Trayvon Martin case: FL stand-your-ground law on trial

[Skookum]

I'm stunned to find so many members willing to throw GZ under the bus in the absence of any evidence justifying such action.  I feel like I'm in a gun control forum.

[jameslovesjammie]

I'm stunned to find so many members willing to throw GZ under the bus in the absence of any evidence justifying such action.  I feel like I'm in a gun control forum.

Did you read all 16 pages of this discussion before you posted?

[Skookum]

I read the first page and last two pages.  I was shocked at the lack of knowledge displayed on p. 1, and did not see a lot of evidence of good research or wisdom on the last two pages.  I'm sensing I stumbled into a MSNBC fan club.

[DenStinett]

I read the first page and last two pages.  I was shocked at the lack of knowledge displayed on p. 1, and did not see a lot of evidence of good research or widom on the last two pages.  I'm sensing I stumbled into a MSNBC fan club.

With all the pages here, I know that?s a lot of reading?.BUT
You really should have read the whole thread
There are more posts backing Zimmerman than not
A lot of info and Ideas battered back and forth
One may think of going back and reading everything then change the wording in your post?.seriously ! ! !

On a different note......
What I find interesting is that the Race Haters haven?t jumped on the ?Face Eater? train
This last weekend, a Miami COP shot and killed a ?Black? Homeless man
OH, did I forget to mention, that the man was eating the face off of another (White) homeless guy?.
YES, I said ?EATING THE FACE OFF OF ANOTHER MAN?
Laterally biting and tearing pieces of flesh from the other man?s face
It took three shots to stop and finally kill the assailant

Now, my question is this:
Would it have been considered excessive force if the victim of the attack would have pulled a Pistol and shot his attacker (once in the chest) to stop the attack, since the attacker had NO weapon ? ! ?

[Skookum]

Den,

Thanks for the recommendation of revising my posts -- I misspelled wisdom.

I'm comfortable having made my judgment on the basis of the three pages I read.  I disclosed the extent of my reading and you and others are free to make judgments about my behavior.  I do take some comfort from you informing me that there are more posts in this thread that support GZ than those that villify him.

I would hope that the vast majority of responsible gun owners would have the wisdom to be highly skeptical of any so-called news floated from one of the liberal, anti-gun, propaganda organs.  And, I would hope the vast majority of responsible gun owners would not be so quick to toss someone under the bus when all available credible information points to a justifiable use of force.  GZ was far more restrained than I would have been.  I wouldn't have called for help for more than 40 s before drawing my gun.  I would not have given my assailant the chance to bash my head onto the pavement more than once.  And, I would have shot more than once.

I wasn't aware that the face-eater event had a racial factor.  I believe in a color-blind society.  Thus, to me, TM's blackness and GZ's blackness are not an issue.  Every person has a right to defend himself.

[Twmaster]

I'm glad I do not have you on a jury if you are going to make decisions based on a tiny selection of the information offered and then stand by your small sampling without bothering to read the rest as it has been suggested.

[jameslovesjammie]

Skookum,

The info that you read was back from March.  Most of what was said back then was based on what limited information the news media had leaked at the time.  In all honesty, based on the info available at the time...I personally didn't think George was in the right.  Now that a few months have gone by and more information has come to light...I am positive he was. 

Gun rights or not, two months ago I thought he broke the law.  Now I don't think he did.

[Michigan Joe]

I'm probably late to give my opinion, but I think it is common sense to conclude that if someone physically lays hands on you and starts bashing your head into the pavement, you should be allowed to shoot the attacker with a licensed gun or bash his head with an unlicensed rock.  I do not see why, assuming that is what happened; there is any discussion. Different facts, different conclusion, of course.

Joe

[Czeetah]

I'm probably late to give my opinion, but I think it is common sense to conclude that if someone physically lays hands on you and starts bashing your head into the pavement, you should be allowed to shoot the attacker with a licensed gun or bash his head with an unlicensed rock.  I do not see why, assuming that is what happened; there is any discussion. Different facts, different conclusion, of course.

Joe

Yeah, of course we have to consider GZ was stalking him.

What would you expect your wife of daughters reaction to be if some creepy looking dude was following them around in a truck creeping about and then hopping out of the truck and following her around ... she'd probably be pretty amped up for flight/fight.

Of course I don't know all the facts and have no opinion who is guilty/not guilty. But when you're creeping around stalking somebody, kind of hard to blame them for maybe thinking you're a BG weirdo and reacting in a defensive manner.

[armoredman]

No personal attacks here, please. Keep the discussion to the facts at hand.

[Spirit 1]

Yeah, of course we have to consider GZ was stalking him.

What would you expect your wife of daughters reaction to be if some creepy looking dude was following them around in a truck creeping about and then hopping out of the truck and following her around ... she'd probably be pretty amped up for flight/fight.

Of course I don't know all the facts and have no opinion who is guilty/not guilty. But when  , kind of hard to blame them for maybe thinking you're a BG weirdo and reacting in a defensive manner.

That's just what turned many people against George Zimmerman. It comes on top of another member tossing out insults before reading what we've said, and even after his refusing to go and read what has been said in order to judge fairly! Yeah, just grab those TV sound bites, it will tell you all you want to know allright. That is, if that's all you want to know to guide your life's decisions.

