|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On June 01 2013 03:52 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:22 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Is it possible? I guess You do understand the meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt right? I think its something very important that everyone in this thread is forgetting. Also your wording is horribly biased, it makes a lot of difference if i say Do we have evidence that an armed member of a neighborhood watch was keeping an eye on someone who he felt was suspicious? Yes Do we have evidence that this man was hurt? Yes Is it possible a Martin was a werewolf with hypnotizing powers that attacked Zimmerman and upon killing martin the shock made zimmerman lose his memory? Sure--if we don't need evidence for things anymore I guess anything is possible. It's only self defense IF he was attacked by Martin. We have no evidence at all as to what Martin did. Should we accuse Martin of assault without evidence? Here's what we have, a guy with a gun tracked someone who lived in an area with a history of robberies and martin, after running for his life, asks the tracker what he was doing, the perpetrator retorts with a non-answer. The evidence suggests that the wounds come from Martin trying to defend himself. After being chased, tracked down, and not being given an answer to his question, in a neighborhood with a history of robberies. Sure we could assume that Martin had a heart attack a microsecond before the bullet impact and he died before the bullet hit and all Zman is guilty of shooting a dead body. We can assume a lot of Things. Loki mind controlling mortals to cause mischief, the phase of the moon affecting the citizens down below. A lot of things are possible if we ignore the facts. What are the facts? Zman was running after Martin. Zman says he was going after Martin. Zman says "they get away" suggesting his distrust of the police coming. Zman refused to walk back to his car and walked towards the victim's house. The victim is dead less than a minute after he meets up with Zman. Zman was seeking, nervous about, and found his victim. His victim died about 40 seconds later. But yes, if we ignore facts, we can say that anything could have happened. Heck, maybe it was a 2nd shooter from the grassy knoll. So your idea of defending from someone following you is to stop and fight them? Have you ever lived in a high crime area? Ever been followed by someone and actually know what it feels like to be in danger?Im simply wondering why in the world you keep claiming that Trayvon was "defending himself" by stopping and fighting the guy that was following him. Go out and ask anyone who has grown up in a high crime area if they think its a smart idea to "Defend" themselves by stopping and fighting someone who is stalking them because to me it seems that you have no street smarts when you claim these outrageous things. Lets let people who actually live in the same neighborhoods as trayvon decide what actually happened instead of letting people who probably have no clue what it feels like to be in a fight or live in a high crime neighborhood decide a man's fate.
I grew up in Oakland CA which has one of the highest murder rates in the US. Where did you grow up oh hardened wise one?
21 feet and you can charge a guy with a gun. If you think someone has a gun, and you are 21 feet or closer, lunging at him is as good as running from him. Running from him is hoping he's a bad shot. Lunging at him depends on how lucky you feel at getting your hits in. Which luck would you lean on?
|
On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed.
Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you,
A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger
B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger
I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe.
|
On June 01 2013 03:44 Quexana wrote:Show nested quote +You do understand the meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt right? I think its something very important that everyone in this thread is forgetting. It's beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. The prosecution will have no problem proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed homicide. The question the court must decide is whether that homicide was justified or not and in that case the burden of proof is on the defense, not the prosecution. Yes, Zimmerman's testimony will count as proof, and the prosecution will offer evidence to poke holes in that testimony, but the fact as to whether Zimmerman killed Martin or somebody else killed him has already been made clear.
Actually, while most states do have it that way, florida does not. The burden of proof is actually on the prosecution, not the defense. However, the burden of production (producing evidence) is on the defense because self defense is an affirmative defense.
