Zimmerman Not Guilty

If race has nothing to do with it why do you feel the need to tell us your black?

 

Your facts are all wrong, I have no idea where you conjured them from.

However, even if what you say did happen, place yourself in Martin's shoes. You're walking back home in your own neighborhood, when a stranger wanabe cop "thinks" you looks suspicious, gets out of his car and starts harassing you in YOUR OWN BACKYARD. Don't tell me you would have not confronted him in anyway.

 

That must have been a mean tackle to bloody someone's nose and put multiple gashes in the back of someone's head.

 

Look up the "stand your ground" law in florida. I think that had a lot to do with it. Im sure if this was in a northern state/canada he would have gotten at least 15 years for mannslaughter. Then again that drunk driver in bc(i think bc) got no time for hitting and killing a 4 year old petting a horse on the side of the road. So who knows what would have happened to him

 

Read my edit. Also regardless if the other person is unarmed you shouldn't shoot him unless absolutely necessary. If you had the opportunity to shoot him you probably could have diffused the situation. He was angry and he shot him in "self defense" or as revenge for the attack.

Yeah agreed. I'd be interested to see the specifics behind "stand your ground" if you have any I'd be interested in learning them as I'm not familiar with certain state laws. From my understanding what my friend explained he said that it entails if you feel threatened you can apply force to secure the situation such as murdering someone on your property? The same friend and I discussed this and I hypothesize Canada is more lenient on bad decisions resulting in death such as the drunk driver in BC. My small town has had a history of drunk drivers. A 21 year old male drunk driver killed 3 teenagers four years ago and received 8 years as prison sentence.

 

My facts are wrong but yours are completely correct, okay. And I can show you that he had "A couple of minutes" at the time that he lost GZ and had told the girl he was on the phone that he was right by his house, meaning he could have easily went inside which would have been the right thing to do. He confronted the situation and didn't even bother to even see why GZ was following him or say "Hey man, I live here" when GZ supposedly asked him what he "was doing walking around".

And are you serious? What do you not get when I say TM obviously didn't know who the hell GZ even was so to him it's just a random stranger. If someone was following me and I was fearful I would get help not put myself in danger. He made it worse when he attacked GZ and confirmed his suspicion that he was dangerous. If you justify TM's actions than your a hypocrite for saying that GZ shouldn't have followed someone he found suspicious.

 

1. You're not going to know if someone is unarmed when they're bashing your head in the sidewalk

2. Why do you think someone slamming your head on concrete isn't qualified as "absolutely necessary" especially when you had suspicion (however warranted it may have been or not) to begin with. Him fighting GZ only confirmed GZ's suspicion. If anyone were to diffuse the situation, it could have and should have been martin to say "Hey I live here" when asked or god forbid go in the houose, not start beating up the person following him. That would only make GZ more impulsive to pull his fire arm, what?

3. He was angry that TM beat him up so he shot him? Wtf? They were in a scuffle and he was shot during the fight, not out of revenge. What the hell. And opportunities to shoot, and diffuse a fight are two separate wave lengths...

 

Clearly there are alot of uninformed people in this thread.

Zimmerman waived his right to use "stand your ground" in the case.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida-zimmerman-defense

 

Please do share. I'd love to see it.

Ok it's getting pointless arguing with you on this topic because

1. You know don't what happened; your facts are wrong.

2. You refuse to accept or acknowledge that Martin was unarmed and GZ got out of his car with a LOADED gun after the police told him to fuck off.

Fixed.

 

Actually heads is right, i think you may have got the wrong facts / information but I don't believe that TM was the one to follow GZ, i'm almost positive it was the other way around.


I do believe that Zimmerman's intent was to kill Trayvon from the beginning. In the call with the dispatcher, he says "these assholes always get away". Now I don't believe the outcome(the verdict) had anything to do with Martin's race but I believe that zimmerman had targeted him because he was black. Oh well, nothing surprises me after the casey anthony case.

 

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...ased-in-trayvon-martin-killing/1#.T-Tw6xc7Xko

He could have left, avoided the situation with the man who he had no idea even was, but chose to confront it (That's okay though, right?). I don't know about you but in a couple of minutes, I could be at the other side of the block...

And again, yeah my "facts" are wrong and yours are right. You must know everything about everything?

2. You do realize he was already long out of the car when they told him not to follow him, correct?

And awww, modifying my posts and putting *fixed, what a fresh joke. Cute.

 

Where are you getting your facts? The fact you are putting quotations around your facts makes me skeptical that you're just making this stuff up to fit your argument. Note: I did not actively follow the case I'm just commenting on the morals and the way some states deal with a murder like this regardless this would be excessive force not self defense in Canada and would at the very least be manslaughter but most likely second degree as carrying a firearm is prohibited in Canada.

 

I didn't say TM initially followed GZ but he had the chance to get away but he chose to confront it, so in a way he did follow GZ.

And your last paragraph, please tell me you're not serious. You really think someone saying "These assholes always get away with it" means he wanted blood for him? Nothing but a generalization at most. EVEN IF (And he might not even had) meant it in the context that "black people always get away with it" it's a generalization and in no way should be interpreted to mean "I'm going to kill this dude tonight".

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/george-zimmerman-s-911-call-transcribed

20 seconds I'll be on the other side of the complex where he was at if you look at the map, it's a small area if you're running out of your car you're going to get distance in 20 seconds from when he left to when she said don't.

Edited the source in my previous post too.

 

Getting your facts from an outdated USA Today editorial. http://content.usatoday.com/communi...yvon-martin-killing/1?csp=34news#.T7ZbCcXUQgl Seems legit.

 

He was obviously angry and by saying that i assume he was on a power trip so i dont think its such a giant generalization.

Please dont jump on my dick.

 

Are you high? What does the date matter it was a statement not only from his girlfriend but can easily be confirmed on his call log, that doesn't become "Outdated". Respond with a real response please, you're picking at straws now.

I'm not jumping on you but you can't seriously believe someone who is on the phone with the cops had intentions from the get go to kill the kid...

 

You're hilarious. Are you ok lol??? You seem to have conveniently left out the other key word in my post. EDITORIAL. If you don't know what that is, then I suggest you look that up. At first I wasn't sure if you were trolling me or if you were just stupid, but I'm inclined to believe the latter now.

 

Ok, we'll pretend that because it's an editorial that falsifies the statement that was taken from his girlfriend, because that totally is what an editorial is right?

Yeah, I'm stupid and you aren't.

 

I'm glad we can finally agree on something