Your choice of words isn't accidental, I know that. "...have to consider GZ was stalking him..." No, as a matter of FACT, we don't! Stalking is a crime. Stalking is following someone with a prior intent to do them harm at your opportunity. Stalking paints a picture of a man with evil intent. Stalking leans way over toward imagining it was premeditated murder. Your choice of words.

Sounds like more character assassination here? "...creepy looking dude was following them around in a truck creeping about and then hopping out of the truck and following her around..."

What part of official testimony & evidence has portrayed or described George Zimmerman as 'creepy looking'?? What evidence says he was 'creeping about' Where did you find evidence that he was '...hopping... out of the truck'??

In fact, based on evidence, it was Trayvon Martin who was in a neighborhood he didn't belong in, and was from evidence acting in a suspicious manner. Children, as media insists on describing this person who was a couple of months from legal manhood, should be home with their mommy and daddy. This sweet young innocent child was out roaming a neighborhood at night, yes roaming as in walking to and fro in a place he did not belong, in that gated private community while loaded out on weed.

He was doing so because he had gotten kicked out of school, and apparently out of his house too, temporarily living with another parent following the school 'trouble', which certainly wasn't his first. You know, the school trouble with jewelry in his possession which didn't belong to him? The school trouble over carrying drugs and having possesion while he was at school? Seems the drug use was common for him because according to Official Evidence of Coroner's Toxicology Report he was under the influence of drugs, loaded, the night he was out wandering around munching Skittles in a neighborhood he didn't live in or actually belong in, before he attacked a man.

Zimmerman broke no law following and first contacted the police, local law enforcement, before doing so! He stayed on the phone with Law Enforcement while he went about his community duties as a Neighborhood Watch Volunteer. Evidence says he got attacked, physically assaulted in a way that could swiftly kill him, and that he drew and shot as a result.

That is according to evidence, not lying media spin, misrepresentation and phony descriptions.

[Skookum]

I'm glad I do not have you on a jury if you are going to make decisions based on a tiny selection of the information offered and then stand by your small sampling without bothering to read the rest as it has been suggested.

This isn't a court of law.  And, sampling is used in daily life; often times the results of sampling are used in a court of law.

Now, if you wish to gripe about the quality of my sample, you would have yourself a valid argument.

[Skookum]

Skookum,

The info that you read was back from March.  Most of what was said back then was based on what limited information the news media had leaked at the time.  In all honesty, based on the info available at the time...I personally didn't think George was in the right.  Now that a few months have gone by and more information has come to light...I am positive he was. 

Gun rights or not, two months ago I thought he broke the law.  Now I don't think he did.

jlj,

When this story started to become of national and international importance, I started researching it.  The line coming out of the media just didn't make sense -- what sane person calls the police to his location right before committing a crime?

Nearly a week prior to the article was published that kicked off this thread the recording of GZ's call to the police was uploaded to You Tube.  Listen to it and you learn that the police dispatcher did not advise GZ not to pursue TM, you learn that GZ was not in pursuit of TM.  The dispatcher expressed a non-need.  Further research would have enlightened the writer about a dispatcher having no lawful authority to issue any orders in FL.  Thus, even if the dispatcher would have offered advice or attempted to make an order, it would be pretty much irrelevant.

Given the role that race has taken in this case, the writer of the article that kicked off this thread was remiss in failing to report that GZ is black.

It appears that this isn't the only gun forum that jumped to an initial opinion of GZ being somehow in the wrong.  The author of the article cites two others that did so.

Just my opinion, but if one fancies himself to be a responsible gun owner who values his gun rights, he better be tuned in to a more reliable news source than the alphabet, anti-gun, propaganda networks.  Everyone on this and all other gun fora obviously has access to the internet, so there is no excuse for not seeking and finding less biased sources of information.  I also think anyone who regards himself as responsible enough to carry a weapon should take on the responsibility to think logically about important matters such as the GZ case.  For example, the article's conclusion -- that we shouldn't villify the FL gun laws, but instead should villify the man who, from all available evidence, exercised his right to self defense, is nothing other than a flanking attack on FL's gun laws.

[Skookum]

Yeah, of course we have to consider GZ was stalking him.

1.  Please present your evidence that GZ was stalking TM.  Be sure your evidence conforms to the applicable legal definition of stalking.

2.  Please explain what law gives anyone being "stalked" (or followed) the right to commit a felonious assault on the purported "stalker" (or follower).

3.  Please explain why you are implying that GZ looks or looked "creepy."

I got news for you -- I have the right to follow you whenever or wherever I want, as long as you are on public property (or on the common grounds of my homeowners' association), unless and until you get a restraining order to prevent me from doing so.  Even with such an order in hand you do not have the right to commit a felonious assault on me just because I violate the order and follow you.  TM -- a drug-peddling thug who was on drugs at the time -- was dumb enough to bring his fists to a gunfight, and he earned a Darwin Award.  The take-home lesson should be that other thugs need to be careful about assaulting someone in all states except IL.

[Skookum]

It comes on top of another member tossing out insults before reading what we've said, and even after his refusing to go and read what has been said in order to judge fairly!

May I ask what insults I am being accused of tossing out?

I didn't need to read 16 pages to be shocked at what I saw on p. 1, p. 15, and p. 16 -- and what I continue to see on p. 17.  Judging by the remaining content in your post above, you and I are in violent agreement.

We each have a choice -- to be a recepticle for the outputs of the propaganda organs, or to be informed citizens.

By the way, very good argument on your part in response to the uninformed claim of stalking.  Bravo!