|
On June 01 2013 03:57 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:52 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:22 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Is it possible? I guess You do understand the meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt right? I think its something very important that everyone in this thread is forgetting. Also your wording is horribly biased, it makes a lot of difference if i say Do we have evidence that an armed member of a neighborhood watch was keeping an eye on someone who he felt was suspicious? Yes Do we have evidence that this man was hurt? Yes Is it possible a Martin was a werewolf with hypnotizing powers that attacked Zimmerman and upon killing martin the shock made zimmerman lose his memory? Sure--if we don't need evidence for things anymore I guess anything is possible. It's only self defense IF he was attacked by Martin. We have no evidence at all as to what Martin did. Should we accuse Martin of assault without evidence? Here's what we have, a guy with a gun tracked someone who lived in an area with a history of robberies and martin, after running for his life, asks the tracker what he was doing, the perpetrator retorts with a non-answer. The evidence suggests that the wounds come from Martin trying to defend himself. After being chased, tracked down, and not being given an answer to his question, in a neighborhood with a history of robberies. Sure we could assume that Martin had a heart attack a microsecond before the bullet impact and he died before the bullet hit and all Zman is guilty of shooting a dead body. We can assume a lot of Things. Loki mind controlling mortals to cause mischief, the phase of the moon affecting the citizens down below. A lot of things are possible if we ignore the facts. What are the facts? Zman was running after Martin. Zman says he was going after Martin. Zman says "they get away" suggesting his distrust of the police coming. Zman refused to walk back to his car and walked towards the victim's house. The victim is dead less than a minute after he meets up with Zman. Zman was seeking, nervous about, and found his victim. His victim died about 40 seconds later. But yes, if we ignore facts, we can say that anything could have happened. Heck, maybe it was a 2nd shooter from the grassy knoll. So your idea of defending from someone following you is to stop and fight them? Have you ever lived in a high crime area? Ever been followed by someone and actually know what it feels like to be in danger?Im simply wondering why in the world you keep claiming that Trayvon was "defending himself" by stopping and fighting the guy that was following him. Go out and ask anyone who has grown up in a high crime area if they think its a smart idea to "Defend" themselves by stopping and fighting someone who is stalking them because to me it seems that you have no street smarts when you claim these outrageous things. Lets let people who actually live in the same neighborhoods as trayvon decide what actually happened instead of letting people who probably have no clue what it feels like to be in a fight or live in a high crime neighborhood decide a man's fate. I grew up in Oakland CA which has one of the highest murder rates in the US. Where did you grow up oh hardened wise one? 21 feet and you can charge a guy with a gun. If you think someone has a gun, and you are 21 feet or closer, lunging at him is as good as running from him. Running from him is hoping he's a bad shot. Lunging at him depends on how lucky you feel at getting your hits in. Which luck would you lean on? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunts_Point,_Bronx
Heres an intresting question though, if you think someone has a gun would you stop and ask them if they have a problem?
|
On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe.
A.) Travyon did run away. As you could tell by the fact that Zman was running after him during the police call.
B.) Travyon's girlfriend said that he didn't run again because he was tired--FROM RUNNING AWAY THE FIRST TIME.
If you run your hardest trying to stay safe, and then the guy catches up to you--do you just magically have the energy to run away the second time?
|
On June 01 2013 04:00 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:57 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:52 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:22 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Is it possible? I guess You do understand the meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt right? I think its something very important that everyone in this thread is forgetting. Also your wording is horribly biased, it makes a lot of difference if i say Do we have evidence that an armed member of a neighborhood watch was keeping an eye on someone who he felt was suspicious? Yes Do we have evidence that this man was hurt? Yes Is it possible a Martin was a werewolf with hypnotizing powers that attacked Zimmerman and upon killing martin the shock made zimmerman lose his memory? Sure--if we don't need evidence for things anymore I guess anything is possible. It's only self defense IF he was attacked by Martin. We have no evidence at all as to what Martin did. Should we accuse Martin of assault without evidence? Here's what we have, a guy with a gun tracked someone who lived in an area with a history of robberies and martin, after running for his life, asks the tracker what he was doing, the perpetrator retorts with a non-answer. The evidence suggests that the wounds come from Martin trying to defend himself. After being chased, tracked down, and not being given an answer to his question, in a neighborhood with a history of robberies. Sure we could assume that Martin had a heart attack a microsecond before the bullet impact and he died before the bullet hit and all Zman is guilty of shooting a dead body. We can assume a lot of Things. Loki mind controlling mortals to cause mischief, the phase of the moon affecting