Triggering: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman

[Maverick.]

This is something that has been really bothering me lately. Trayvon Martin, a teenage boy was walking to the convience store one night when a neighborhood watchman shot and killed him for no reason. To make matters worse, the shooter has not been arrested or convicted. Such a unfortunate event. Learn more here.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Justi...78155035593734
http://globalgrind.com/news/trayvon-...oments-details


Please sign the petition.
http://www.change.org/petitions/pros...trayvon-martin

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by Maverick.

shot and killed him for no reason.

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/new...erman-03232012

The fact that police didn't arrest a man after a self defense shooting is not enough of a reason for this story to be as big as it is. Zimmerman is under a grand jury indictment in 2 weeks anyways, so I don't understand the outrage. My guess is certain race-baiting groups that prey on peoples initial, emotional outrage just need an issue in an election year.

[Koharuchan]

You know, this case has been bothering me. I know I'll probably get bashed for this, but it's my opinion. Yes, it is a tragedy that the boy was shot and killed for no reason. Yes, it is horrible that the man who did it was not charged. But honestly...this stuff happens every day. It sucks, but that's the world we live in. Innocent people, including children, are shot and killed every day. There are plenty of cases when the murderer goes unpunished. It happens so often, and it's sad. What bothers me is that this one case is getting so much attention, when this has happened before so many times. I'm just not understanding why so many people are making such a huge deal out of this particular case. Don't get me wrong here, I know it's a tragedy what happened, and I feel so sorry for his family, but what is it about this particular case that has everyone all over the states so riled up?

[thebigmole]

I just don't believe that it was self defense. First of all why the heck was Zimmerman following the kid to begin with, because he was a black kid in a hoodie he hadn't seen before? And if you were a kid walking alone at night and saw some creepy guy with a gun following you what would you do? I think it's perfectly possible that Zimmerman did NOT stop following the kid and the kid got freaked out, maybe saw the gun, and was acting in his own defense when he was hitting Zimmerman. No matter what it's a tragedy, but it's a tragedy that could have been avoided if Zimmerman hadn't been such a busybody.

[TigerTank77]

You know whats funny? First, Zimmerman was a "racist white man", then it turns out he's Hispanic. Also, the news keeps painting Trayvon as this small fragile teenager, when in reality he was a 6'2" football player and just over [edit] pounds. But these aren't important to the matter at hand.

What is important, is that there's so much bullshit surrounding this case involving what people want to believe, and what the news is deciding to report on and leave out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shootin...Police_arrival

Don't take everything you see on the page as fact, but try get a clearer picture of what's been going on. Pro-tip: Don't believe a fucking thing you see on the news.

I'm not going to sit here and say Zimmerman made good decisions, but it's not as cut and dry as everyone seems to want it to be.

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

You know whats funny? First, Zimmerman was a "racist white man", then it turns out he's Hispanic. Also, the news keeps painting Trayvon as this small fragile teenager, when in reality he was a 6'2" football player and just over [edit] pounds. But these aren't important to the matter at hand.

Funniest thing about this all, is Obama saying "if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon". He would all right, a total thug:

Spoiler:

There is seriously something wrong with white people who just cannot process that a black kid was somehow violent. Despite the evidence that Trayvon was wailing on Zimmerman before he fired, people either completely ignore it, or come up with their own deluded fantasy to justify it. It's like white people are so afraid of being seen as racist that they can't accept it, because I honestly can't understand why.

Oh, and the racist-Black Panthers have already issued a $10,000 bounty on Zimmerman's head. When Zimmerman gets off, prepare for the race riots...

[Dr.Bobby]

There's just so much here...

First, there's a law in Florida (actually, in many states) that gives people the legal right to shoot to kill in the name of 'Self defense'. This rescinds prior laws of 'Safely retreating' in the face of such threats. Also, there are no criteria establishing what constitutes 'Imminent threat'. Basically, it's shoot first, ask questions later. What could go wrong?

Second, Zimmerman was part of a self styled 'Neighborhood watch' (read: Vigilante) group. He had no training in law enforcement and no authority to police the neighborhood. What could go wrong?

Third, Trayvon was doing nothing at the time that was remotely suspicious and surely not 'Threatening'. Other than being black and wearing a hoodie in a predominantly white neighborhood. What could go wrong?

