• 157 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#101 Posted by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam said:

@vortex13: He was apparently standing and staring at the houses. I don't know, it was out of spite. I was tired and I was really stressed. Had I not been, I probably wouldn't have gotten into the argument. I'm actually not defending Zimmerman like you think I am. Evidence points to Trayvon being the innitial attacker. Zimmerman shot him in self-defense. I'm defending self-defense.

So why couldn't Trayvon be considered doing self defense? Level with me. Let's go over the scenario, once more.

Trayvon was walking home after leaving a convient store, I believe that's what they said it was. The whole, tea and skittles thing. He had his hood up while walking home. Zimmerman followed him in a truck over pure harsh judgment. I will say it's harsh judgment, because it was a kid with a hood, and he already had his mind set apparently.

First off, there's already something wrong here. Neighboorhood Watch isn't supposed to follow, only observe and call the police. So, he called the police and they told him to stop following. He did not listen to the police, which is another thing he did wrong, and continued to follow him.

Apparently, at one point, Zimmerman got out of his car, and continued to follow Trayvon by foot. The debate starts if he attacked when he was walking back or not. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. I want to ask, why is this still being looked down upon. People say "HE COULD'VE RAN AWAY AND CALLED THE POLICE." I get this, however, like I said, he defended himself.

Both were in the wrong, if anything. Zimmerman SHOULD be more in the wrong than Trayvon is, for even following him by truck and foot after the police dispatch told him to stop. If you look it up, Zimmerman actually got denied from being a cop, or something of the sort. Also, what were we to believe he was going to do? Follow him in the truck some more? Trayvon defended himself, and Zimmerman couldn't take what he had coming to him. Zimmerman had a gun PRESSED to Trayvon's chest, and shot him.

There is a debate in the court, saying who was on top. Regardless of what you think, court still has to make the judgement on what was on top. If Zimmerman was on top, god help that pathetic waste of life.

Bottom line is, Zimmerman had a beat down coming to him after being so immature. Did Trayvon deserve to get shot? I MAJORLY disagree. He was a kid walking home with his hoodie up. Due to Zimmerman's stupidity, and lack of care, it all resulted in the death of Trayvon.

Maybe, just maybe, that certain place needs to rethink their "Stand Your Ground" law since it's completely absurd and defends such scum.

#102 Posted by Dernman (15072 posts) - - Show Bio

Online
#103 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: That's your opinion and it's bias. Zimmerman was volunteering as the Neighbourhood Watch due to the recent robberies that took place in the neighbourhood. He saw Trayvon looking at some houses and became suspicious. Understandable. He called the police and the dispatcher told him not to follow Trayvon. By the time the police would arrive, Trayvon could be gone. Zimmerman does not have to listen ti the dispatcher. There's no law saying that he can't follow Trayvon. Zimmerman caught up to Martin. From that point, it's unknown what happened. The only eye-witness says he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Fearing for his life, Zimmerman shot Martin.

I don't care why Zimmerman followed him. I don't care what happened prior to Martin attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman shooting him in self-defense. Say what you want, but all evidence points to Martin being on top. All I care about is that Zimmerman shot Martin out of self-defense. Disregard what I said in the quote. My opinion is not bias. I don't care about Martin and I don't care about Zimmerman. I don't let emotion or morals make my judgment for me. I'm basing it entirely off the law and evidence presented. If they present evidene that Zimmerman attacked Martin, then my opinion will change.

#104 Posted by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Have you been watching the trial?

Trayvon was just walking home, but he was walking through a gated community with a history of robberies, slowly in the rain. That's more suspicious than just someone walking around.

Police dispatch aren't police. In court the dispatcher testified that they are not permitted to give any type of orders to anyone calling. He made a suggestion. Zimmerman chose not to listen to it.

They both did do stuff wrong, but based on all testimony and Zimmerman's story, it was Trayvon who did the initial attacking. Really, anything that happened before this is not relevant in a self defense situation. According to everything I have heard, Trayvon decided to confront Zimmerman instead of escaping (easily done) or calling the police himself. Punching someone who is following you is not self defense.

Personally, I believe with any amount of training Zimmerman could have easily defended himself without a gun (I am a tactical defense instructor and from what I can tell it didn't sound like a life threatening situation to me). The moment that it became life threatening though is when Zimmerman noticed Trayvon had seen his gun. That's when he got it out himself and shot. He did not press the gun to Trayvon's chest (not that that should matter anyway) as shown in the testimony of the ballistics expert. It was touching his outer sweatshirt, which would have been hanging. The same soot marks were not found on his shirt.