the citizens down below. A lot of things are possible if we ignore the facts. What are the facts? Zman was running after Martin. Zman says he was going after Martin. Zman says "they get away" suggesting his distrust of the police coming. Zman refused to walk back to his car and walked towards the victim's house. The victim is dead less than a minute after he meets up with Zman. Zman was seeking, nervous about, and found his victim. His victim died about 40 seconds later. But yes, if we ignore facts, we can say that anything could have happened. Heck, maybe it was a 2nd shooter from the grassy knoll. So your idea of defending from someone following you is to stop and fight them? Have you ever lived in a high crime area? Ever been followed by someone and actually know what it feels like to be in danger?Im simply wondering why in the world you keep claiming that Trayvon was "defending himself" by stopping and fighting the guy that was following him. Go out and ask anyone who has grown up in a high crime area if they think its a smart idea to "Defend" themselves by stopping and fighting someone who is stalking them because to me it seems that you have no street smarts when you claim these outrageous things. Lets let people who actually live in the same neighborhoods as trayvon decide what actually happened instead of letting people who probably have no clue what it feels like to be in a fight or live in a high crime neighborhood decide a man's fate. I grew up in Oakland CA which has one of the highest murder rates in the US. Where did you grow up oh hardened wise one? 21 feet and you can charge a guy with a gun. If you think someone has a gun, and you are 21 feet or closer, lunging at him is as good as running from him. Running from him is hoping he's a bad shot. Lunging at him depends on how lucky you feel at getting your hits in. Which luck would you lean on? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunts_Point,_Bronx Heres an intresting question though, if you think someone has a gun would you stop and ask them if they have a problem?
I think if you've run till you were out of steam and the guy still finds you--that you ask him if anything's wrong in the hopes its a misunderstanding.
|
On June 01 2013 04:02 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe. A.) Travyon did run away. As you could tell by the fact that Zman was running after him during the police call. B.) Travyon's girlfriend said that he didn't run again because he was tired--FROM RUNNING AWAY THE FIRST TIME. If you run your hardest trying to stay safe, and then the guy catches up to you--do you just magically have the energy to run away the second time?
If i recall correctly he wasn't very far away from his home was he? I seriously doubt that he had enough energy to beat Zimmerman to the GROUND (according to eyewitness reports right?) and not enough energy to run out of danger.
According to wikipedia he was shot 70 yards away from where he was staying, 70 yards, 210 feet or around one block away from his house. You honestly think that with adrenaline pumping through his veins if he genuinely believed his life was in danger he couldn't have gone one more block?
|
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die.
|
On June 01 2013 04:06 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:02 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe. A.) Travyon did run away. As you could tell by the fact that Zman was running after him during the police call. B.) Travyon's girlfriend said that he didn't run again because he was tired--FROM RUNNING AWAY THE FIRST TIME. If you run your hardest trying to stay safe, and then the guy catches up to you--do you just magically have the energy to run away the second time? If i recall correctly he wasn't very far away from his home was he? I seriously doubt that he had enough energy to beat Zimmerman to the GROUND (according to eyewitness reports right?) and not enough energy to run out of danger.
tired legs =/= tired arms
Muscles ache if used too much, but I'm assuming Travyon didn't run on his hands.
EDIT:
He was 70 Yards [210 feet] away (a little less than a football field, but I don't know the terrain)
|
On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe.
Way to miss the point. I was illustrating how differently the exact same situation can be viewed, not what other situation should have happened or what would have been smart to do, so that has nothing to do with what I said.
On June 01 2013 03:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:
It's only self defense IF he was attacked by Martin.
This is established dozens of times already, and is in the OP under pertinent and full spoilers. It doesn't matter who attacked first in a self defense claim if Zimmerman believes he was in danger of his life or great bodily harm.
|
On June 01 2013 04:11 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe. Way to miss the point. I was illustrating how differently the exact same situation can be viewed, not what other situation should have happened or what would have been smart to do, so that has nothing to do with what I said. Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 03:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:
It's only self defense IF he was attacked by Martin. This is established dozens of times already, and is in the OP under pertinent and full spoilers. It doesn't matter who attacked first in a self defense claim if Zimmerman believes he was in danger of his life or great bodily harm.
Has to be a reasonable belief. If I see a scary looking man on the street, I don't get to kill him and justify it by my own paranoia.
|
On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die.
If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun.
|
On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun.
Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman"
Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun.
|
On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun.
