|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP. |
On March 23 2012 12:00 NotSorry wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 11:58 HeavenS wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. ok well its my opinion then that you have serious fucking problems. 46 pages in and you're seriously defending this dude when it can be heard in the tape trayvon screaming for help and zimmerman putting a bullet in him and silencing him for good. 46 pages and you still miss where it's been pointed out many times that witnesses say it was Zimmermann screaming for help as Trayvon had him mounted and was punching him repeatedly in the head. Or where Trayvon's own father said it wasn't his son's voice heard on the phone call screaming, he changed his mind sometime during the next 3 weeks when the family decided to sue Zimmermann.
its clear he just looked at what page we are on and said 46 pages. he didnt actually read them. he also doesnt apparently realize that i am not defending zimmerman, as i said on like page 10 or so that i think he is guilty. alas, whats the point of even responding to such idiots.
User was warned for calling people idiots
|
So, let's ask the question. What do we have as an alternative to Stand Your Ground legislation? I agree that it is ridiculous that two people engaged in a fight could both claim self-defense. I am still not sure that the law as written supports this idea, but I agree that it can't be refuted outright.
As a citizen, I want to know that I can always legally do that thing which gives me the best chance of preserving my life and the lives of those around me. Sometimes, that means running away. Sometimes though, it means standing your ground even when you might be able to get away. I am not willing to tell a citizen "There is like a 30% chance you're gonna get shot if you run, but because you could possibly run you HAVE to try that first before fighting." That kind of stance seems to give criminals impunity as long as they don't attack someone in their home.
How can we write a law that possibly accounts for that?
|
On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you.
There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night.
His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman.
Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault.
People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent.
|
On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:27 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:24 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
When I hear the 911 tape of his death, I hear the sound of sheer terror in the voice of the one screaming for help. I think it's because he saw a gun and knew he was about to be shot. Just my opinion though. That was Zimmermans screams as said by witnesses. The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet. I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you.
Did you read my post?
You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies?
"Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on"
Does he have any evidence for this?
"Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help"
Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story.
I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story.
That's not providing anything
|
On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent.
didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently.
|
On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:27 Lockitupv2 wrote:
[quote]
That was Zimmermans screams as said by witnesses. The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet. I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything
im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent.
Isn't that the purpose of a trial though, so a jury of his peers can actually see the evidence and make a determination? The issue here, in my mind, isn't whether Zimmerman is guilty or not, or whether he gets off when he's guilty. The issue is that the stand your ground law is problematic, and murder can easily occur due to an extreme lack of oversight.
|
On March 23 2012 12:16 Anytus wrote:
So, let's ask the question. What do we have as an alternative to Stand Your Ground legislation? I agree that it is ridiculous that two people engaged in a fight could both claim self-defense. I am still not sure that the law as written supports this idea, but I agree that it can't be refuted outright.
As a citizen, I want to know that I can always legally do that thing which gives me the best chance of preserving my life and the lives of those around me. Sometimes, that means running away. Sometimes though, it means standing your ground even when you might be able to get away. I am not willing to tell a citizen "There is like a 30% chance you're gonna get shot if you run, but because you could possibly run you HAVE to try that first before fighting." That kind of stance seems to give criminals impunity as long as they don't attack someone in their home.
How can we write a law that possibly accounts for that?
Maybe the answer isn't to write a law for everything. Maybe it's a matter of how we deal with each other. Maybe those who are trying to protect their communities should identify themselves as such when initiating contact with 'strangers' in their community so they can inquire as to their intentions. Maybe when we're asked by someone who identifies themselves as a community watchman, we simply let them know what we are doing and not giving them shit that they have no right to be asking me such questions.
Maybe we learn about how police officers conduct their jobs instead of having these false assumptions about what cops can and can't do, and generally be cooperative when dealing with law enforcement. Generally be the exact opposite of how this entire Occupy generation is conducting itself. That would be a good start.
|
On March 23 2012 12:05 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:00 NotSorry wrote:On March 23 2012 11:58 HeavenS wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:
[quote]
There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground.
You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone.
You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. ok well its my opinion then that you have serious fucking problems. 46 pages in and you're seriously defending this dude when it can be heard in the tape trayvon screaming for help and zimmerman putting a bullet in him and silencing him for good. 46 pages and you still miss where it's been pointed out many times that witnesses say it was Zimmermann screaming for help as Trayvon had him mounted and was punching him repeatedly in the head. Or where Trayvon's own father said it wasn't his son's voice heard on the phone call screaming, he changed his mind sometime during the next 3 weeks when the family decided to sue Zimmermann. its clear he just looked at what page we are on and said 46 pages. he didnt actually read them. he also doesnt apparently realize that i am not defending zimmerman, as i said on like page 10 or so that i think he is guilty. alas, whats the point of even responding to such idiots. User was warned for calling people idiots
edit: nm.
|
On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920
I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down"
You see where this leads to?
And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts
"didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently."
E: Ok, gonna stop this now, don't want to discredit you or direct you solely, just had much respect for you post history and didn't want you to fall for this guy, sorry for my direct responses
|
On March 23 2012 12:23 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent. Isn't that the purpose of a trial though, so a jury of his peers can actually see the evidence and make a determination? The issue here, in my mind, isn't whether Zimmerman is guilty or not, or whether he gets off when he's guilty. The issue is that the stand your ground law is problematic, and murder can easily occur due to an extreme lack of oversight.
If there is no evidence you don't take something to trial. Sadly this is winding up like the Duke Lacrosse case and politicians will probably orchestrate a show trial regardless.
If you are making the claim that murder can occur and people can get away with it under the Stand Your Ground law I think you need a better case study.
Even states without such a law would probably not convict someone who was down on the ground screaming for help while being struck in the head when they shot their attacker.
|
On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent.
I've reiterated several times that all the reports and accounts are inconsistent and we don't know what happened. Probably the most meaningful thing as to my opinion on the matter that I posted was that I don't think a normal fistfight is a reasonable threat that requires the use of deadly force, but we don't know exactly how the fight went and what happened to say anything one way or the other though. The autopsy report hasn't been posted online yet as far as I can tell. I haven't tried to condemn either of the parties involved, because I don't know what happened, you don't know what happened, and nobody in the thread knows what happened. That is all.
|
On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 23 2012 09:39 Fyrewolf wrote:
[quote]
The only people to say they identified the screams are Zimmerman claiming it was him, and Martin's Father claiming it was his son on the tapes. The witness reports don't really say one way or the other yet.
I just stated my opinion that after listening to the call, that it's more plausible to me that the screaming is Martin. Like I said, just an opinion. There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground. You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone. You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920 I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down" You see where this leads to? And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts "didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently."
There is no evidence yet to suggest that Zimmerman took out his weapon at any point before when he used it. Should all try to keep things factual based with our opinion on those facts.
|
On March 23 2012 12:23 Kaitlin wrote:
Maybe the answer isn't to write a law for everything. Maybe it's a matter of how we deal with each other. Maybe those who are trying to protect their communities should identify themselves as such when initiating contact with 'strangers' in their community so they can inquire as to their intentions. Maybe when we're asked by someone who identifies themselves as a community watchman, we simply let them know what we are doing and not giving them shit that they have no right to be asking me such questions.
Maybe we learn about how police officers conduct their jobs instead of having these false assumptions about what cops can and can't do, and generally be cooperative when dealing with law enforcement. Generally be the exact opposite of how this entire Occupy generation is conducting itself. That would be a good start.
Sounds like rainbows and unicorns to me. If I have to shoot someone because they got in a domestic dispute with their wife in the hardware store, I want to know if I am protected or not.
There will always be criminals and assholes. We need laws that clearly define what everyone's rights are and how we can deal with them.
|
On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 12:21 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 11:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 23 2012 11:33 rouzga wrote:On March 23 2012 10:17 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 23 2012 10:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 10:06 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 09:51 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 09:41 Lockitupv2 wrote:
[quote]
There are links a few pages back that give witness accounts that say it was zimmerman on the ground.
You dont exactly scream for help when your beating someone.