All the testimony seems to show Zimmerman on the bottom and Zimmerman calling for help. The prosecution keeps shooting themselves in the foot with their witnesses. They should not have gone for a second degree murder charge in this and maybe Zimmerman would do some time, but I think he will be acquitted based on the evidence at hand.

The Stand Your Ground law is one of my personal favorite laws. Why should I have the duty to retreat in these types of situations? Why shouldn't I be able to face my own confronters or help someone else who may need it? I hope it is unaffected by this case, but I do not believe that SYG should be used at all in this situation, as even if the old law was in place, he was in no position (according to testimony) to retreat so deadly force would have been allowed anyway.

Moderator
#105 Posted by pooty (11111 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Have you been watching the trial?

Trayvon was just walking home, but he was walking through a gated community with a history of robberies, slowly in the rain. That's more suspicious than just someone walking around.

Police dispatch aren't police. In court the dispatcher testified that they are not permitted to give any type of orders to anyone calling. He made a suggestion. Zimmerman chose not to listen to it.

They both did do stuff wrong, but based on all testimony and Zimmerman's story, it was Trayvon who did the initial attacking. Really, anything that happened before this is not relevant in a self defense situation. According to everything I have heard, Trayvon decided to confront Zimmerman instead of escaping (easily done) or calling the police himself. Punching someone who is following you is not self defense.

Personally, I believe with any amount of training Zimmerman could have easily defended himself without a gun (I am a tactical defense instructor and from what I can tell it didn't sound like a life threatening situation to me). The moment that it became life threatening though is when Zimmerman noticed Trayvon had seen his gun. That's when he got it out himself and shot. He did not press the gun to Trayvon's chest (not that that should matter anyway) as shown in the testimony of the ballistics expert. It was touching his outer sweatshirt, which would have been hanging. The same soot marks were not found on his shirt.

All the testimony seems to show Zimmerman on the bottom and Zimmerman calling for help. The prosecution keeps shooting themselves in the foot with their witnesses. They should not have gone for a second degree murder charge in this and maybe Zimmerman would do some time, but I think he will be acquitted based on the evidence at hand.

The Stand Your Ground law is one of my personal favorite laws. Why should I have the duty to retreat in these types of situations? Why shouldn't I be able to face my own confronters or help someone else who may need it? I hope it is unaffected by this case, but I do not believe that SYG should be used at all in this situation, as even if the old law was in place, he was in no position (according to testimony) to retreat so deadly force would have been allowed anyway.

Well put. people keep saying Zimmerman shouldn't have been following or he should've listened to the police. NONE OF THAT MATTERS. The ONLY thing that matters is who attacked first. As you said, Punching someone who is following you is NOT self defense. that is assault.

#106 Posted by InnerSuperman (858 posts) - - Show Bio

@pooty: you sound like all those people jason voorhees killed

#107 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam: Uhm, STALKING?

You people are pathetic. Your opinion is bias. You don't like Trayvon. "I wouldn't be surprised if he was the one who broke into the houses.". You're biased just like Zimmerman is.

Jokes on all of you, you sick bastards. You support a murderer. Congrats.

You people keep ignoring the fact Zimmerman stalked Trayvon because he's a fat, worthless, rejected cop bastard who's suspicious. Bottom line is, neighboorhood watch isn't allowed to follow people. Much less STALK said person.

And I guess you people totally believe Trayvon had it coming, right? God forbid, the kid fight the fat worthless bastard who was following him.

Bottom line is, here's to hoping Trayvon goes to heaven when Zimmerman's fat ugly ass goes right to hell.

And as someone else said, are you kidding me? "Why shouldn't I be able to face my own confronters or help someone else who may need it?" Oh, you mean like Trayvon did? Oh wait, there's OTHER solutions for him, but not for Zimmerman. Maybe I'm not getting it. Maybe I'm not WANTING to get it.

All I see is Zimmerman following a kid, being a suspicious over self righteous bastard, a kid fighting him, and him shooting him because he couldn't fight back.

#108 Edited by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I'm seeing a lot of bias from you as well. You are only focused on the points made by the anti-Zimmerman media and the lame points the prosecution is trying to make to turn the jurors, since they don't have a case at all for second degree murder.

Also, can the insults. If you can't handle a discussion without them, you're better off not partaking.

Moderator
#109 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart said:

@sideburnguru: I'm seeing a lot of bias from you as well. You are only focused on the points made by the anti-Zimmerman media and the lame points the prosecution is trying to make to turn the jurors, since they don't have a case at all for second degree murder.

Also, can the insults. If you can't handle a discussion without them, you're better off not partaking.

