Trayvon, Zimmerman...Enough already

mjbrox said:

This is why they should have gone with a lesser charge.

Here is the thing, Zimmerman was acting irresponsible by getting out of his car to pursue Martin.

So maybe what he did was "legal" can you at least admidit that he should have STAYED IN THE FUCKING CAR!

Click to expand...

Another member here on Dweb had his house robbed while he was at home in bed with his wife, and a kid in another room. They broke into his garage where his inventory was being stored for his AV business and got away with flat screen TV's, tools, and other AV equipment.

That same week he installed an alarm system.

A month later his alarm starts beeping in the middle of the night. He had another garage, detached from the home, at the rear of his building lot. The alarm was showing a window alarm on that detached garage. He looks outside and see's flashlights inside his garage. He got on the phone with 911 and grabbed his shotgun. he witnessed the buglers leaving his garage with a tool box, so he went after them, gun in hand.

Now, no one was shot, but the home owner was praised for his efforts by the police and neighbors.

So how is it that one police force and community can praise a guy for doing that, but another police force and community can slam another guy for doing the same thing?

You can't explain it. That's why we have laws. That's why we have the courts. Zimmerman was found not guilty.

Drillbit said:

So he got out of his car to look for him but was not following him? Does not compute.

Click to expand...

Marty, listen to the tape again. The dispatcher did not ask Zimmerman to stop following Martin until after Zimmerman was already following him. When the dispatcher asked him to stop, Zimmerman said "okay". That means Zimmerman stopped following Martin after he was asked. What happened after that point is speculation.

D Chapman said:

A month later his alarm starts beeping in the middle of the night. He had another garage, detached from the home, at the rear of his building lot. The alarm was showing a window alarm on that detached garage. He looks outside and see's flashlights inside his garage. He got on the phone with 911 and grabbed his shotgun. he witnessed the buglers leaving his garage with a tool box, so he went after them, gun in hand.

Now, no one was shot, but the home owner was praised for his efforts by the police and neighbors.

.

Click to expand...

I would not praise that action.

What can be gained by chasing a bugler with a gun?

Honestly, was he going to shoot the guy for steeling a tool box?

D Chapman said:

And Martin "needed" to hit Zimmerman.

Click to expand...

We dont know the answer to that and never will


but one thing is for sure, if Zimmerman would have stayed in his car like a good little boy, none of this would have happened?

Do you see a pattern here? Zimmerman initiated the sequence of events. Clearly his actions where lawfull, but they were not responsible.

Much like chasing a bugler who has already fled your home with a gun

If you want to say that the system works and it's better for 1000 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent one to go to jail, ok. If you say you can't prove exactly what happened and because the other person who could tell what happened is dead I'll grit my teeth and accept it. He can go play golf with Roman Polanski and Robert Blake. If you want to say that what he did was right in any sense of the word or that you would want him in your nighborhood you are a moron.

mjbrox said:

I would not praise that action.

What can be gained by chasing a bugler with a gun?

Click to expand...

What can be gained by you and your family living in fear that someone else may be breaking into your home at night while you're in bed?

I'm not sure I would have chased them, personally. But I would have shot them.

Drillbit said:

If you want to say that the system works and it's better for 1000 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent one to go to jail, ok. If you say you can't prove exactly what happened and because the other person who could tell what happened is dead I'll grit my teeth and accept it. He can go play golf with Roman Polanski and Robert Blake. If you want to say that what he did was right in any sense of the word or that you would want him in your nighborhood you are a moron.

Click to expand...

^^^^^^ I agree 110% ^^^^^^^^

Drillbit said:

If you want to say that the system works and it's better for 1000 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent one to go to jail, ok. If you say you can't prove exactly what happened and because the other person who could tell what happened is dead I'll grit my teeth and accept it. He can go play golf with Roman Polanski and Robert Blake. If you want to say that what he did was right in any sense of the word or that you would want him in your nighborhood you are a moron.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm a moron then.

D Chapman said:

What can be gained by you and your family living in fear that someone else may be breaking into your home at night while you're in bed?

I'm not sure I would have chased them, personally. But I would have shot them.

Click to expand...

Every time I think citizens should be able to have guns people say shit like this. It is not your place to play judge, jury and executioner.

You should be able to defend your life with deadly force, but not your property.

D Chapman said:

A month later his alarm starts beeping in the middle of the night. He had another garage, detached from the home, at the rear of his building lot. The alarm was showing a window alarm on that detached garage. He looks outside and see's flashlights inside his garage. He got on the phone with 911 and grabbed his shotgun. he witnessed the buglers leaving his garage with a tool box, so he went after them, gun in hand.

Click to expand...

