The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:15 pm

wack wack wrote:You're right, stand your ground is irrelevant to this case. You can't possibly stand your ground if you're moving forward, as Zimmerman did toward Martin.

Your "we weren't there" protestations are weak. There are universally accepted FACTS to this case: 1) Zimmerman reported he was following Martin; 2) Zimmerman was advised by the dispatcher to not follow Martin; 3) Zimmerman continued to follow Martin.

The contention that a pursuer has a right to a self-defense claim is completely beyond reason.


You and Fisti might benefit from a concealed carry course and learning a little about self-defense laws. If you are claiming that Zimmerman provoked an attack, then you need to realize that under the law "provocation" means to engage in an unlawful activity which provokes an attack. Following a person is not normally an unlawful activity. Secondly, under the law, at least under Wisconsin law, a person who provokes an attack STILL has a legal claim of self-defense if they "reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm."

As for your "universally accepted facts" I think it is far from universally accepted that "Zimmerman continued to follow Martin." When you listen to the 911 call when the dispatcher says "you don't need to do that" Zimmerman's reply is "OK." Then Zimmerman tells the dispatcher that he is going to a certain location and to have the police call him so the he can tell him where to meet him. That doesn't support the idea that he is continued to follow him. What evidence do you have to support your "universal fact" that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin?

peripat
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:59 am

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby peripat » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:20 pm

So apparently the current pro gun talking point is that anytime anyone with a legal gun kills someone the killing is justified because legal ownership of a gun establishes that said owner is virtuous, truthful, and entirely entitled to kill anyone they happen to come across.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7904
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby rabble » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:21 pm

Dangerousman wrote:
rabble wrote:
Your turn. What does that case prove?

You're not getting off that easily. You said "I find it odd that this issue is an example of rushing to judge, but any news of a concealed carry gun used to prevent a crime is proof positive that we need more concealed weapons out there." You're suggesting that concluding that concealed carry is a good thing when it is used to stop a crime is rushing to judgement. Yet, you have enough "facts" to draw conclusions about the Zimmerman/Martin case?

Oh, no. I merely point out that everyone who has concluded the former - and by "everyone" I include you because you love to post them so much, has also concluded we're rushing to judge in this current case.

In other words, one is proof of something but the other isn't.

In my own opinion you're saying as long as concealed carry is preventing some crimes we can afford the occasional killing of an unarmed kid. Collateral damage.

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7981
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby fisticuffs » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:28 pm

What evidence do you have to support your "universal fact" that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin?


Because Martin is now dead. Zimmerman obviously continued to follow him.

Does Martin in this case have the right to defend himself if someone is following him and he feels threatened? Simple yes or no will do.

Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:50 pm

fisticuffs wrote:
What evidence do you have to support your "universal fact" that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin?


Because Martin is now dead. Zimmerman obviously continued to follow him.



Wow, I think Zimmerman is guilty as sin, but that attempt at logic right there almost makes me question my belief.

Here's hoping the prosecutor has a better idea how to put together a logical argument.

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7981
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby fisticuffs » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:52 pm

Wow, I think Zimmerman is guilty as sin, but that attempt at logic right there almost makes me question my belief.


If Zimmerman didn't continue to follow then how did this altercation ever take place?

Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Stebben84 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:55 pm

Dangerousman wrote:You added nothing new, just possible concrete examples of "B" -- which is the correct answer -- and the answer you're carefully trying to avoid admitting.


HOLY SHIT. You're a fucking wack job.

Dangerousman wrote:I don't remember hearing anything about a "cop" telling Zimmerman to "back off." The way I heard it, a dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow Martin.


Alright, that was a misprint on my part and I should have caught that. DISPATCH told him to stop following. Which he should have. If he did, no one would be dead.

I actually had some respect for your other posts, but now you're true colors have come out and you'll blindly defend anyone with a legal gun. Shoot em up cowboys.

Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:03 pm

fisticuffs wrote:
Wow, I think Zimmerman is guilty as sin, but that attempt at logic right there almost makes me question my belief.


If Zimmerman didn't continue to follow then how did this altercation ever take place?


Well, according to Zimmerman's side of the story, Martin approached Zimmerman as he returned to his car(after calling 911). Personally I think it's a pile of crap story, and I'm sure you do too, But if a Prosecutor got up in front of a jury and claimed that Zimmerman followed Martin with the sole evidence being that Martin was shot, she'd be laughed out of the courtroom.

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7981
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby fisticuffs » Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:10 pm

Well, according to Zimmerman's side of the story, Martin approached Zimmerman as he returned to his car(after calling 911).


Yeah I never heard that. I was under the impression the police told him not to pursue and he did anyway. I'm just glad the case is going to court in the first place. Thanks to the asinine NRA-ALEC laws it didn't have to.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:59 pm

peripat wrote:So apparently the current pro gun talking point is that anytime anyone with a legal gun kills someone the killing is justified because legal ownership of a gun establishes that said owner is virtuous, truthful, and entirely entitled to kill anyone they happen to come across.