Fourth, when Zimmerman called 911 to report Trayvon, the operator told him directly that he didn't need to do this. Zimmerman ignored this request by law enforcement. What could go wrong?

Fifth, Zimmerman was not arrested b/c under the 'Stand your ground' law, he did nothing illegal. The law supports this behavior, therefore, he is not subject to immediate arrest. The outrage is that murder here is basically protected. What would need to happen is a demonstration that Zimmerman acted not out of 'Imminent threat', but rather from other motives. To no avail for Trayvon, however.

What needs to be comprehensively addressed is how these types of laws are passed in the first place, and a recognition that they are not at all in the public good. Until then, the least we can do is recognize that although 'Things happen', we do not need to perpetuate a culture that not only makes them more likely, but also dismisses them.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Fourth, when Zimmerman called 911 to report Trayvon, the operator told him directly that he didn't need to do this. Zimmerman ignored this request by law enforcement. What could go wrong?

Actually he was told he didn't need to follow the guy by a civilian phone operator. But yeah, he shouldn't have followed the guy.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Fifth, Zimmerman was not arrested b/c under the 'Stand your ground' law, he did nothing illegal. The law supports this behavior, therefore, he is not subject to immediate arrest. The outrage is that murder here is basically protected. What would need to happen is a demonstration that Zimmerman acted not out of 'Imminent threat', but rather from other motives. To no avail for Trayvon, however.

Zimmerman was found with grass stains on his back and multiple injuries to his face concurrent with getting punched.

The law is fine, the problem is idiots.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

What needs to be comprehensively addressed is how these types of laws are passed in the first place, and a recognition that they are not at all in the public good. Until then, the least we can do is recognize that although 'Things happen', we do not need to perpetuate a culture that not only makes them more likely, but also dismisses them.

Except that they are in the public good. Welfare is in the public good, but we don't abolish it because people abuse it. Some idiot abused a good self defense law. That doesn't mean we should abolish it.

[Dr.Bobby]

Ben, laws are designed to prevent people from being idiots. Not encourage idiotic behavior, especially when the result can be lethal. This isn't a case of self defense, Zimmerman was not being threatened.

Let's not become so calloused that we miss the essential fact here: A totally innocent person is now dead b/c there is a law on the books that allows people to play cop without any training or qualifications to do so.

[thebigmole]

I agree with Dr Bobby. Trayvon wasn't harming anyone, he was simply walking back to his dad's house. Zimmerman caused the confrontation by following him, and for all we know Trayvon hit him out of self defense. I mean here was this guy he didn't know following him around, and oh yeah he was carrying a gun. Not to mention that two of the three witnesses are saying that Trayvon was the one crying for help not Zimmerman. Zimmerman was the direct cause of this kid's death. If he had just left well enough along Trayvon would still be alive.

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

This isn't a case of self defense, Zimmerman was not being threatened.

Let's not become so calloused that we miss the essential fact here: A totally innocent person is now dead b/c there is a law on the books that allows people to play cop without any training or qualifications to do so.

If you're in a gated community after dark, and someone comes up asking who you are and you want to diffuse the situation, providing your address and the name of the person you are staying with is a GREAT way to do that. The story would have ended there. Telling the person to fuck off and mind your own business is a way to make sure the confrontation progresses to the next step. Starting to punch the person asking questions to the ground (even if they put their hands on you) is a way to take the confrontation to another level. That's what the kid chose to do. He lost that fight. His fault. I don't know enough about law, but Zimmerman's guilty of manslaughter or criminal negligence. Not murdering an "innocent" person.

So, how was it not self defense? You should just let some young person beat on you? You might be a cuckold like that Doctor, but not everyone else is.

[thebigmole]

Originally Posted by Caliber

If you're in a gated community after dark, and someone comes up asking who you are and you want to diffuse the situation, providing your address and the name of the person you are staying with is a GREAT way to do that. The story would have ended there. Telling the person to fuck off and mind your own business is a way to make sure the confrontation progresses to the next step. Starting to punch the person asking questions to the ground (even if they put their hands on you) is a way to take the confrontation to another level. That's what the kid chose to do. He lost that fight. His fault. I don't know enough about law, but Zimmerman's guilty of manslaughter or criminal negligence. Not murdering an "innocent" person.

So, how was it not self defense? You should just let some young person beat on you? You might be a cuckold like that Doctor, but not everyone else is.