If you think I'm bad at insulting, you really haven't been around for the other threads with this debate, have you? And don't think I'm getting smart because you're a mod, or anything like that. I respect most people here, and I have no reason to disrespect you. I'm not trying to seem "cool" or a "troll", I am pissed. You're damn right I am.

I'm not going by their points, I'm going by how the situation unfolded by what we know for sure, and what the case has been saying. All I know is, Zimmmerman suspected Trayvon, Zimmerman was told to stop, Zimmerman continued to stalk Trayvon, Trayvon DID defend himself. Was it the right defense? No, but he did stand his ground. The guy was following him for how long?

That, and I think it's fair to stop the insulting when people stop insulting Trayvon, or acting like he deserved it. Maybe I'm not seeing the self righteous path you're all seeing right now, because I'm not that guy. I don't see this "Well, Zimmerman was defending himself." I don't see how shooting a kid you've been following for so long was righteous. Isn't there phonecalls that had Trayvon's voice yelling for help too? Yeah, I apologize. I apologize I'm not defending the guy who brought this whole situation on himself.

He. Started. This situation. He was the cause to all of this. Him stalking Trayvon was the cause, the death of Trayvon was the effect. Call it murder, call it defense, a kid lost his life because some man was following him because he had a hood up. Once the dispatch told him to stop, he SHOULD'VE stopped. It would've ended this whole situation.

I get what happened with the robberies, I understand that. I understand there may have been some reason to follow this kid, in hopes he proves his point and finds some kid guilty. I understand that. However, when the dispatch told him to stop? He should've stopped. Instead, he let his foolish judgment get the better of himself, and it ended up in a 17 year old getting gunned down because of pure speculation.

Whether or not Trayvon was the angelic kid, I don't know. I just hate this idea, hate how these "professionals" who have probably never even BEEN in these situations are saying "Well, that's the wrong way to defend yourself." Who the hell unless you're in that situation, can say "That's the wrong way", when some parents RAISE their kids that way. He fought back, and apparently it was successful. Zimmerman couldn't handle what he brought onto himself, he had to use a gun instead.

#110 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart: Don't bother, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Probably basing his argument off some Youtube video.

#111 Posted by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam said:

@jloneblackheart: Don't bother, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Probably basing his argument off some Youtube video.

See, and this is why I lower myself to insults. Awesam, you started this when you had to go to the "He was probably the kid who robbed the houses" argument. That was the rudest, and the most disrespectful thing I've read on the issue. You don't know him, he's dead. There's no reason to continue to try and demean this kid anymore.

And actually, I'm going off the story everyone else is talking about. I'm following the same story as you all are.

#112 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I told you to disregard it. I had a stressful day and I let it get to me. Also, I said I wouldn't be surprised. In no way did I imply he was, or could be involved. You, on the other hand, came up with the most immature, bias, and rude argument I've ever read. Zimmerman followed Trayvon. It does not give him the right to attack him. Do I attack every person I think is following me? I'll repeat myself for you one last time since you find it so difficult to understand. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and Zimmerman defended himself. The attack was unprovoked. Every other detail is irrelevant. Try watching the news once in a while.

#113 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

The question is really 'Will there be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted?' The answer is 'Who cares?'

#114 Posted by King Saturn (224150 posts) - - Show Bio

The question is really 'Will there be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted?' The answer is 'Who cares?'

The People who own The Property that is being Vandalized by the Rioters.

#115 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@lady_liberty: I hardly consider a bunch of idiots tossing trash cans around a riot.

#116 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam said:

@sideburnguru: I told you to disregard it. I had a stressful day and I let it get to me. Also, I said I wouldn't be surprised. In no way did I imply he was, or could be involved. You, on the other hand, came up with the most immature, bias, and rude argument I've ever read. Zimmerman followed Trayvon. It does not give him the right to attack him. Do I attack every person I think is following me? I'll repeat myself for you one last time since you find it so difficult to understand. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and Zimmerman defended himself. The attack was unprovoked. Every other detail is irrelevant. Try watching the news once in a while.

This. THIS is your ignorance. Why is this even an argument? Do you know how many crimes, I would LOVE to go back and list, where the situation would be changed entirely if we ignore every fine detail?

The attack was provoked. So, let me get this straight. We acknowledge the fact it was in a bad, crime alley that Trayvon was going into with his hood up. It was only him walking, and it was late at night. Let's just, keep an open mind. Try to follow me with this. What if, since we can't find out from him since, you know, he got shot. What if Trayvon, was suspected that Zimmerman was one of the people who were one of the criminals.