Apparently the current anti-gun talking point is that any use of a firearm by a concealed carry permit holder could not have been anything but a cold-blooded vigilante murder.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:08 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:You added nothing new, just possible concrete examples of "B" -- which is the correct answer -- and the answer you're carefully trying to avoid admitting.


HOLY SHIT. You're a fucking wack job.

Dangerousman wrote:I don't remember hearing anything about a "cop" telling Zimmerman to "back off." The way I heard it, a dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow Martin.


Alright, that was a misprint on my part and I should have caught that. DISPATCH told him to stop following. Which he should have. If he did, no one would be dead.

I actually had some respect for your other posts, but now you're true colors have come out and you'll blindly defend anyone with a legal gun. Shoot em up cowboys.


I have not defended him. I've said in the past that IF he did anything illegal he ought to be prosecuted. But I do look at all sides of the story first, and I'm not inclined to jump in with the lynch-mob mentality. The standard for conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt." That's a high standard, one that few people on here seem to agree with. With the incomplete picture we have at this point, if you don't have any doubts then I question your objectivity. I certainly do not believe that having a legal gun gives you carte blanche to use it in any manner you wish. Far from it. And I'd appreciate you not attempting to wrongly characterize my position, although I do understand that is the typical approach used by most people here.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:12 pm

fisticuffs wrote:
Well, according to Zimmerman's side of the story, Martin approached Zimmerman as he returned to his car(after calling 911).


Yeah I never heard that. I was under the impression the police told him not to pursue and he did anyway. I'm just glad the case is going to court in the first place. Thanks to the asinine NRA-ALEC laws it didn't have to.


Hey Fisti, if you're so convinced that the horrible Florida "stand your ground" law prevents prosecution of George Zimmerman, how do you explain the fact that he's sitting in jail with murder charges?

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7981
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby fisticuffs » Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:14 pm

I've said in the past that IF he did anything illegal he ought to be prosecuted. But I do look at all sides of the story first, and I'm not inclined to jump in with the lynch-mob mentality. The standard for conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt." That's a high standard, one that few people on here seem to agree with. With the incomplete picture we have at this point, if you don't have any doubts then I question your objectivity.


He wasn't charged with anything for 6 and a half weeks. That is what the outrage is about. Not his guilt or innocence.

And I'd appreciate you not attempting to wrongly characterize my position, although I do understand that is the typical approach used by most people here.


Clearly you'd never do such a thing. Even though you clearly did in this very paragraph.

Hey Fisti, if you're so convinced that the horrible Florida "stand your ground" law prevents prosecution of George Zimmerman, how do you explain the fact that he's sitting in jail with murder charges?


The very public outrage you label as a "lynch mob". That's why.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:51 pm

fisticuffs wrote:
I've said in the past that IF he did anything illegal he ought to be prosecuted. But I do look at all sides of the story first, and I'm not inclined to jump in with the lynch-mob mentality. The standard for conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt." That's a high standard, one that few people on here seem to agree with. With the incomplete picture we have at this point, if you don't have any doubts then I question your objectivity.


He wasn't charged with anything for 6 and a half weeks. That is what the outrage is about. Not his guilt or innocence.

And I'd appreciate you not attempting to wrongly characterize my position, although I do understand that is the typical approach used by most people here.


Clearly you'd never do such a thing. Even though you clearly did in this very paragraph.

Hey Fisti, if you're so convinced that the horrible Florida "stand your ground" law prevents prosecution of George Zimmerman, how do you explain the fact that he's sitting in jail with murder charges?


The very public outrage you label as a "lynch mob". That's why.


Nice admission. And here so many people have been lead to believe that a person is supposed to be charged due to probable cause that a crime was committed. What a silly notion.

And his guilt or innocence is not the issue? It is exactly the issue. It's the only issue that matters. Not the amount of public outrage.

Well I'd be outraged if an innocent person was charged, after one day or after one year. I'm not sure why the length of time matters, and I'm sure that there have been plenty of instances where it has taken years to complete and investigation and for charges to be brought. Not every investigation is completed in the time span of a one-hour episode of CSI Miami.

lynch tr.v. , lynched , lynching , lynches . To punish (a person) without legal process or authority, especially by hanging, for a perceived offense

What part of the legal process is "public outrage?"

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7981
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby fisticuffs » Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:01 pm

Well I'd be outraged if an innocent person was charged, after one day or after one year.


Innocent people are charged all the time. You do understand the difference between charged and convicted right? 50 people since 2005 have killed someone in FL without being charged or investigated.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/22/2 ... cases.html
It wasn't a given that Zimmerman would have had a court date.
And his guilt or innocence is not the issue? It is exactly the issue.


So now your misrepresenting my views right after I stated them. His guilt or innocence is not my issue.

lynch tr.v. , lynched , lynching , lynches . To punish (a person) without legal process or authority, especially by hanging, for a perceived offense


Thanks for proving my point. Clearly those who wanted an arrest and a trial were in no way a "lynch mob" as you've described them.

You failed to answer my direct question (shocking)
Did Travon not have a right to defend himself if he felt threatened?

I understand that you want to be able to make a decision to use force when you feel there is an eminent threat. Should you not be held accountable if that decision is wrong?


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests