Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Wow! I have had that debate with three people since Sunday morning. It is the same people who believe O.J. Simpson was innocent in the two murders.texanjoker wrote: The jury spoke..yup. in a debate I had 2 nights ago the person thinks that the jury system should be changed due to this....
We already haveone.VoiceofReason wrote:Please add a "Vomit" smiley
(or close to it)You contradict yourself. How could he be wrong in getting out of his vehicle if no one was in eminent danger? He did not know getting out of his vehicle was putting himself in danger. If he had thought it would he probably wouldn't have gotten out. If he thought he was in danger he would have called 911 instead of the non-emergency line.Valor wrote:2. Yes he was wrong, and the final outcome is validation. It is consistently advocated here and in class to be a good witness. The authorities were in route and no one was in eminent danger.
I understand how Mr. Holder is directly involved in what are perhaps pending federal charges. How is Obama directly involved? Seriously, I missed it..Cletus wrote:Maybe Mr. Zimmerman was playing cop, but that's not a Sin. Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama are playing God by threatening revenge on a Man judged Not Guilty according to Man's Law.
What makes you say he was “playing cop”? It appears to me he was just observing and reporting to the police. Is it possible that derogatory terms like “playing cop and Batman” are used to deride people that do the right thing by people that are afraid to?Cletus wrote:Maybe Mr. Zimmerman was playing cop, but that's not a Sin. Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama are playing God by threatening revenge on a Man judged Not Guilty according to Man's Law.
And that is one of the (many) things that TM apologists overlook. GZ didn't recognize the person on the property, and that's because the person on the property wasn't a tenant. Of course that didn't give GZ a right to shoot him, but it certainly was justification for observing him.The Annoyed Man wrote:...
So right from the get-go.....NO.....Trayvon Martin did not have "the same right" to be there as George Zimmerman......even though Trayvon Martin had been invited to visit the fiancé's apartment. It is a gated community, implying controlled access. I have friends here who live in gated communities. If they invite me to visit them inside their community, I am allowed to go straight from the gate to their house. I'm not allowed unrestricted access to the community just because I'm inside the gate. There's a reason it's gated...
I donated money to Zimmerman back on his original website. Should he end up in federal court, I will donate more. About the best way I know to "stand up for him", even if he is a Democrat.VoiceofReason wrote:What makes you say he was “playing cop”? It appears to me he was just observing and reporting to the police. Is it possible that derogatory terms like “playing cop and Batman” are used to deride people that do the right thing by people that are afraid to?Cletus wrote:Maybe Mr. Zimmerman was playing cop, but that's not a Sin. Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama are playing God by threatening revenge on a Man judged Not Guilty according to Man's Law.
Like Mr. Cotton, I have followed a few DWI’s while calling in the location to the police. I don’t think I was “playing cop” or “Batman”. I was doing what I could to keep the drunks from killing someone else and/or themselves.
What really troubles me is that no one is standing up and saying enough. People are persecuting Mr. Zimmerman and a lot of people know it is wrong but no one is willing to challenge them.
The NRA slammed holder for attacking “stand your ground” laws but where are the people that should be standing up against this political persecution?
Good on ya.sjfcontrol wrote:I donated money to Zimmerman back on his original website. Should he end up in federal court, I will donate more. About the best way I know to "stand up for him", even if he is a Democrat.VoiceofReason wrote:What makes you say he was “playing cop”? It appears to me he was just observing and reporting to the police. Is it possible that derogatory terms like “playing cop and Batman” are used to deride people that do the right thing by people that are afraid to?Cletus wrote:Maybe Mr. Zimmerman was playing cop, but that's not a Sin. Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama are playing God by threatening revenge on a Man judged Not Guilty according to Man's Law.
Like Mr. Cotton, I have followed a few DWI’s while calling in the location to the police. I don’t think I was “playing cop” or “Batman”. I was doing what I could to keep the drunks from killing someone else and/or themselves.
What really troubles me is that no one is standing up and saying enough. People are persecuting Mr. Zimmerman and a lot of people know it is wrong but no one is willing to challenge them.
The NRA slammed holder for attacking “stand your ground” laws but where are the people that should be standing up against this political persecution?
In order for me to understand the objections to the verdict, I needed in my mind to set up a logical chain of events that would match the evidence that we have with TM being the totally innocent victim and Zimmerman being a guilty aggressor. This is the only one I could come up with.VoiceofReason wrote:Did GZ “show his gun in the holster, and says something like "I'm going to kill you"” before or after calling the police?philip964 wrote:VoiceofReason wrote:Take a look at CNN this morning. The only topic out of 14 that did not have a reference to Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman was “World”. They even managed to get the subject into “Tech” and “Entertainment”.
Please add a "Vomit" smiley
At James Coney Island taking advantage of their 90 cent coneys today. CNN is on their TV. It's Non stop TM. Apparently 100 protest marches are scheduled for this weekend. So be careful. The out rage is growing. Jesse Jackson wants Obama to speak to it. President Carter spoke, not sure what he said, but if I would guess it would be that the UN needs to open an investigation. Jesse has now decided that Z was over charged on purpose to get him off. He mentioned a woman in Florida who is black and got 20 years and did not kill anyone. This shows how the justice system is racist in Florida.
I identify with Z since we are both CHLs, homeowners, and concerned about crime. Thus I am biased. I tried to put on the other hat. This is what I came up with.
TM was unarmed. TM was legally allowed to be where he was. He was not doing or about to do any thing illegal. He may have been profiled by Z because of his clothes, walk, or possibly his race, not illegal but troubling if you fit that profile. TM may have initiated verbal contact to confront what he saw as a danger. So far no laws broken, something we could all agree with.
Then something happens, if your on the other side, which I'm trying to be on now.
Z hits TM and TM realizing he has only seconds to act, realizes he can reach Z before Z can get to his holstered gun. So TM springs and knocks down Z, landing on top, Z spends all his time trying to get his gun, screaming for help to alert his neighbors. TM try's to stop Z from reaching g his gun, and increasingly begins pummeling Z to knock him out, he fails and Z finally gets the gun. TM raises up to try and get away but Z fires one shot which passes through all important organs and dies heroically trying to save his life. Z puts him self together in the few minutes before police arrive and comes up with a story that this thug attacked him for no reason and fearing for his life shot him. The police seeing an urban dressed young black man and finding
no other evidence to the contrary, do not arrest him.
Imagine the situation if TM had gotten to the gun in this fight and had killed Z. Would not this be what he told the police.
To me Z explains if more logically. But I am biased.
That is the problem I have with scenarios like this. I tend to believe that if he intended to do something along these lines, he would have never called 911.