We know the area is filled of crime. We know Trayvon, wasn't an angelic child, I even admitted that. What if he thought when Zimmerman got out of his car, he was going to follow him some more. What if he thought Zimmerman WAS going back to get a gun? Fighting back isn't the thing people suggest you do, the "professionals" at least. However, we don't know what was going through Trayvon's head. Did you also choose to ignore the part, that's ALSO going through the court, where a witness heard someone screaming for help. It wasn't said if it was Zimmerman or Trayvon, but if I remember, they said it was more suggested it was Trayvon saying it. Also, that's what I found from the news too, by the way. WGAL 8, if you really want to know is what I was watching when they mentioned two witnessess brought up that they heard cries for help, but they didn't know who it was, they were siding with Trayvon at the moment.

As for the riots? It doesn't matter what happens. If Zimmerman is guilty, or non-guilty, one side is going to riot. This is a major clash on two sides. Changes will come from this.

#117 Edited by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@king_saturn: I'm sure they'll be upset about it, especially if its a business. That said defending your property is part of life. I'm sure there are security companies that would be happy to defend a location from rioters if the owners don't want to do it themselves.

#118 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam: I'd be more concerned about looting to be honest.

#119 Posted by King Saturn (224150 posts) - - Show Bio

@king_saturn: I'm sure they'll be upset about it, especially if its a business. That said defending your property is part of life. I'm sure there are security companies that would be happy to defend a location from rioters if the owners don't want to do it themselves.

The only part that's relevant is what I have bolded and underlined....

#120 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

The thing that's going to PROBABLY happen, if Zimmerman is found innocent?

They're going to transfer him to a safe area. Rest assured on that. There was a case last year, where some woman got found not-guilty who apparently killed her baby, and they transfered her to a far safe area.

There's going to be major riots in that city, and people will probably end up.. severely injured. People are going crazy over it already. Crazier than me. It's saying something.

They need to protect the family. Internet is crazy, and will leak information. I remember the Sandusky family had threats and property damage at them because of Jerry Sandusky. It was crazy.

If Zimmerman is found guilty?

People will still riot, just the other side. Maybe not as major, because the Zimmerman side, will admittingly act more mature with the situation.

Laws will be looked into, and the way they're executed.

..I would think they still need to protect the family.

#121 Posted by King Saturn (224150 posts) - - Show Bio

The thing that's going to happen, if Zimmerman is found innocent?

They're going to transfer him to a safe area. Rest assured on that. There was a case last year, where some woman got found not-guilty who apparently killed her baby, and they transfered her to a far safe area.

There's going to be major riots in that city, and people will probably end up.. severely injured. People are going crazy over it already. Crazier than me. It's saying something.

They need to protect the family. Internet is crazy, and will leak information. I remember the Sandusky family had threats and property damage at them because of Jerry Sandusky. It was crazy.

If Zimmerman is found guilty?

People will still riot, just the other side. Maybe not as major, because the Zimmerman side, will admittingly act more mature with the situation.

Laws will be looked into, and the way they're executed.

..I would think they still need to protect the family.

Casey Anthony

#122 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Actually, no one said it was Trayvon except for his mother. Then again, Zimmerman's mother said it was her son. I listened to the tape and it sounds like an older man yelling. Again, they have an eye-witness who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. What went through Trayvon's head is irrelevant since... weel, we'll never know. Attacking an innocent man isn't justified by what he thinks. I know you're not familiar with the law, but the way it works is you need evidence. All the evidence points towards Trayvon being the innitial attacker. Your ignorant and immature responses aren't exactly helping you either.

If you walked behind me and I started beating you half to death, are you at fault? You certainly think so.

#123 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio
@awesam said:

@sideburnguru: Actually, no one said it was Trayvon except for his mother. Then again, Zimmerman's mother said it was her son. I listened to the tape and it sounds like an older man yelling. Again, they have an eye-witness who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. What went through Trayvon's head is irrelevant since... weel, we'll never know. Attacking an innocent man isn't justified by what he thinks. I know you're not familiar with the law, but the way it works is you need evidence. All the evidence points towards Trayvon being the innitial attacker. Your ignorant and immature responses aren't exactly helping you either.

If you walked behind me and I started beating you half to death, are you at fault? You certainly think so.

If we were in a dangerous area, I was in a pick up truck, I was following you for a good bit of time, and I got out of my car on foot and started to go a bit faster in my pace? I'd definitely say I had something coming my way.

He was hardly innocent. He stalked him. Hey, I guess those guys who follow girls just observing them the whole time, even in cars are completely innocent and good people, right? Unless, of course we have a double standard going on here. They don't have the right to use pepper spray then, right?

