Printable View
No, Mr earl - he wasn't just carrying a weapon, he used to it kill someone who was unarmed and doing nothing illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
True, the courts pronounced him not guilty of murder, therefore he is, theoretically, not guilty. Practically, he did kill the kid
He could have easily been carrying a garrote and done the poor lad in although the end result would have been the same...:mid:
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2013/07/3823.jpg
Martin was defintiely doing something illegal. He was straddling Zim, who could not escapte and pounding him.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
If they were both standing I think it may have been different.
Do not assault or attack stranger in the US, particularly in states with CCW permit laws.
He was doing something illegal, and Zim was just a Boy Scout on patrol, I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaroMartin was defintiely doing something illegal. He was straddling Zim, who could not escapte and pounding him.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
If they were both standing I think it may have been different.
Do not assault or attack stranger in the US, particularly in states with CCW permit laws.
Zim approached in the dark with a gun. (established fact)
Travon asked him why he was following him. (overheard by witness on phone)
Tavon stood his ground. They physically fought and Trayvon got the best of him.
Little Zim took out his equalizer and killed him.
Would Zim have followed (against the instructions of the police) this
"dangerous" black man in the dark if he did not have a gun, (one that neighborhood watch patrol people are not supposed to carry)?
After he was shot, Zim says Travon said "You got me". Really...shot in the heart and you say you got me...? You believe that...? Where does that happen outside of the movies.
In fantasy land.
It's all yours to believe, if you want to make a fool of yourself.
You assume too much. One might argue that the Martin only wound up "straddling" GZ after he himself decided to stand his ground. We have only GZ's word that Martin threw the first punch, and it is arguable that even if he did he was provoked. We do know that at least until the confrontation occurred Martin was doing nothing wrong and GZ had no justification for confronting him other than his own deeply prejudicial suspicion. Martin may have been hothead, but GZ is a fool, a fool with a gun whose foolishness led to the incident and the death of a teenager. Contrary to GZ's assessment of Martin, it's clear who the "asshole" was in that situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaroMartin was defintiely doing something illegal. He was straddling Zim, who could not escapte and pounding him.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
If they were both standing I think it may have been different.
Do not assault or attack stranger in the US, particularly in states with CCW permit laws.
In any case, since this is the "gun issue" thread, let's consider something else: Based on Zimmerman's own Swiss-cheeselike story, if he had been confronted by someone who knew how to get his weight behind a punch and target it properly he could easily have had his gun taken away when he got knocked on his ass.
A concealed weapon doesn't give a warning sign to potential thugs, and if the thug is close up with his gun/knife out first he'll be happier to have your gun then he would your wallet. Even cops have their guns taken off them from time to time. If Martin really had been a hardened street thug, based on how he claimed to have acted GZ would have been very lucky to get out of the situation with his gun, not to mention his life. A fool with a gun is still a fool, and liable to get someone killed.
[QUOTE=MrG;2515112]1. Zim never said Martin was "dangerous."Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
2. Zim was not on watch patrol at the time.
I want to verify if Martin asked Zim anythiing.
Then what was he doing out there...a little freelance stalking.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
Oh please....Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
You gonna verify that with the Martin, his killer, or the witness on the phone with Martin at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
[QUOTE=barbaro;2516077]:deadhorsebig:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG1. Zim never said Martin was "dangerous."Quote:
Originally Posted by barbaro
No, he merely said, apropos of nothing but his own imagination, that "something was off" about Martin (maybe the way he pulled his hood up in the rain) and that the young man he didn't know at all was a "fucking punk" and an "asshole," the kind who "always get[s] away." And of course, this time the asshole did get away.
You are free to stop pretending to be objective any time you like there, barbaro, you aren't fooling anyone.
^ No one has been obective in this case.
Sadly, these deadly incidences happen all over the US.
I (and I assume the majority) of American posters on here know someone who has shot someone and/or knows someone who has been shot.
I know people who have shot people and know people who have been shot.
Physical confrontation/fights with strangers can lead to fatal shootings by someone is is scared, or just plain dumb.
If Zim and Martin were standing when the bullet went through the clothes and entered the body, I would have a different opinion.
The forensics show Martin was on top.
Add the eye-witness testimony, and the injuries, and this is a case of self-defense.
Zim was foolish that day; Marting was foolish that day.
^
Pretty wishy-washy reasoning there, IMO.
So what if Martin was on top--fighting for his life, for all you know. Superficial wounds and with no evidence Martin inflicted them are not evidence.
Now an man armed with a loaded gun can follow another one, shoot him down claim self-defense and legally walk...? That's a new one.
Guns are a curse in this country. Now this.
barbaro tries so hard to seem impartial but it just doesn't work.
Trayvon was foolish that day, he says. Yes, foolish for walking to the shops, he should have been like every other fact seppo fuck and driven there, packed heat and gunned Zimmerman down for stalking him then claimed the 'stand your ground' law.
Perfectly legal
And the ensuing logic is to carry weapons with you at all times and feel free to kill anyone who you feel threatens you, even if you have to follow/stalk them to get to that stage
Lovely society
^
Steady on there Rocker!
You appear to be somewhat of an endangered species still giving a hoot about the outcome of the trial and the fact that little hoodlum, Trayvon has gone to a 'better place' as it were.