When you get your concealed carry in Kentucky they specifically mention this point. If someone is inside your house you can shoot them. If you come home and see someone carrying your tv accross the lawn you can't. If they keep running with your tv and you shoot them then its man slaughter. Does this mean no cops would slap you on the back and say "attaboy" if you drew down on the guy and held him for the cops? Of course not but it's not the law.

D Chapman said:

I guess I'm a moron then.

Click to expand...

We've all know that for a while.

I have to wonder what you people would think if Zimmerman were a cop. Or a cop in plain clothes. Or a cop that was off-duty. Would your opinion be different? Does a badge change everything?

D Chapman said:

I have to wonder what you people would think if Zimmerman were a cop. Or a cop in plain clothes. Or a cop that was off-duty. Would your opinion be different? Does a badge change everything?

Click to expand...

No, but training does.

D Chapman said:

I have to wonder what you people would think if Zimmerman were a cop. Or a cop in plain clothes. Or a cop that was off-duty. Would your opinion be different? Does a badge change everything?

Click to expand...

Yes. We give cops right citizens don't have. A cop has the right to detain and question people suspected of crimes or who are acting suspiciously. Cops have training in escalation of force and have minimum physical tests they have to meet.

Say your are right and Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. If when when Trayvon rushed him saying "what you following me for?" he got a "Police freeze!" Does this 17 year old with no arrests attack a cop? Doubtful. Can 95 percent of cops handle this fight with out shooting the kid? I would say so.

We give cops special rights because we believe they have the training to use them responsibly. Zimmerman had none of this which is a big part of the reason this kid is dead.

Here is a question for you. What if Trayvon had a gun and killed Zimmerman. Say his version of the facts is the only evidence available. "I was walking home, This guy was following me, I turned down an alley and he got out and was coming after me. I came up and asked him what he wanted and he attacked me. While we were fighting I saw him pull out a gun so I pulled out mine and defended myself." Is that manslaughter?

mjbrox said:

What Zimmerman did was not against the law, but his poor decisions led to the "need" to kill Martin.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this and it makes my head hurt...

So, your community association feels the need to have a neighborhood watch program. You volunteer. There are break-ins and some vandalism within your gated community. One night you see a person walking around in the rain. You follow that person in your car while you call 911 to request police response. You are describing to the dispatch officer how to get to your neighborhood and where exactly the "suspect" is, where they are going and finally where you intend to meet the officer(s). You get out of your car to follow the suspect because you just don't want this person to "get away".... Then the suspect is "checking" you out... has turned around and is moving toward you.

Have you done ANYTHING wrong? Have you provoked something? Have you done anything that "led to the need to kill..."? NO

You have the right to walk up to and talk to anyone at anytime in your community. You may even ask anyone what business they have in the area. It may not be the safest thing to do and it may even be a dick move but it is still legitimate. We are not talking about a city street here. This is a gated community. If I hear some shit in my front or back yard at night, I am on point immediately. Gun in hand, I will investigate. If you want to hide in your home and call the police... good for you.

I hurts my head to think that some people out there feel that everyone should avoid all confrontation... "call the police and let them take care of it". Let the nanny-state handle your personal and neighborhood security. WTF

mjbrox said:

Every time I think citizens should be able to have guns people say shit like this. It is not your place to play judge, jury and executioner.

You should be able to defend your life with deadly force, but not your property.

Click to expand...

There is some truth to that statement. But I would not allow my home to be broken into over-and-over again. I'm not a charity. I'm not going to live in fear.

Under the law, though, you're technically wrong.

"The use of deadly force can be used when:
1) Another person is, or was attempting arson, burglary, robbery, or another felony,
2) The use of deadly force is immediately necessary because of a genuine fear for the safety of the home or its inhabitants,
3) The use of deadly force would prevent or stop the other person's criminal activity, and
4) The use of non-deadly force would put the homeowner at risk of serious bodily harm."

Drillbit said:

Here is a question for you. What if Trayvon had a gun and killed Zimmerman. Say his version of the facts is the only evidence available. "I was walking home, This guy was following me, I turned down an alley and he got out and was coming after me. I came up and asked him what he wanted and he attacked me. While we were fighting I saw him pull out a gun so I pulled out mine and defended myself." Is that manslaughter?

Click to expand...

If Zimmerman attacked first, then Martin could justify shooting him. But Martin would have to show bodily harm just as Zimmerman did.

If Zimmerman's face and head had not been beat up, the defense would have had a hard case to prove.

LOL, now Marty and Matt disagree and they're fighting for the same cause.

mjbrox said:

Fackt - The cops told him to stay in his car.

.

Click to expand...

Uhm, hate to fact check you, but he was on the phone with a police dispatcher, they are in no way police, and they didn't (nor did they have the authority) to order him to stay in his car, they told him it wasn't necessary to follow him....that is a big difference