George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty

Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#61
My point is he was paranoid and racially profiling.

I didnt say Zimmerman was necessarily a racist...but that race was the motivating issue.
 

Xandra

Active Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
3,806
Likes
0
Points
36
#62
My point is he was paranoid and racially profiling.

I didnt say Zimmerman was necessarily a racist...but that race was the motivating issue.
1/5 of the neighborhood was black and he hadn't made any recent calls since the snooper. Which would make me think there were other factors which prompted him to be suspicious and call police... stature, age, behavior etc.
 

Torch

New Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2012
Messages
859
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Knoxville, Tennessee
#65
I'm disgusted that he was found not guilty.
And disgusted by this thread.

If you don't think it's about race you're not paying attention and you CLEARLY didn't listen to what Zimmerman had to say on his 911 calls. Martin "fit the description" of the people who had been breaking and entering in the neighbourhood - in what way?
Because he was black.

My black friend was walking home one night and suddenly found himself surrounded by six cops with their guns drawn yelling PUT YOUR HANDS IN THE AIR, PUT YOUR HANDS IN THE AIR.
Because he "fit the description" of some guys who had held up a bank earlier in the day.
By which they mean he was black. And that was the end of how he fit the description.
Same ****ing thing.

Sick to my stomach and even more sick that I knew this was how it was going to turn out.
I couldn't agree more. And this thread...."I'm going to shoot someone for hopping my fence." Please do. And I hope that person's family sues the everloving **** out of you for wrongful death.
 

Red Chrome

Active Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
1,568
Likes
0
Points
36
#66
It amazes me to see some of the responses here. Really truly does and I do.believe that 90% or more of you have never had your house broke into, never had a home invasion, never had to deal with a hormonal pissed off teenager that was beating your face in.

I'm sorry and maybe my situation has changed my view on things but I do feel Zimmerman was in every right to shoot to defend himself.

I will say, that if I saw someone suspicious,someone who I had never seen before, odd time of night or acting off, no matter the color in my neighborhood, I'd call the cops AND keep my eye on said person, does that give them the right to attack me? Does that give them the right to engage in a confrontation? No.

Anymore, it is my right to protect myself however is necessary. And I would. I will not be a victim ever again.

What if Zimmerman had been a woman?, would we even be having this discussion?
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#67
I never saw conclusive proof that Trayvon attacked first.

If it was a woman, the story may have been different but if it was a woman who followed, confronted, and then shot, yes, I would feel the same. My guess is a 17 year old boy is not as likely to react physically to a woman and that the woman would likely not be as aggressive as some accounts of Zimmerman believe.

My home has been broken into. Still not going to shoot someone who I think may be thinking about it. Stuff is not worth someones life. If a person came INTO my house while I was home, and didnt just turn around and run, and I had a gun, yes, totally different situation.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
7,099
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Illinois
#68
I think a lot of people in this thread are assuming a lot of things that there was no conclusive evidence for but rather his word and lots of murky information.

It didn't seem to me he was released because they decided he was completely innocent but rather there was reasonable doubt that he was guilty, which I'm ok with and is how it's supposed to work. I would rather have a guilty person free than an innocent in jail.

But, him being released does not make me think there isn't a lot about this whole thing that stinks and I really do believe he very much is to blame (if only in part) for this boys death.

I think no one except him will ever know what really happened but regardless a boy is dead.
 

Dogdragoness

Happy Halloween!!
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
4,169
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Gillett/Flower Mound TX
#69
I couldn't agree more. And this thread...."I'm going to shoot someone for hopping my fence." Please do. And I hope that person's family sues the everloving **** out of you for wrongful death.
They can try but it won't get very far ... Castle laws here protect me ... Whee I live isn't the city, it's different out here. A woman alone sees a stranger, fears for her safety, no LE for miles ... Yeah I'm really worried about getting sued :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#70
I think a lot of people in this thread are assuming a lot of things that there was no conclusive evidence for but rather his word and lots of murky information.

It didn't seem to me he was released because they decided he was completely innocent but rather there was reasonable doubt that he was guilty, which I'm ok with and is how it's supposed to work. I would rather have a guilty person free than an innocent in jail.

But, him being released does not make me think there isn't a lot about this whole thing that stinks and I really do believe he very much is to blame (if only in part) for this boys death.

I think no one except him will ever know what really happened but regardless a boy is dead.
Very much this
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#71
They can try but it won't get very far ... Castle laws here protect me ... Whee I live isn't the city, it's different out here. A woman alone sees a stranger, fears for her safety, no LE for miles ... Yeah I'm really worried about getting sued :rolleyes:
Its not about what legal, its about whats right. If you TRULY fear for your life, and there is good reason to, sure, shoot. But dont say "Oh they hopped my fence therefore they must be intent on doing me harm, I am going to kill them" Killing a person is NOT a simple thing nor should it ever be
 

Red Chrome

Active Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
1,568
Likes
0
Points
36
#72
Its not about what legal, its about whats right. If you TRULY fear for your life, and there is good reason to, sure, shoot. But dont say "Oh they hopped my fence therefore they must be intent on doing me harm, I am going to kill them" Killing a person is NOT a simple thing nor should it ever be
I understand that but fences exist for a reason. Hop my fence and you're going to get bit, period. So, should my dogs not protect their yard from an intruder? Someone hopping your fence is an intruder and should be treated as such. I'm not saying to just shoot them, but they **** sure will leave scared and in a cop car for trespassing.
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#73
I understand that but fences exist for a reason. Hop my fence and you're going to get bit, period. So, should my dogs not protect their yard from an intruder? Someone hopping your fence is an intruder and should be treated as such. I'm not saying to just shoot them, but they **** sure will leave scared and in a cop car for trespassing.
I think getting bit by an angry dog is one thing most casual fence hoppers understand they're risking when they do it, and it's not usually fatal. Angry dogs are pretty good at making their presence known beforehand too.