You also don't scream for help if you have a gun. The witness reports have been kind of inconsistent, I've seen it be reported both ways so far with both of them on top from different sources. The details of the fight are still unknown, but I personally don't think there was justification for deadly force. If he wanted to use his gun, he could have done a warning shot in the air, or maybe not aim to kill, instead shooting the boy directly in the chest. But as I said, the details are unknown. There's a whole lot of speculation going on in the thread, but we really can't tell what happened yet. Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life. Amazing how you are unwilling to view things from any perspective other than Zimmerman being an inhuman monster who wanted to protect his neighbors because... because he's such an inhuman monster... or something. From reports are inconsistent, details are unknown, details are unknown again, lots of speculation going on in the thread, and we can't tell what happened yet, and from that you conclude that I must automatically despise someone and am not open to any other viewpoints. That's just silly. he made his account just to say whatever he feels like in this thread. he will just troll people all day. + Show Spoiler +Are you sure you want to lose your credibility for someone how just turns other people's word around and states lies as if they were facts?
Just the posts of 2 pages from this guy:
I do not know of any jurisdiction where self defense enables you to knock down and beat on people laying supine if they question what you are doing.
I don't see how anything Zimmerman did justified making a preemptive attack on him. Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help makes it even harder to justify.
Trayvon didn't do anything wrong until he decided to knock someone to the ground and pummel them in the head. At that point he stopped being innocent.
I suppose he took the pistol with him just in case he got knocked to the ground and beaten in the head while nobody came to his aid.
Unless, of course, you do not want to use the gun and were only carrying it as a last resort to protect your life.
Well at least the media does. They are treating Zimmerman as though he were White for the sake of stirring up racial controversy (and thus ratings), when in reality he is a mixed race Hispanic.
It's sad and unfortunate the way things played out, but the wrong action was when Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on.
I don't understand guys like him, all patriotism aside, who just want to stir things up, and it's bad the mods don't ban him, but defending such a person, who even puts the blame on the DEAD victim without reading what he says is just awful . however misguided he may be. at least he provides support for what he is saying. you dont just ban people who have different opinions from you. Did you read my post? You know that he "provides" this support by just making up lies? "Trayvon decided to commit a preemptive assault instead of continuing to walk away or just talking to Zimmerman to see what was going on" Does he have any evidence for this? "Continuing to beat him in the head when he was already knocked down and screaming for help" Same here. Etc. He is just constructing his own story around his point of view without evidence although he claims that noone else has evidence for their side of the story. I'm not saying either side is right/wrong or guilty/not guilty UNTIL proven. But to prove this they have to ask further questions. What you are doing is listening to some fanatic patriotistic defender of this right. He would bend any argument or lie until it fits his side of the story. That's not providing anything im going to preempt his post. he is basing it on this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=322664¤tpage=46#920 I did read all of the posts. Being the one on the ground holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head doesn't make you someone who is doing a "preemptive assault" or "beat him in the head when he was already knocked down" You see where this leads to? And in your previous post I see that you already recognize the inconsistence in this guy's posts "didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently."
when i said misguided, i meant i dont agree with him all the time. but at least he is attempting to support his positions with sources. i may not agree with his interpretation of the events, but he is making an attempt to support them. he is not trolling. the majority of the people in this thread have jumped to conclusions without any basis; he arguably is doing the same, but is supporting his views at the very least. when i saw an inconsistency, i responded as such.
|
On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:
holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head
What? Where are you getting this crazy shit from? You are just writing fan fiction at this point.
There is no reason to believe the gun was drawn at all, at any point, up until the very moment of the shooting. If the gun was out before Trayvon attacked he would be struggling for the gun, not punching Zimmerman in the face and leaving his hands free while he holds a gun in them.
This has become completely insane. Please take a step back from your fantasy delusions and look at the facts.
|
On March 23 2012 12:21 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent. didnt he originally say he was attacked right after he got out of his vehicle? that seems inconsistent with the 911 calls and the fact that the confrontation took place after he walked some distance and in someone's yard apparently.