Also, link me to that. Because I saw two on my news. I actually got a link for you, something you haven't provided me with. Both claimmed to be right near the situation as well.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2013/0627/Trayvon-Martin-case-Prosecution-s-star-witness-proves-to-be-a-challenge-video

Neither of those two are the lady shown in the picture, I'm sure you know that. Let's wait to see who's ignorant, since I'm going off what the "news" you told me to watch, is telling me. Gg. And I'm sure you would believe it was the older man yelling, since two, and it seems like other people thought it sounded more like Trayvon.

Now, I will say, the one girl [Not the two I mentioned] the girl who got the call was a total.. well, I won't call her a moron. I'll call her a nervous wreck, didn't help with anything at all.

@king_saturn Yeah, thank you. I remember she got put into a far away area, so no one would get to her. Same thing will probably happen with Zimmerman.

#124 Posted by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart said:

@sideburnguru: I'm seeing a lot of bias from you as well. You are only focused on the points made by the anti-Zimmerman media and the lame points the prosecution is trying to make to turn the jurors, since they don't have a case at all for second degree murder.

Also, can the insults. If you can't handle a discussion without them, you're better off not partaking.

If you think I'm bad at insulting, you really haven't been around for the other threads with this debate, have you? And don't think I'm getting smart because you're a mod, or anything like that. I respect most people here, and I have no reason to disrespect you. I'm not trying to seem "cool" or a "troll", I am pissed. You're damn right I am.

I'm not going by their points, I'm going by how the situation unfolded by what we know for sure, and what the case has been saying. All I know is, Zimmmerman suspected Trayvon, Zimmerman was told to stop, Zimmerman continued to stalk Trayvon, Trayvon DID defend himself. Was it the right defense? No, but he did stand his ground. The guy was following him for how long?

That, and I think it's fair to stop the insulting when people stop insulting Trayvon, or acting like he deserved it. Maybe I'm not seeing the self righteous path you're all seeing right now, because I'm not that guy. I don't see this "Well, Zimmerman was defending himself." I don't see how shooting a kid you've been following for so long was righteous. Isn't there phonecalls that had Trayvon's voice yelling for help too? Yeah, I apologize. I apologize I'm not defending the guy who brought this whole situation on himself.

He. Started. This situation. He was the cause to all of this. Him stalking Trayvon was the cause, the death of Trayvon was the effect. Call it murder, call it defense, a kid lost his life because some man was following him because he had a hood up. Once the dispatch told him to stop, he SHOULD'VE stopped. It would've ended this whole situation.

I get what happened with the robberies, I understand that. I understand there may have been some reason to follow this kid, in hopes he proves his point and finds some kid guilty. I understand that. However, when the dispatch told him to stop? He should've stopped. Instead, he let his foolish judgment get the better of himself, and it ended up in a 17 year old getting gunned down because of pure speculation.

Whether or not Trayvon was the angelic kid, I don't know. I just hate this idea, hate how these "professionals" who have probably never even BEEN in these situations are saying "Well, that's the wrong way to defend yourself." Who the hell unless you're in that situation, can say "That's the wrong way", when some parents RAISE their kids that way. He fought back, and apparently it was successful. Zimmerman couldn't handle what he brought onto himself, he had to use a gun instead.

You can be as andry as you like. You can also have a conversation with a mod, in disagreement or not, without any worry. It's when you call people "sick bastards" or say you "hope I go to hell with Zimmerman" (which you edited out) that we have a problem.

I think you are basing your poin of view on your feelings and a single news source, not necessarily how the legal system works and the evidence that was actually presented in the case so far. You have to be more realistic. It's not "self righteous."

You want to pin the whole thing on Zimmerman because he followed Trayvon. Well, he was a member of the neighborhood watch. Ethically, Zimmerman should not have followed him when dispatch said that they didn't need him to do that. Legally, Zimmerman could follow him wherever he wants. Trayvon didn't choose to call the police or run away. He chose physical confrontation, which is not legal. Now, obviously we only have Zimmerman's side of the story for what really happened at this point, but all other parts of his story have been confirned as truthful by all other witness and forensic testimony.

You say Zimmerman SHOULD'VE stopped. Well we can play the should've, would've, could've game all day long on both sides, but that is not going to change the outcome. For every one you come up with for Zimmerman there is one for Trayvon.

You are absolutely correct that Zimmerman couldn't handle the situation. Based on descriptions of the fight before the gun shot, I could teach someone in an afternoon how to defend and escape a mount position. It isn't hard. Unfortunately for Trayvon, Zimmerman did not know how to properly defend himself. But he was carrying a legal firearm and had the legal right to defend himself with deadly force when he believed his life was threatened.