Getting shot is a deliberate, calculated action with intent behind it. Personally I don't think anyone should pull a firearm unless they intend to use deadly force, and fence hopping by itself doesn't warrant deadly force unless you're hanging out in the yard and they rush at you with a weapon.

There are too many variables and dumb harmless reasons people hop fences for that they don't deserve death for. It's not okay, and having them hauled off by the cops is totally reasonable.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#74
I think a lot of people in this thread are assuming a lot of things that there was no conclusive evidence for but rather his word and lots of murky information.

It didn't seem to me he was released because they decided he was completely innocent but rather there was reasonable doubt that he was guilty, which I'm ok with and is how it's supposed to work. I would rather have a guilty person free than an innocent in jail.

But, him being released does not make me think there isn't a lot about this whole thing that stinks and I really do believe he very much is to blame (if only in part) for this boys death.

I think no one except him will ever know what really happened but regardless a boy is dead.
Yep. For me it comes down to reasonable doubt.
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
6,405
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Minnesota
#75
Wow, there's a lot of sad hate and casual racism flying around in here, isn't there? :( A half hour reading about stand your ground case outcomes in Florida should be enough to convince anyone that race has a LOT to do with the application of this law in practice... unless people are happy in their echo chambers, anyway.

I don't think either man was totally innocent, but I will say... IMO if not for Zimmerman's ego, a kid wouldn't be dead now. Neighborhood watch is... watching, not apprehending. He wanted to be a big man, and now someone's son is dead. And Florida's stand your ground law is a crappy, poorly worded law that hopefully will be cleaned up after this.


God forbid anyone thought I was irredeemable for all the stupid **** I did when I was 17. That's the saddest thing I think I've read in a long, long time.
 

yoko

New Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
5,347
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#76
Neighborhood watch is... watching, not apprehending.
Following someone isn't apprehending.

He didn't run up, pistol whip this kid and then shoot him. This kid assaulted him.

I don't think every wrong is irredeemable but when you physically attack someone you take the risk of them killing you in self defense.

Like I said earlier following isn't illegal. He was a douche to carry it out that long but what he did wasn't illegal.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#77
Following someone isn't apprehending.

He didn't run up, pistol whip this kid and then shoot him. This kid assaulted him.

I don't think every wrong is irredeemable but when you physically attack someone you take the risk of them killing you in self defense.

Like I said earlier following isn't illegal. He was a douche to carry it out that long but what he did wasn't illegal.
And you know this how?

We know there was an altercation...that is all.

The thing is Martin if he had lived, IMO couldve claimed self defense too. He feared for his safety when some man was stalking him. If he had a gun and shot him for stalking and being threatening, would that be stand your ground? To me Trayvon likely was the one who had stand your ground rights, he just used fist instead of a gun.
 

yoko

New Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
5,347
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#78
And you know this how?

We know there was an altercation...that is all.
With his injuries that's how I believe it to have happened. On the flip side can you prove this wasn't what happened? He had a broken nose and cuts to the back of his head where it had been slammed onto the ground. Was there any injury to Martin to show he was jumped? There was an altercation before he was shot but Zimmerman was the one with injuries *other than the gunshot of course*.

I get that people are angry that a young man was shot I think that's normal. But I think way too many people are labeling Martin as a kid and automatically dismissing his part in this.
 
Joined
May 29, 2011
Messages
738
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Kalamazoo.
#79
Wow, there's a lot of sad hate and casual racism flying around in here, isn't there? :( A half hour reading about stand your ground case outcomes in Florida should be enough to convince anyone that race has a LOT to do with the application of this law in practice... unless people are happy in their echo chambers, anyway.

I don't think either man was totally innocent, but I will say... IMO if not for Zimmerman's ego, a kid wouldn't be dead now. Neighborhood watch is... watching, not apprehending. He wanted to be a big man, and now someone's son is dead. And Florida's stand your ground law is a crappy, poorly worded law that hopefully will be cleaned up after this.


God forbid anyone thought I was irredeemable for all the stupid **** I did when I was 17. That's the saddest thing I think I've read in a long, long time.
This, please. And lord help me if I'm ever killed and testimony comes up from people who knew me when I was a teenager.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#80
With his injuries that's how I believe it to have happened. On the flip side can you prove this wasn't what happened? He had a broken nose and cuts to the back of his head where it had been slammed onto the ground. Was there any injury to Martin to show he was jumped? There was an altercation before he was shot but Zimmerman was the one with injuries *other than the gunshot of course*.

I get that people are angry that a young man was shot I think that's normal. But I think way too many people are labeling Martin as a kid and automatically dismissing his part in this.
Nope, but there is plenty of testimony supporting that Zimmerman started it...not Martins fault he was winning.

Regardless of that...it still hinges on Zimmerman FOLLOWING him and not following directions to stay out of it. HE was the one with a gun and HE was the one who started the whole mess.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top