I am trying to find some things about this but maybe you can help me and just give some nice links and excerpts to make it easy. I haven't noticed any contradictions or lies in what Zimmerman has said.
|
On March 23 2012 12:31 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:23 Whitewing wrote:On March 23 2012 12:20 Zaqwe wrote:On March 23 2012 12:01 Fyrewolf wrote:On March 23 2012 11:52 dp wrote:On March 23 2012 11:45 Zaqwe wrote:
What do you feel is unreasonable about what I have posted?
I don't see how Trayvon dying when he attacked someone changes what he did. That is bizarre and goes way beyond respect for the dead.
It's sad, but please be rational. Throwing out all logic and justice because someone died is not productive. I think he takes issue with you saying Trayvon attacked him without any evidence to support it. Having the upper hand during a fight does not equate starting it. As well, your eyewitness is not the only one, and conflicting accounts are out there, so claiming a superior stance on the issue because of it is annoying I would assume. Indeed. Thank you. There is the account of Zimmerman himself, who says he was attacked. What reason is there to think he is lying? He is of good character and known by his neighbors, has prevented crimes before and stopped criminals, and was the first person to phone police that night. His story of what happened after being attacked is consistent with witness accounts. A witness saw Zimmerman screaming for help and being beaten while laying on his back, so there is again no reason to doubt Zimmerman. Your claim that Trayvon could have been attacked first is a possible scenario but unlikely given the circumstances. Furthermore the autopsy would have shown wounds on Trayvon from an assault. People are so quick to condemn Zimmerman when all available evidence suggests he is innocent. Isn't that the purpose of a trial though, so a jury of his peers can actually see the evidence and make a determination? The issue here, in my mind, isn't whether Zimmerman is guilty or not, or whether he gets off when he's guilty. The issue is that the stand your ground law is problematic, and murder can easily occur due to an extreme lack of oversight. If there is no evidence you don't take something to trial. Sadly this is winding up like the Duke Lacrosse case and politicians will probably orchestrate a show trial regardless. If you are making the claim that murder can occur and people can get away with it under the Stand Your Ground law I think you need a better case study. Even states without such a law would probably not convict someone who was down on the ground screaming for help while being struck in the head when they shot their attacker.
Seriously you need to stop. I don't mind you having an opinion, just like I did. But all your posts assume that Tray initiated a fight. Tray was aware he was being followed and we have no clue what conversation or physical altercation came of that. Your fighting hard for your opinion, instead of just having one. No matter how much you believe it, it doesn't make it true (just like I believe Zimmermans actions led to an altercation). State your opinion and ignore people who don't want to agree. But after that, we are trying to discuss the facts and any legal matters that might revolve around it (like what crimes they may or may not be guilty of, that may or may not make it possible for Zimmerman to claim self defense).
So if you have some facts (like some of your posts do!) thats freakin awesome. But we already know how you feel about who attacked who.
|
On March 23 2012 12:33 dAPhREAk wrote:
when i said misguided, i meant i dont agree with him all the time. but at least he is attempting to support his positions with sources. i may not agree with his interpretation of the events, but he is making an attempt to support them. he is not trolling. the majority of the people in this thread have jumped to conclusions without any basis; he arguably is doing the same, but is supporting his views at the very least. when i saw an inconsistency, i responded as such.
but again, his only source is the ORIGINAL report of what happened. with people not giving statements to the police. since then multiple other witnesses have contradicted his source. those sources have been posted numerous times throughout the thread, where he only completely ignores them, he is here with a new account (violation of TL rules), solely to start arguments and not to discuss the actual case. in his 40+ posts here he hasn't done anything but egg people on and post the same thing over and over. he is clearly and blatently a troll at worst, and at best in violation of TL policy.
|
On March 23 2012 12:36 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2012 12:30 rouzga wrote:
holding someone down who tried to put a gun on your head
What? Where are you getting this crazy shit from? You are just writing fan fiction at this point. There is no reason to believe the gun was drawn at all, at any point, up until the very moment of the shooting. If the gun was out before Trayvon attacked he would be struggling for the gun, not punching Zimmerman in the face and leaving his hands free while he holds a gun in them. This has become completely insane. Please take a step back from your fantasy delusions and look at the facts.
The facts you are making up?
You should quote the whole post or at least read it instead of calling people crazy shit.
I tried to base my argument on the same evidence you do. Fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