From what has not been allowed in to the courtroom is that Trayvon was far from an angel. He had school suspensions, drug issues and a history of fighting and pride in it. This has not been allowed to be brought before the jury, yet Zimmerman's previous character references have (such as been turned down for the police department).

We will never know what really happened that started the actual event that caused the shooting, but dead men tell no tales and as long as the prosecution cannot prove otherwise, Zimmerman simply exercised his rights and defended himself. They should have went with a lower charge, but the State of Florida are morons (ie charging Casey Anthony with first degree murder).

The question is really 'Will there be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted?' The answer is 'Who cares?'

Me. I work in Sanford.

Moderator
#125 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Why am I still doing this? Your example was irrelevant. Zimmerman was following a suspicious person, not a young girl. You do realize Jeantel lost her credibility when she lied to the court, right? Of course you don't, you're Googling everything as this conversation goes on. I'm on my phone, so don't expect links. The witness was Jonathan Good, I believe.

#126 Posted by pooty (11111 posts) - - Show Bio

Looking at someone suspiciously is NO CRIME

Following someone you think is suspicious is NO CRIME

Ignoring the advice of a police dispatch is foolish but NO CRIME

Approaching someone and questioning them is foolish but NO CRIME

Approaching the person who is following you is foolish but NO CRIME

Hitting someone because they are following you IS A CRIME

Killing someone who is mad because you were following them is NO CRIME

#127 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart:

I edited it out because it was completely immature, and my feelings were getting into play with it. I know how the legal system works, this just bugs the living hell out of me. I can side with that too, maybe they should've went with a lower charge.

And you're right, I am letting all of this get to me. And it's literally just, jabbing into me. This man brought ALL of this into myself. And I know Trayvon wasn't an angel, but being raised in a city, and having friends somewhat like him. This just bugs at me, left and right. Zimmerman brought all of this upon himself. All of it. And in the end, it resulted in Trayvon dieing.

Hell, I can play the realism game. The media is hyping Trayvon up to be some kind of angel. I've seen images of Trayvon. I've seen better images of Zimmerman. However, it's just this whole situation pisses me off, and in the end I just can't come to the realiziation, there's nothing I can do about it.

I'm also letting my judgment get in the way. I guess, I just prefer someone fighting back. It's obvious, if Zimmerman, and I'm going to be straight foward didn't pull a bitch move and shoot Trayvon, Trayvon would've just ended up whooping his ass. Lesson would've been learned, Zimmerman may have learned to not follow people that long out of pure spectulation. However, it didn't go out like that.

I just can't bring myself to proper terms with this issue. I honestly can't. I guess my problem is =

Morality wise? Zimmerman was in the wrong. He shouldn't have followed him. He should've stopped. He should've just reported him to the police, like neighboorhood watch usually does. Legally? Trayvon beat his ass down, and that's sadly illegal. Personally, I believe it should be added into the Stand Your Ground law, but that's not up to me.

@awesam

: If you read my post, I said the girl on the picture of the link I provided you was NOT one of the girls I was talking about, and I said she wasn't credible. You shouldn't keep doing this, since you're not even reading my posts. Also, there's that beautiful double standard I knew you were going to play.

@pooty
I just love that. Thanks for proving how messed up that sounds, legal or not.

"Hitting someone who is following you." Crime.
Let me modify yours a bit "KILLING someone who is mad and defending himself because you were following them." NO CRIME.

Gotta love that. HEY, don't hit someone who's following you, but it's totally okay to shoot that person because you got your sissy ass beaten to the ground, and ended up having to use a gun because you can't fight. There's a reason he's a rejected police officer, and his fat ass is stuck as neighboorhood watch.

#128 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Sorry, I just thought your entire argument was a big joke. Now that I know you're seriously, I'll try to stop laughing.

You have your own views and I get that, but the law favors mine. The majority favors mine. Only you support yours.

#129 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: From what I've read Zimmerman was rejected due to credit issues, not physical fitness.

#130 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@lady_liberty: I had a link on it, give me a second. I clicked the link I had, and put me in a "index" list. Have to dig up the article.

Here's one: http://allthingscrimeblog.com/george-zimmermans-application-to-join-his-hometown-police-force-was-rejected/

Finding different articles saying different things. Interestingly enough, for a man who was trained in fighting, he surely got his ass whooped.

@jloneblackheart Since you were wondering about his fighting training, and all of that. He either lied, or he just never really got far in his classes.

@awesam said:

@sideburnguru: Sorry, I just thought your entire argument was a big joke. Now that I know you're seriously, I'll try to stop laughing.

You have your own views and I get that, but the law favors mine. The majority favors mine. Only you support yours.