You have no idea who threw the "first punch" it could very well be that Trayvon was acting in his own defense, against someone harassing him for no reason. The whole point is that you don't know what happened, so because Trayvon has also not been proven guilty of anything he is technically an innocent person, who is now dead.

[Fabrication]

This is all I have to say.

[Dr.Bobby]

Originally Posted by Caliber

If you're in a gated community after dark, and someone comes up asking who you are and you want to diffuse the situation, providing your address and the name of the person you are staying with is a GREAT way to do that. The story would have ended there. Telling the person to fuck off and mind your own business is a way to make sure the confrontation progresses to the next step. Starting to punch the person asking questions to the ground (even if they put their hands on you) is a way to take the confrontation to another level. That's what the kid chose to do. He lost that fight. His fault. I don't know enough about law, but Zimmerman's guilty of manslaughter or criminal negligence. Not murdering an "innocent" person.

So, how was it not self defense? You should just let some young person beat on you? You might be a cuckold like that Doctor, but not everyone else is.

Sounds like you're justifying murder here, Caliber...even if Trayvon responded to an unprovoked confrontation by a stranger by becoming defensive (or even belligerent), that doesn't qualify as menacing..surely not worthy of deadly force, yes? So what exactly are you defending here?

Sometimes, it is very simple, with or without 'Cuckold'.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Ben, laws are designed to prevent people from being idiots. Not encourage idiotic behavior, especially when the result can be lethal. This isn't a case of self defense, Zimmerman was not being threatened.

Laws are designed to punish people who do bad things. It doesn't really curb stupidity. If it did, we wouldn't be clamoring for more Jersey Shore while NASA gets bare-bone funding.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Let's not become so calloused that we miss the essential fact here: A totally innocent person is now dead b/c there is a law on the books that allows people to play cop without any training or qualifications to do so.

Actually, an innocent person is dead because Zimmerman as an idiot. The law is fine, because you see, if he's found to have acted without a justified reason for self defense (which most likely will happen), then he goes to jail, and justice is served.

[Maloo]

I love how people who know nothing think they know everything. No one knows exactly what happened other than the two people involved, and one of those people is dead.

And to the people who say "stuff like this happens all the time": Do you not realize that that's not fucking okay? Shit like this shouldn't EVER happen. Brushing it off just makes you look like an ignorant person who's content with the world's problems.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Maloo

I love how people who know nothing think they know everything. No one knows exactly what happened other than the two people involved, and one of those people is dead.

Exactly. Still, that hasn't stopped the media from running fucking wild with it.

Originally Posted by Maloo

And to the people who say "stuff like this happens all the time": Do you not realize that that's not fucking okay? Shit like this shouldn't EVER happen. Brushing it off just makes you look like an ignorant person who's content with the world's problems.

I think part of the issue for a lot of people, is that the only reason this got so much attention was because the original story was that a "white" man had shot an unarmed black kid in a "gated" neighborhood, and it exploded as a racial issue, while a lot of people honestly didn't understand why it was getting so much attention when the same, if not worse shit was happening all over the place.

Example: http://news.yahoo.com/student-shot-d...054223724.html

Guess how much media coverage that's going to get? None.

Doesn't mean it should happen. It SHOULDN'T, but it does.

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by thebigmole

You have no idea who threw the "first punch" it could very well be that Trayvon was acting in his own defense, against someone harassing him for no reason. The whole point is that you don't know what happened, so because Trayvon has also not been proven guilty of anything he is technically an innocent person, who is now dead.

True, technically you don't know who instigated it, but Zimmerman was bleeding from the face and back of the head, (police report btw) and Trayvon wasn't. Hence, why its evidence supporting Zimmermans story, which contributed to the police letting him go, but not enough to let him slide past the grand jury. But even if he put his hands on the kid, Trayvon is the one who escalated it into a brawl.

And I love how people in this story are saying "Trayvon was innocent of those claims until proven guilty". How about Zimmerman?

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Sounds like you're justifying murder here, Caliber...even if Trayvon responded to an unprovoked confrontation by a stranger by becoming defensive (or even belligerent), that doesn't qualify as menacing..surely not worthy of deadly force, yes? So what exactly are you defending here?

Not justifying murder, I just don't like malicious prosecutions and mob mentality brought on by people who listen to Al Sharpton. And pinning someone to the ground while wailing on them is not becoming "defensive", it's becoming violent.