Ok so let me get this right, Trayvon is a block away from his house, hes tired, he is confronted by someone who was chasing him, he sees a gun that this man has, he manages to successfully knock down Zimmerman without
A) getting shot and
B) being unable to take the gun away from him
I imagine that if he was ontop of Zimmerman bashing him repeatedly on the face (according to eyewitness accounts) wouldn't he also have been able to take the gun away from him if he had it out OR incapacitate it (since you know Zimmerman is on the ground and Martin is not) enough to make sure he cant take out his gun which you claim he knew he had since he started the fight in the first place?
Point is if he knew he had a gun then he shouldve made sure that he wasnt able to use the gun instead of knocking him to the ground getting ontop of him and then hitting him repeatedly?, and if he didnt know he had a gun then why did he start the fight in the first place?
|
On June 01 2013 04:29 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun. Ok so let me get this right, Trayvon is a block away from his house, hes tired, he is confronted by someone who was chasing him, he sees a gun that this man has, he manages to successfully knock down Zimmerman without A) getting shot and B) being unable to take the gun away from him I imagine that if he was ontop of Zimmerman bashing him repeatedly on the face (according to eyewitness accounts) wouldn't he also have been able to take the gun away from him if he had it out OR incapacitate it (since you know Zimmerman is on the ground and Martin is not) enough to make sure he cant take out his gun which you claim he knew he had since he started the fight in the first place? Point is if he knew he had a gun then he shouldve made sure that he wasnt able to use the gun instead of knocking him to the ground getting ontop of him and then hitting him repeatedly?, and if he didnt know he had a gun then why did he start the fight in the first place?
At 21 feet you can tackle someone before they can pull out a gun. They were less than 21 feet, they were conversation range.
Travyon didn't have strike marks on him--most likely because the other guy in the fight used all his strength to hold on to his gun instead of striking back--which explains why the kid didn't just disarm zman, because he probably was trying to disarm zimmerman. Zimmerman then shoots martin.
It explains the injury, the randomness of the attack, the timing, and most other things about the case. He was tired from running (according to girlfriend) tries to see if he made a mistake "do we have a problem" and then suddenly shit hits the fan and the phone is knocked out. In 40 seconds a gun fires into the chest of a teenager.
Is it also possible that they had fluid escalation of arguments? It is. But why would Travyon's phone be knocked out and broken? Why would it only be 40 seconds between the hang up and the gun shot? did they argue for 20-30 seconds and then someone zman shot trav? Was there no argument? Or was there a catalyst that forced the issue.
|
It's important to note that Trayvon had gotten away but decided to double back and ambush Zimmerman.
|
On June 01 2013 04:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:29 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun. Ok so let me get this right, Trayvon is a block away from his house, hes tired, he is confronted by someone who was chasing him, he sees a gun that this man has, he manages to successfully knock down Zimmerman without A) getting shot and B) being unable to take the gun away from him I imagine that if he was ontop of Zimmerman bashing him repeatedly on the face (according to eyewitness accounts) wouldn't he also have been able to take the gun away from him if he had it out OR incapacitate it (since you know Zimmerman is on the ground and Martin is not) enough to make sure he cant take out his gun which you claim he knew he had since he started the fight in the first place? Point is if he knew he had a gun then he shouldve made sure that he wasnt able to use the gun instead of knocking him to the ground getting ontop of him and then hitting him repeatedly?, and if he didnt know he had a gun then why did he start the fight in the first place? At 21 feet you can tackle someone before they can pull out a gun. They were less than 21 feet, they were conversation range. Travyon didn't have strike marks on him--most likely because the other guy in the fight used all his strength to hold on to his gun instead of striking back--which explains why the kid didn't just disarm zman, because he probably was trying to disarm zimmerman. Zimmerman then shoots martin. It explains the injury, the randomness of the attack, the timing, and most other things about the case. He was tired from running (according to girlfriend) tries to see if he made a mistake "do we have a problem" and then suddenly shit hits the fan and the phone is knocked out. In 40 seconds a gun fires into the chest of a teenager. Is it also possible that they had fluid escalation of arguments? It is. But why would Travyon's phone be knocked out and broken? Why would it only be 40 seconds between the hang up and the gun shot? did they argue for 20-30 seconds and then someone zman shot trav? Was there no argument? Or was there a catalyst that forced the issue.