For a man who tells others to grow up, you have alot of maturing to do. I replied to your argument, and pretty much showed your assumptions on mine were wrong.

The majority favors yours? On here, maybe. The majority of rioters and most of the people following the trial say differently. Whether they're correct or not, I'm not the only one thinking Zimmerman is in the wrong. While the law says we're wrong or not, I'm not alone in thinking Zimmerman is a waste of life. Get off the computer for a bit, and you'll find that out yourself but just asking a few people in the outside world.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130304173027AAk7UAG Just some different links. I know you're "against Google" or looking on YouTube, and everything else, but you might see some arguments you may have issues with. More people who are on the defense of Trayvon bring up better things than I do.

#131 Edited by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Actually most self defense laws favor the use of a firearm, especially as opposed to an edged weapon. For some reason when you just beat someone up or you use a edged or blunt weapon in self defense, it doesn't always work so one-sided. Chances are that's because your attacker survives and can tell their side of the story, which can then be warped by some scumbag attorney.

In this case, Trayvon doesn't really get his side, whether he was the aggressor or not. The prosecutors have to come up with his case without his side of the story. That's a hard thing to do and they aren't doing it well. They are doing such a bad job in fact, I almost believe they are just putting this thing through the system to appease those who "demand justice for Trayvon."

Having listened to the case every day (except to day so I may have missed something), I think Zimmerman will be acquitted.

Moderator
#132 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm glad you can find people who support your views. Be it the rioters, but they opinions count as well... sort of. I'll have you know, all of my friends and everyone I've discussed this matter with offline agree that Martin is at fault. He is, you know... When I said "majority", I meant like... of the country.

#133 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

In this case, Trayvon doesn't really get his side, whether he was the aggressor or not. The prosecutors have to come up with his case without his side of the story. That's a hard thing to do and they aren't doing it well. They are doing such a bad job in fact, I almost believe they are just putting this thing through the system to appease those who "demand justice for Trayvon."

I've wondered that as well. Why they put Rachel Jeantel on the stand without a lot more coaching bewilders me. Surely they had both time and money.

#134 Posted by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart: That's absurd. I'm not saying your post is absurd, but the way they look at it. Just hate the idea of that. I know one thing that's going to spark from this, is the idiots ranting "SEE, THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO STRIKE DOWN ON DA GUNS.".

To be fair, the whole court case is a mess of stories. I just hope Zimmerman gets charged for something. Probably not, but I just wish his family well. I wish his family, and friends well, because I know how immature people can get over these things. I'm gonna be honest, what happens to Zimmerman? As immature as it sounds, I could give a shit less. I just hope his family and friends, who didn't do anything will be okay.

#135 Posted by pooty (11111 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Morality wise? Zimmerman was in the wrong. Trayvon beat his ass down, and that's sadly illegal

THANK YOU!! You have constantly said we are defending zimmerman. We are not defending Zimmerman's morality. We are defending his legal rights. not the person

#136 Posted by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam said:

@sideburnguru: I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm glad you can find people who support your views. Be it the rioters, but they opinions count as well... sort of. I'll have you know, all of my friends and everyone I've discussed this matter with offline agree that Martin is at fault. He is, you know... When I said "majority", I meant like... of the country.

Really? I mean, if you're doubting the majority, I'm sure we could honestly push the boundary here and go on a massive search outside of Comic Vine, of what people think.

I've only seen people who think Zimmerman is totally innocent on here. Funny enough, other people I asked believe the guy isn't innocent. Of course, we could always agree to disagree, but I'm not sure if that's in your nature, or in mine.

#137 Edited by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I read it and I couldn't find anything about why his application was rejected.

It appears he was losing the fight, that's true. Although that supports his claim to self defense.

#138 Posted by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@lady_liberty said:

@sideburnguru: I read it and I couldn't find anything about why his application was rejected.

It appears he was losing the fight, that's true. Although that supports his claim to self defense.

Like I said, I'm going through different links now. Some people are saying "No reason given." Go on Yahoo answers, people are saying "Either for mentallity or because of his size", and that's irrelevant because if size mattered, the police around here wouldn't allowed to be anywhere close to hired.

It's either lack of any experience, or credibility with what he said. Which would make sense then. I feel as though if he took the classes like his application claimed, he should've been better off in this fight to the point where he shouldn't have used a gun. I don't see how anyone who exceled in kick boxing loses against a kid with bare minimum street fighting, if that. Not putting down those fighters, but it just doesn't add up.

@pooty I've mentioned in many times, that my own personal feelings on this are getting in the way. Everytime these topics pop up, I keep saying it. I give a fair warning, alot of what I say is built on the rage on this issue.