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

Guess how much media coverage that's going to get? None.
Doesn't mean it should happen. It SHOULDN'T, but it does.

How about the 13 year old who was set on fire by a group of older black teens for being white? Of course that story wasn't "mainstream", because the victim wasn't black, and the teens weren't white.

[Tyr.]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

that allows people to play cop without any training or qualifications to do so.

And you are playing Detective with no training or qualifications.

Not only are you acting on incomplete intel, you are also fanning the flames of what could possibly be a repeat of the LA Riots.

Bill Lee and his team are known for being particularly good investigators and all-round good officers. Let them do their job.

Stick to therapy, or whatever it is you do.

- Yogi

[Koharuchan]

Originally Posted by Maloo

And to the people who say "stuff like this happens all the time": Do you not realize that that's not fucking okay? Shit like this shouldn't EVER happen. Brushing it off just makes you look like an ignorant person who's content with the world's problems.

I personally don't get why this case is getting so much national attention, but I DO realize that it's not okay. I'm not content with the world's problems. The world we live in pretty much sucks, and that's the truth. But really think about this. Kids get shot and killed every day. A lot of times, the murderer isn't caught or doesn't get charged. Does it suck? Absolutely. But this case is just another one of those shootings; a kid got killed, and the culprit hasn't been charged. Yes, this stuff shouldn't happen, but it does. That is never going to change. I just don't understand why this one particular case is so special that it's got the whole country stirred up.

[Maloo]

Originally Posted by Koharuchan

I personally don't get why this case is getting so much national attention, but I DO realize that it's not okay. I'm not content with the world's problems. The world we live in pretty much sucks, and that's the truth. But really think about this. Kids get shot and killed every day. A lot of times, the murderer isn't caught or doesn't get charged. Does it suck? Absolutely. But this case is just another one of those shootings; a kid got killed, and the culprit hasn't been charged. Yes, this stuff shouldn't happen, but it does. That is never going to change. I just don't understand why this one particular case is so special that it's got the whole country stirred up.

See, that's the kind of attitude that I detest. "Oh well, that's how it is and things will never change." Attitudes like that is exactly the reason why things DON'T change.

[TigerTank77]

SO, there's a new report out on the whole thing.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nat...143,full.story

If it's legit, then it's really going to change the entire perception of the case. Although I can't speak for how credible the article is, so if anyone can affirm or dissaffirm, please do so.

EDIT:

Here's another. Yahoo news.

http://gma.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-...-abc-news.html

Well... when you have two separate sources both saying the same thing... that pretty much seals it.

If Zimmerman had stopped following him and was walking away, and Martin came around and attacked him from behind, that's on Martin.

[Dr.Bobby]

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

SO, there's a new report out on the whole thing.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nat...143,full.story

If it's legit, then it's really going to change the entire perception of the case. Although I can't speak for how credible the article is, so if anyone can affirm or dissaffirm, please do so.

Ben, since one of the participants is dead, we unfortunately cannot get a full accounting. To this point, there are a few things clear: The first is that people are inclined to believe what they want based on very personal factors that probably have little to do with the actual events.

The second is that the cause of this incident, which is really the issue and is currently being overlooked, at least in this discussion here, is that there's a law on the books in Florida that basically put a person (Zimmerman) with a gun on the street with the clear intent of finding situations they believe they can use them. Or, because they had a gun, put himself on the street in some self proclaimed role as 'Vigilante'. That's called 'incitement'.

There's no doubt *something* occurred between Trayvon and Zimmerman, but the issue is if it necessarily needed to happen, and who was responsible...and what society can do to prevent it. Trayvon wasn't doing anything illegal, and as a result, Zimmerman really had no reason (or justification) for getting in his face. He is not a law enforcement official! So, Zimmerman used a law to justify violating someone's rights (to be walking down the street) to incite a situation based on his race and appearance, without any authority to expect Trayvon's compliance, provoking a situation that might have turned into a self defensive one, and then standing the law on it's head to justify killing him. The point is, he didn't have either the authority or the 'Probable cause' in the first place to even stop him.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

The second is that the cause of this incident, which is really the issue and is currently being overlooked, at least in this discussion here, is that there's a law on the books in Florida that basically puts people with guns on the street with the clear intent of finding situations they believe they can use them. That's called 'incitement'.