So you are telling me that when you are trying to dissarm a person you decide to bash them in the head instead of trying to wrestle their arm so they arent in a position to shoot you? From your account of things it still doesnt explain how Zimmerman ended up with injuries unless Trayvon was trying to inflict as much bodily harm as possible instead of trying to disarm him.
|
On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun.
You and Quexana sound like you've already branded Zimmerman as guilty. Both of you are making speculations without any proof. It's downright ridiculous at times. It's nice to remain objective in cases such as this and have an actual discussion about it. But you two are throwing around accusations with almost every post.
"Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun."
This is just one giant unsubstantiated assumption.
On June 01 2013 04:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:06 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:02 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 03:57 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 03:50 Fyrewolf wrote:On June 01 2013 03:04 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 00:46 Quexana wrote:You sort of missed a big step between "follow people at night" and "shoot them in self defense." Something along the lines of getting the crap beaten out of him by Martin.
Again, the case hinges on who initiated the altercation itself. Hypothetically, assume that the jury finds that the evidence shows that Martin initiated the fight, do you still believe Zimmerman was in the wrong for shooting him? You want people to lie down and die in a situation like that?
And what does Martin being a teen have anything to do with anything. That's just playing up bias. Teens are just as capable of abhorrent acts of violence as anyone else.
And for the record, I don't like guns, would never own a gun, and am all for stricter gun control. I also have ultimate respect for self-defense laws and believe that people, when their lives are in danger, are within their rights to do whatever it takes to reach safety. If Martin truly did start the fight and have Zimmerman on the ground bashing his head in, his life is forfeit. You miss a step too, the one where Martin runs away from Zimmerman. Again, if I'm a teenager and I see a stranger sitting in his car, staring at me, I'm gonna run away, just like Martin did. Zimmerman pursued him. If a guy whose been staring at me, starts chasing me down after I run from him, I'm gonna assume he means me harm and if cornered, fight. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as Neighborhood Watch or a concerned neighbor, which could have diffused the situation. According to Zimmerman's own account (we sadly don't have Martin's account), Martin either came out of nowhere, jumped out from the bushes, or emerged from the darkness (his accounts vary slightly), and asked Zimmerman "Do you have a problem", Zimmerman had the opportunity to explain why he was chasing a teen in the dark, could have said "Hey, I'm in the community watch and we've had some break-ins lately and you were looking suspicious" or something to that effect, but according to Zimmerman, he answered "No, I don't have a problem." That's when Zimmerman claims Martin said "Well, you do now." and jumped him. So, if I take Zimmerman at face value and believe every word he said on the matter, he stalked a teen through his neighborhood, then when the teen ran away, he got out of his car and chased him down, then when the teen gave him the opportunity to explain himself, Zimmerman offered no explanation. Only after all of that did Martin start to fight, and then during the fight, Martin realized that the guy who had been stalking and chasing him with no explanation was doing so carrying a gun! If I was Martin, I would have bashed his head in too. Everybody is willing to see Zimmerman's point of view and give him the benefit of the doubt that he was in fear for his life, but no one sees how Martin could have been in fear for his life after being stalked and chased by a stranger who was bigger than he was, who was carrying a gun who refused to identify himself when asked. I'm not saying it was murder, but this looks like textbook manslaughter to me. Zimmerman tried playing vigilante, but he guessed wrong and killed a kid unnecessarily. I really don't see why this is controversial. Even if I don't believe anything that was said by anybody except George Zimmerman's own words on the matter, I come to that conclusion. But then again, Zimmerman did lie in court about his finances, leading to his bail being revoked, so I'm not saying that Zimmerman should be taken 100% at his word. People in this thread keep trying to act as if Trayvon was somehow incapable of willingly initiating a fight, im sorry but it is NOT far fetched to believe that Trayvon could've simply changed his mind and decided he was tired of this guys shit and to try to beat him up for following him. I really dislike the fact that a lot of people in this thread are trying to play it off like there is no way in hell that Trayvon actually initiated the fight and worse off are the people that are trying to say "this is what a teenager would've done", news flash people, every person is unique and the whole purpose of this trial is to try to uncover what actually happened, so I suggest everyone here try to actually listen and follow the case instead of trying to push