do not have a duty to retreat. Perhaps I am oversimplifying it.

 

I prefer the term tactical withdrawal:-D

I have a duty to myself to run like a mofo!roflmao

 

Not always the best tactical response though. :cool

 

I kinda drifted away for a while, but this article just came up when I went to check my email...
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130725/US-Neighborhood-Watch-Juror/

Juror says she owes Martin's parents apology

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — The second juror to speak publicly told ABC News in an interview made available Thursday that she feels George Zimmerman got away with murder for fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, but that there wasn't enough evidence at trial to convict him under Florida law.

 

I saw that about the juror. Says there was not enough evidence to convict, then says he was guilty... I think someone is wanting a book deal, as the other juror who tried to get a book deal got shut down.

All the jury should consider is the evidence in the case and the laws. The Prosecution has to prove guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt. Clearly, the Prosecution did not do so in this case.

 

One of the other aspects I've not seen mentioned in the media at all is what if TM racially profiled GM which is the reason he could have ran initially and fought without asking questions. As I understand Black and Latino gangs don't take too kindly to each other, is it so hard to imagine they both racially profiled each other? Latino guy in car following a black guy in a new neighbourhood?

From a Jury perspective or if I'm a jurer and step out of my own preconception box it could be that I'm stereotyping minority Americans in assuming they are all aware of gang type behaviour and have experienced it at some point, which is pretty much racial profiling.

I would imagine this to be one of the conversations the jury was ordered not to have and rightly so, Trayvon cannot be questioned as to his motives.

 

Interesting point on profiling Rikky. I mean, we do have testimony that TM called GZ a "creepy a@@ saltine". :-D

 

Here we go again, ABC editing the second juror to talk about the trial.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...with_murder_no_juror_b29_is_being_framed.html

'Edited' video here: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/george-zimmerman-juror-hearts-felt-guilty-19778568

Unedited version. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/george-zimmerman-juror-stands-decision-19777201

NBC edited the call from Zimmerman, ABC editing this... Do we have a media anymore?

 

News media is a business like any other and profits are # 1 importance.

So...we have news. We just have news tailored to bring in viewers, not truth. It is like this world-wide.

 

People don't like shades of grey they have to think about, they like good guys and bad guys, good vs evil. When there's a story where both people could be good or bad or the law/society could be good or bad people riot, it's just too complicated.

Much easier to pick a side then read media tailored to that viewpoint,you can then relax:cool The news channel has done all the thinking for you and the world makes sense again.

 

Yes, I call them low information voters. I have talked to several people who believe the SNL skit with Tina Fey was actually Sarah Palin, Zimmerman called 911 and said Martin looked black, when actually, the non-emergency dispatcher asked Z if the suspect was black, white, or hispanic...

Interesting how bad 'big bidness' is, but the news does poor or even unethical reporting, and it is acceptable for them to be profitable...

Now you have several 'civil rights folks' wanting to end the stand your ground laws, even though that was not what Zimmerman's defense was...

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._ground-law-racial-profiling-george-zimmerman

I love this cartoon: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...31Ud6NELG34AOjrYDACQ&ved=0CDIQ9QEwAQ&dur=2015

If you are going to protest, at least know what you are protesting. rolleyes

 

Funny analogy I noticed with with airport and stadium queues.

They realised a long time ago that when funnelling people through a small space it's better to have two single file queues separated by a barrier in between, with just one large entrance people are constantly working out where they fit as they approach the entrance, they bump, argue, apologies, change their mind, get stressed and it causes congestion. When there are two single file queues with a barrier people choose early on which queue they are in, stop analysing the situation and follow the person in front of them.

Maybe a country also runs more smoothly this way?Just thinking out loud.

 

Maybe so Rikky, but I like options. :cool