Actually that's not what the law on the books says, but nice try on the leading.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

There's no doubt *something* occurred between Trayvon and Zimmerman, but the issue is if it necessarily needed to happen, and who was responsible...and what society can do to prevent it. Trayvon wasn't doing anything illegal, and as a result, Zimmerman really had no reason (or justification) for getting in his face. He is not a law enforcement official! So, Zimmerman used a law to justify violating someone's rights (to be walking down the street) to incite a situation based on his race and appearance, without any authority to expect Trayvon's compliance, provoking a situation that might have turned into a self defensive one, and then standing the law on it's head to justify killing him. The point is, he didn't have either the authority or the 'Probable cause' in the first place to even stop him.

Except that Zimmerman didn't get in his face. Zimmerman followed him for a bit, then disengaged and started to return to his vehicle, moving away from Martin. THEN Martin attacked him and tried to bash his skull in.

Both parties were in the wrong. Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him, but Martin had absolutely zero right to attack and beat someone who was walking away from him.

And you need to stop using Martin's death as a soapbox from which to promote your emotionally charged "anti-self defense" agenda.

[thebigmole]

Originally Posted by TigerTank77

SO, there's a new report out on the whole thing.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nat...143,full.story

If it's legit, then it's really going to change the entire perception of the case. Although I can't speak for how credible the article is, so if anyone can affirm or dissaffirm, please do so.

EDIT:

Here's another. Yahoo news.

http://gma.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-...-abc-news.html

Well... when you have two separate sources both saying the same thing... that pretty much seals it.

If Zimmerman had stopped following him and was walking away, and Martin came around and attacked him from behind, that's on Martin.

But that doesn't seem to be what happened. According to what his girlfriend heard over the phone Martin simply asked Zimmerman why he was following him. From there the confrontation started. If Zimmerman had never followed Martin in the first place this would not have happened, whether or not this is murder Zimmerman is still directly responsible for the confrontation that ended Martin's life. Martin reacted as I feel many guys would, I feel like the standard reaction for a big guy who is being followed around at night would be to just confront the follower. After all he was in a gated community why would Martin think Zimmerman was carrying a weapon?
Should Martin have hit Zimmerman, probably not, but he certainly didn't deserve to be shot for his overreaction.

[Dr.Bobby]

Ben, you've already made up your mind here, there's not much point in my continuing. You're not hearing me.

I'm not 'anti self defense'. This isn't a case of self defense, if anything it's developing into one of incitement and provocation to the point where self defense was necessary. I AM for rational laws that protect people, rather than give those who are loosely put together in the first place the legal rights and protections to act on their own faulty judgments. Zimmerman confused the "Self defense' clause to mean that he has the authority to stop and confront a stranger who was not engaged in an illegal activity of any kind. In short, he over played his hand and got more than he bargained for, and is now hiding behind the law.

The point is, Zimmerman provoked a lethal situation with the help of Florida law. That's not 'Self defense', that's incitement. Laws shouldn't be written which allow people to do things they shouldn't be doing it the first place (playing cops and robbers with live ammo), only to have it escalate to the point where the law basically exonerates them for acting lethally on a situation of their own creation.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Ben, you've already made up your mind here, there's not much point in my continuing. You're not hearing me.

I am hearing you. I'm just hearing a lot of speculation. I assume you're familiar with occam's razor?

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

I'm not 'anti self defense'. This isn't a case of self defense, if anything it's developing into one of incitement and provocation to the point where self defense was necessary. I AM for rational laws that protect people, rather than give those who are loosely put together in the first place the legal rights and protections to act on their own faulty judgments. Zimmerman confused the "Self defense' clause to mean that he has the authority to stop and confront a stranger who was not engaged in an illegal activity of any kind. In short, he over played his hand and got more than he bargained for, and is now hiding behind the law.

Please show me where Zimmerman stopped and confronted Martin.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

The point is, Zimmerman provoked a lethal situation with the help of Florida law. That's not 'Self defense', that's incitement. Laws shouldn't be written which allow people to do things they shouldn't be doing it the first place (playing cops and robbers with live ammo), only to have it escalate to the point where the law basically exonerates them for acting lethally on a situation of their own creation.

Please explain to me how following someone for a short period of time before disengaging and returning to your car is incitement, or even accosting.