opinions one side or the other. Too many people are making too many assumptions about this case. Actually, in Zimmerman's original accounting of the story, he said he was starting to walk back to his car after having chased Martin and lost him, when Martin appeared and confronted him, and that when he reached for his cellphone Martin attacked. Martin could have interpreted a strange man who was following him and then responding "no I don't have a problem" while reaching for something to be reaching for a gun, and may have attacked prematurely because he was afraid. This is speculation of course, but it illustrates how differently the exact same situation can be viewed. Heres what the smartest thing to do if you actually think someone is following you and intends to inflict harm on you, A) walk away if you dont believe you are in immediate danger B) run away as fast as you can if you think you are in immediate danger I have absolutely no idea why people still claim when he was trying to defend himself if he was the one that asked Zimmerman a question, if you live in an area with a lot of crime you dont stop and ask them a question, you get the hell away as fast as you can to somewhere you know you are safe. A.) Travyon did run away. As you could tell by the fact that Zman was running after him during the police call. B.) Travyon's girlfriend said that he didn't run again because he was tired--FROM RUNNING AWAY THE FIRST TIME. If you run your hardest trying to stay safe, and then the guy catches up to you--do you just magically have the energy to run away the second time? If i recall correctly he wasn't very far away from his home was he? I seriously doubt that he had enough energy to beat Zimmerman to the GROUND (according to eyewitness reports right?) and not enough energy to run out of danger. tired legs =/= tired arms Muscles ache if used too much, but I'm assuming Travyon didn't run on his hands. EDIT: He was 70 Yards [210 feet] away (a little less than a football field, but I don't know the terrain)
This is just so preposterous. If his legs are that exhausted there is no way he'd be in any condition to fight even if "tired legs =/= tired arms". Do you even workout or do any sort of cardio? If you did, you'd understand that if your legs are that exhausted, too exhausted to run away again even with adrenaline pumping your heart would be way more tired leaving you with no energy to put up a fight. Even if Trayvon was in god awful shape this still applies but would be even more extreme when it comes to his cardio condition.
I don't think Zimmerman is guilty or innocent we'll leave that up to the courts, but I'm basing everything off what we do know. Unfortunately Zimmerman is alive and Trayvon is dead so we me be getting a biased view of events but it doesn't change the fact that it's what we have to go with. It's up to the prosecution to prove otherwise without making baseless assumptions.
|
On June 01 2013 04:46 Anesthetic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:29 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun. Ok so let me get this right, Trayvon is a block away from his house, hes tired, he is confronted by someone who was chasing him, he sees a gun that this man has, he manages to successfully knock down Zimmerman without A) getting shot and B) being unable to take the gun away from him I imagine that if he was ontop of Zimmerman bashing him repeatedly on the face (according to eyewitness accounts) wouldn't he also have been able to take the gun away from him if he had it out OR incapacitate it (since you know Zimmerman is on the ground and Martin is not) enough to make sure he cant take out his gun which you claim he knew he had since he started the fight in the first place? Point is if he knew he had a gun then he shouldve made sure that he wasnt able to use the gun instead of knocking him to the ground getting ontop of him and then hitting him repeatedly?, and if he didnt know he had a gun then why did he start the fight in the first place? At 21 feet you can tackle someone before they can pull out a gun. They were less than 21 feet, they were conversation range. Travyon didn't have strike marks on him--most likely because the other guy in the fight used all his strength to hold on to his gun instead of striking back--which explains why the kid didn't just disarm zman, because he probably was trying to disarm zimmerman. Zimmerman then shoots martin. It explains the injury, the randomness of the attack, the timing, and most other things about the case. He was tired from running (according to girlfriend) tries to see if he made a mistake "do we have a problem" and then suddenly shit hits the fan and the phone is knocked out. In 40 seconds a gun fires into the chest of a teenager. Is it also possible that they had fluid escalation of arguments? It is. But why would Travyon's phone be knocked out and broken? Why would it only be 40 seconds between the hang up and the gun shot? did they argue for 20-30 seconds and then someone zman shot trav? Was there no argument? Or was there a catalyst that forced the issue. So you are telling me that when you are trying to dissarm a person you decide to bash them in the head instead of trying to wrestle their arm so they arent in a position to shoot you? From your account of things it still doesnt explain how Zimmerman ended up with injuries unless Trayvon was trying to inflict as much bodily harm as possible instead of trying to disarm him.