Se where there might have been at least a 100 or so concerned folks at those Trayvon Appreciation events? :rolleyes:
Nope, I just fond it quite distressing that an unarmed teenager minding his own business can be gunned down by someone who thinks he is a cop/superhero . . . and nothing happens due to some bizarre law that is so diversely applied that it beggars belief.
In what way was Trayvon 'foolish'? I haven't figured that one out yet.
The trial is over, the boy is dead and Zimmerman is free. Fact. Not addressing that aspect of it, BM. The law is the law.
Tired of arguing the Martin slaying with morons. Back to gun issues:
Krazee kop (police chief, no less, of a town in eastern Pennsyltucky) brags online about wanting to shoot "libtards" and worries about Obama taking the M-16 he carries around. Instead, is shot in the hand with his own pistol in a barfight, and manages to lose said pistol (and pretty sure it wasn't Obama took it) (details at link below). Carrying a pistol is no guarantee of security, kids. Still have to be careful- in fact, maybe even more careful when carrying the pistol than not. Zimmerman was careless enough to get put on his ass by an apparently fairly light punch to the nose (capillary damage to schnozz- who gets knocked down by a poke to the nose, anyway?) and very easily could have had his weapon taken away (that he didn't suggests Martin wasn't much of a thug, or that Zimmerman is lying, or both, btw) like this stupid cop, who despite being a big hardassed he-man is referring all queries to his attorney. Just sayin', carrying a sidearm is just as likely to get you into trouble as it is to save you unless you are well-trained and not a dumbass. Good blogpost about the incident here: Menace 2 Society » Balloon Juice
"I took my pistol and a $100 bill, had everything I need to get me killed."
Steve Earle - South Nashville Blues - YouTube
Quite so. A gun at home in the proper circumstances, if there is a perceived need, is one thing. Carrying a handgun in such a way that it can be quickly used is asking for trouble. I don't see why some people can't see that.Quote:
Originally Posted by robuzo
There are a lot of places in North America where having a firearm at home makes perfect sense- anywhere in the countryside, for example. Keep it secured so the kids can't get at it, and don't play with it when drunk. . .also it makes sense to have one in a vehicle in some circumstances. But walking around? Very rarely would that make sense, and in a bar? Never.Quote:
Originally Posted by MordenQuite so. A gun at home in the proper circumstances, if there is a perceived need, is one thing. Carrying a handgun in such a way that it can be quickly used is asking for trouble. I don't see why some people can't see that.Quote:
Originally Posted by robuzo
Sure, drink and guns don't mix well. I wish that more party goers in Thailand would recognise that.
In the case of Thailand, you would need a very good reason for carrying a gun when applying for a carry licence. If you pulled one out in the street or your car, you may well find an illegal one pointing straight back at you. I don't expect that the police would take the trouble to check your carry licence before bringing you down either.
It's happened far too often that people carrying a gun will more readily use it than walk away from an altercation . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Morden
And, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
It's pretty unusual that someone having "the living crap" pounded out of them has the wherewithal to pull out a gun, especially if the person doing the pounding is on top of them pounding away. Usually they lose their gun once it gets to that point. Good thing it was a 150-lb. kid, I guess. Did he manage to pull out the rod while he was getting his head smashed into the pavement? Must have been a fairly gentle smashing, and evidenced by the lack of serious injury it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeAnd, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
Further proof that a useless dickwad like Zimmerman is more dangerous to himself and everyone else with a gun than without. Having the gun gave him the courage to exit his vehicle, and he still got knocked on his ass (supposedly). Lucky Z wasn't dealing with somebody truly dangerous, because if he had been having the gun wouldn't have helped him at all.
Hearsay which the jury was all too willing to believe. Martin was ready to pull out his pop gun at the first opportunity, more like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeAnd, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
Exactly. Zimermann would never have had the courage to follow Trayvon without bring armed because that gives him the upper hand . . . in a situation where there was no upper hand needed because no-one was breaking any laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by MordenHearsay which the jury was all too willing to believe. Martin was ready to pull out his pop gun at the first opportunity, more like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeAnd, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
This is something you fail to understand, BM - Trayvon was not doing anything wring when he was stalked by an armed idiot. It was Trayvon who was defending himself . . . the rest is all just Zimmerman's word/defense
Well, even Trayvon's girl friend Jeantel has mentioned her belief that Trayvon threw the first punch. We know he's been hitting that Purple Drank which makes one very aggressive so there you have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRockerExactly. Zimermann would never have had the courage to follow Trayvon without bring armed because that gives him the upper hand . . . in a situation where there was no upper hand needed because no-one was breaking any laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by MordenHearsay which the jury was all too willing to believe. Martin was ready to pull out his pop gun at the first opportunity, more like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeAnd, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
This is something you fail to understand, BM - Trayvon was not doing anything wring when he was stalked by an armed idiot. It was Trayvon who was defending himself . . . the rest is all just Zimmerman's word/defense
Facts, BM . . . facts. Try it.
"Pounding the living crap out of him"? He had a bloody nose and a scratch on his head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeAnd, once again, that's where you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by OckerRocker
Martin was not 'gunned down' as it were but shot because Zim for afraid for his life. Martin on top pounding the living crap out of him. Zim was simply defending himself which he had every right to do.
The bloke's a pussy and no mistake.
I hope he does it again, this time with a brother who's packing.
:)