Originally Posted by thebigmole

But that doesn't seem to be what happened. According to what his girlfriend heard over the phone Martin simply asked Zimmerman why he was following him. From there the confrontation started. If Zimmerman had never followed Martin in the first place this would not have happened, whether or not this is murder Zimmerman is still directly responsible for the confrontation that ended Martin's life. Martin reacted as I feel many guys would, I feel like the standard reaction for a big guy who is being followed around at night would be to just confront the follower. After all he was in a gated community why would Martin think Zimmerman was carrying a weapon?

As a big guy, would I have asked what Zimmerman was doing? Probably. Would I have tackled him and started punching his head after he started to walk away from me? No, because that's ASSAULT.

Originally Posted by thebigmole

Should Martin have hit Zimmerman, probably not, but he certainly didn't deserve to be shot for his overreaction.

He didn't hit Zimmerman. He tackled him, and was smashing his skull into the sidewalk. That would get anyone else shot on any given day.

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by Koharuchan

I just don't understand why this one particular case is so special that it's got the whole country stirred up.

Ben already explained this. It's solely because a black kid was shot by a white (looking) man, and others are trying to capitalize on it. Just go's to show you if you're a black and going to be killed, you better make sure it's by a white person, because that's the only way the public is going to care. It's a subtle form of racism, because blacks are expected to be violent, but when a white man commits a crime, there's outrage.

And Doc, alleged "incitement and provocation" is not justification for violence. Zimmerman unnecessarily entered a situation, but one that conceivably wouldn't lead to violence. Trayvon was the one who escalated it from a verbal confrontation to a violent one. Zimmerman defended himself from said violence, yet failed to consider the implications of his actions. If it even does go to trial, he'll only get criminal negligence. What do you even think he's guilty of?

[Maloo]

The last story you posted is so incredibly different from what witneses have said on the news, I don't believe it for a second.

[Dr.Bobby]

Originally Posted by Caliber

And Doc, alleged "incitement and provocation" is not justification for violence. Zimmerman unnecessarily entered a situation, but one that conceivably wouldn't lead to violence. Trayvon was the one who escalated it from a verbal confrontation to a violent one. Zimmerman defended himself from said violence, yet failed to consider the implications of his actions. If it even does go to trial, he'll only get criminal negligence. What do you even think he's guilty of?

Well, who really knows what actually happened. The point is, Zimmerman took on a responsibility he didn't need to, one that he wasn't trained for, and one that he had no authority for. And carried a gun in order to protect himself. If he felt safer or more entitled to confront someone as a result is something we can't know for sure, but we have to assume Zimmerman was out there looking for trouble..that's what these 'Neighborhood watches' are about, and lacking in any real authority, he approached someone with the intent to do something..that he wasn't authorized or entitled to do. I cannot accept your premise that you (or he) actually believed his actions could not conceivably lead to a violent confrontation, c'mon. If that was the case, why did he carry a gun? Why didn't he just call 911 and let the police take care of it, especially since Zimmerman had not witnessed a crime involving Trayvon? How he approached Trayvon is another unknown, but we have to also assume given human nature and the scattered details we do have that it probably was provocative..if only b/c we now suspect Trayvon assaulted him. From that point in the story it might have been self defense, but as I previously stated, you cannot provoke a situation and then use self defense as a justification for shooting someone dead, even in Florida. That's why context matters.

I'm not at all defending Trayvon, frankly I think they both could have (and should have) exercised better judgment. But this is often what sadly happens when you put guns in the hands of people who aren't really qualified to use them, and add a bit of strong emotion for good measure. Rather, I think it's the state of Florida (and ex-Governor Jeb Bush) who are at fault here for signing into law a measure that takes law enforcement from skilled, trained, qualified professionals, and puts it into the hands of people who might very well have their own agendas (and issues) at play. "Good intentions" aside, Zimmerman shouldn't be protected by the state for the results of his own bad judgment to act out his inner desire to be a cop.

[SouthernBelle.]

As of right now, I like Zimmerman's account best. However, I will remain indifferent until the court passes judgement. Then I'll rant on whoever lost, so I don't look stupid, and also so I can have the full scope of the story before I decide which side I want to support.

I think it's wrong of those citizens to react in such a manner to Trayvor's death. On the other hand, though, I also think that if Trayvor's family's story is credible, then something needs to be done about Zimmerman... Not until the trial has occurred, though.