Um... 1 hand bashing head, other hand wrestling with arm
Martin had two arms wrestling for gun, Trav had 1 arm and body weight, after a struggle Zimmerman wins the gun-wrestle and shoots trav.
|
On June 01 2013 04:49 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2013 04:46 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:29 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 01 2013 04:21 Anesthetic wrote:On June 01 2013 04:08 Quexana wrote:
1.) Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started. <---According to Zimmerman
2.) How would you respond personally in Martin's situation? As a teenager, your walking home from the convenience store after buying candy. you see a strange guy staring you down from his car. He gets out of his car. You run away. He runs after you and chases you.
3.) Look at your answer to question #2, if your answer is different from the way Martin acted, ask yourself if you deserve to live because you acted the way you acted and someone who acted differently than you would deserves to die. If Trayvon didnt know Zimmerman had a gun until the fight started then he shouldn't have felt his life was in danger and that he needed to defend himself unless Zimmerman actually confronted him right? At least thats my point of view, I dont see why he didn't just continue to run/walk away if Zimmerman didn't threaten him with a gun. Which is why Quex said "According to Zimmerman" Because no, it doesn't make sense why a kid who just ran away and was tired didn't walk away from zimmerman unless there was something to scare him--like a gun. Ok so let me get this right, Trayvon is a block away from his house, hes tired, he is confronted by someone who was chasing him, he sees a gun that this man has, he manages to successfully knock down Zimmerman without A) getting shot and B) being unable to take the gun away from him I imagine that if he was ontop of Zimmerman bashing him repeatedly on the face (according to eyewitness accounts) wouldn't he also have been able to take the gun away from him if he had it out OR incapacitate it (since you know Zimmerman is on the ground and Martin is not) enough to make sure he cant take out his gun which you claim he knew he had since he started the fight in the first place? Point is if he knew he had a gun then he shouldve made sure that he wasnt able to use the gun instead of knocking him to the ground getting ontop of him and then hitting him repeatedly?, and if he didnt know he had a gun then why did he start the fight in the first place? At 21 feet you can tackle someone before they can pull out a gun. They were less than 21 feet, they were conversation range. Travyon didn't have strike marks on him--most likely because the other guy in the fight used all his strength to hold on to his gun instead of striking back--which explains why the kid didn't just disarm zman, because he probably was trying to disarm zimmerman. Zimmerman then shoots martin. It explains the injury, the randomness of the attack, the timing, and most other things about the case. He was tired from running (according to girlfriend) tries to see if he made a mistake "do we have a problem" and then suddenly shit hits the fan and the phone is knocked out. In 40 seconds a gun fires into the chest of a teenager. Is it also possible that they had fluid escalation of arguments? It is. But why would Travyon's phone be knocked out and broken? Why would it only be 40 seconds between the hang up and the gun shot? did they argue for 20-30 seconds and then someone zman shot trav? Was there no argument? Or was there a catalyst that forced the issue. So you are telling me that when you are trying to dissarm a person you decide to bash them in the head instead of trying to wrestle their arm so they arent in a position to shoot you? From your account of things it still doesnt explain how Zimmerman ended up with injuries unless Trayvon was trying to inflict as much bodily harm as possible instead of trying to disarm him. Um... 1 hand bashing head, other hand wrestling with arm Martin had two arms wrestling for gun, Trav had 1 arm and body weight, after a struggle Zimmerman wins the gun-wrestle and shoots trav.
So instead of using all your bodily forces to take away a weapon that can potentially end your life a person should instead use one hand to hit someone's face and only dedicate one hand to take away their hand?
I think if anyone was in that situation they would choose to use both of their hands to make 100% sure and put 100% of their remaining strength to making sure that the other person couldnt aim their gun at you and try to take it away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