#139 Edited by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I find myself having to repeat what I say a lot. You're either not listening, or you're just getting confused with all the arguments here, which is understandable. My argument is not in support of Zimmerman, it's in support of the self-defense law. Zimmerman was defending himself, so in a way, I'm defending him too. I really don't care about him or Martin. My view can't actually be bias, unless defending civil rights is bias.

#140 Edited by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: So you are saying he couldn't have been in a disadvantageous position, so he can't be telling the truth about his self defense claim?

#141 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@awesam said:

@sideburnguru: I find myself having to repeat what I say a lot. You're either not listening, or you're just getting confused with all the arguments here, which is understandable. My argument is not in support of Zimmerman, it's in support of the self-defense law. Zimmerman was defending himself, so in a way, I'm defending him too. I really don't care about him or Martin. My view can't actually be bias, unless defending civil rights is bias.

That wasn't what I was getting at either, and I think we're both at a misunderstanding. When I said guilty in my previous post towards you, it wasn't me in the sense of legal or illegal, it was whether or not he was innocent in the morality sense. On the other hand, alot of people I know, and on the internet are claiming he is guilty of murder with their own seperate arguments. I'm not them.

To me, what the law says does matter, but in this scenario, I will always see Trayvon as defending himself. I know what it's like to be in the "urban" areas that people talk down upon. I know how suspcious, and what your instinct can be when you feel you're being followed. You don't have the time to think, what's right and what is wrong.

@lady_liberty I'm simply saying, with the claims he apparently put on his application about the classes he took, that it's kind of mind boogling that someone in those classes,[ mind you the article I read, it says the class he went to was "one of the best"] got jumped that bad. I'm not saying he couldn't have been in a disadvantage, I'm saying going off size, and the experience from the two, I would put Zimmerman in favor in this scenario. The fact he got beat that bad, even after his "experience" in those classes, seems like a stretch.

Then again, his application never mentioned how far he truly went. He might've just joined those classes, and dropped out immeditaly.

#142 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio
#143 Posted by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: This may help. Find a little solstice in the fact that he has had to go through these proceedings and his life is now turned upside down. On top of that, even though I think he will be acquitted, there will most likely be a civil suit brought against him by Trayvon's family, which will extend his misery and if they won, could possibly take him for everything he owns and more.

@lady_liberty The prosecution has brought out dud witness after dud witness, including many that should have been the defense's witnesses they were so damning to the prosecution's case. It's like they are trying to lose.

Moderator
#144 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Zimmerman does appear to have an advantage in training. Regardless of any advantages he might have had he was still in a bad position.

#145 Posted by Lady_Liberty (8279 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart: Truth. After watching some of the witnesses testimony I'm beginning to understand why they didn't want to charge Zimmerman in the first place.

#146 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: Then this argument is over. Morality doesn't concern me. It's entirely opinion-based and there's really no way I can change yours and vice-versa.

#147 Posted by AweSam (7375 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart: Not so much trying to lose as really desperate to win. Zimmerman's defense is also really bad, which explains why this trial is dragging on so long.

#148 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@lady_liberty:

You mean, quick calls? That wasn't hardly the time. He called her a told her a man was following him. She seemed on the rocker though, and I wouldn't really go off what she says. On that note, neither of us were there to see what went down exactly. I can't see he didn't have an advantage, or he did.

I'm saying, going off training? He shouldn't have been taken down as easy.

@jloneblackheart

Again, I just can't see sympathy for the guy. I know, he's going to have a rough life if he gets off innocent, but again, at least he has a life. He made this issue. He made all of this. Because of his stupidity, a person died because of it.

@awesam I can respect that. As I said before, you are the one who does the right thing. You see the law, and that's all you see. I tend to look at the morality of these cases, and it depends on my judgment. Whether it's righteous or not. I see a guy who started what he couldn't finish, and ended up shooting a kid. You see a guy defending himself. The law would side with you, maybe people who think in my sense would side with me. Maybe some people see both of our arguments.

#149 Posted by jloneblackheart (5519 posts) - - Show Bio

@sideburnguru: I think it's equally stupid to throw hands with someone when you can escape or call the police, especially in Florida where you can get a concealed weapons permit for $50 hour course at the gun show. To prove you can operate the firearm safely, you shoot one bullet down a PVC pipe fixture. No aiming required. Pass the background check and you're packing heat.

Moderator
#150 Edited by SideburnGuru (1338 posts) - - Show Bio

@jloneblackheart: Again, like I said. With a clear mind, sure. We both know we can't find out why he did it. We both don't know what all went down. Hell, we don't even know if Trayvon knew that law.