[Grey Wind]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Well, who really knows what actually happened. The point is, Zimmerman took on a responsibility he didn't need to, one that he wasn't trained for, and one that he had no authority for. And carried a gun in order to protect himself. If he felt safer or more entitled to confront someone as a result is something we can't know for sure, but we have to assume Zimmerman was out there looking for trouble..that's what these 'Neighborhood watches' are about, and lacking in any real authority, he approached someone with the intent to do something..that he wasn't authorized or entitled to do.

Zimmerman was actually on his way home from the grocery store if I can remember correctly. "Looking for trouble" is a pretty farfetched accusation. Everyone hates the fake cop attitude, but the fact that you hold contempt for someone doesn't mean they're guilty. No, Zimmerman approached someone with the intent to find out if they were one of the burglars in the area, as specified in his call to police. Which he wouldn't have made if he was "looking for trouble". And last time I checked you don't need 'authorization' to speak to someone on the street.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

I cannot accept your premise that you (or he) actually believed his actions could not conceivably lead to a violent confrontation, c'mon. If that was the case, why did he carry a gun? Why didn't he just call 911 and let the police take care of it, especially since Zimmerman had not witnessed a crime involving Trayvon? How he approached Trayvon is another unknown, but we have to also assume given human nature and the scattered details we do have that it probably was provocative..if only b/c we now suspect Trayvon assaulted him. From that point in the story it might have been self defense, but as I previously stated, you cannot provoke a situation and then use self defense as a justification for shooting someone dead, even in Florida. That's why context matters.

I don't know about you, but talking to someone and asking them who they are in an authoritative tone doesn't seem like it would inevitably lead to them smashing my skull into the sidewalk. He was carrying a gun because he was a concealed carry permit holder and it was after dark. We don't "suspect Trayvon assaulted him", we know he did because Zimmerman was bleeding from the face and head and Trayvon wasn't. We know he did because witnesses have confirmed he was on top of him. Zimmerman could have been assaulted simply because Trayvon was a thug: there is no reason (and zero evidence) to think he "provoked a fight" besides the "dickhead" mindset you've painted on the guy who ended up screaming like a girl when he was attacked.

And yet provoking a situation which leads to a death, without malice afterthought, and then calling self defense is still not murder.

[FlyingTrue]

To all,

I own and live in a home in the neighborhood where this whole thing has been going on. I was home on my computer when I heard the shot on the evening of February 26th, just after sundown. Minutes after I heard the "pop" sound there was a rush of police cars in full lights and sirens speeding into the road. I didn't know that is what it was all about until later that evening where the news initially broke on TV that there was a fatal shooting. Since then things have been quite chaotic with all of the media attention and rallies going on in the neighborhood. It is a situation that is quite difficult to cope with. My thoughts are with all involved.

[Maverick.]

I can't believe you guys actually think Travyon instigated this whole ordeal. I have no comment towards that. Just because it's a young black boy, he's automatically labeled to be "Thug Material"? Jesus.

[Marguerite]

Not being from the US I know little about this, but the anti-PC brigade really piss me off on issues like this. Majority have an opinion on something? Quick, take the opposite one! Don't worry about what it is or if it has no basis of fact. Just make sure you can talk about how hard it is to be white! Because we all know how hard it is to be the majority.

Black teenager shot? Clearly white people are the victims.

Another example of feminazis, PC morons and minorities trying to keep the white man down!!!!!111!!!1!!

Give me a break. A teenager was killed because some idiot wanted to play cowboy. And then he got away with it. Why the hell can't people just take it as it is; a tragedy? Why doesn't it have to be about the same lame regurgitated argument that gets used whenever something mentions a) race b) gender c) Christmas d) another else than can be tentatively and falsely related to political correctness?

You might as well just copy and paste your comments for the the inevitable 'MINORITIES ARE KILLING THE JOY OF EASTER FOR OUR POOR WHITE CHILDREN. ALSO FEMINISTS.' thread.

[Dr.Bobby]

Originally Posted by Caliber

Zimmerman was actually on his way home from the grocery store if I can remember correctly. "Looking for trouble" is a pretty farfetched accusation. Everyone hates the fake cop attitude, but the fact that you hold contempt for someone doesn't mean they're guilty. No, Zimmerman approached someone with the intent to find out if they were one of the burglars in the area, as specified in his call to police. Which he wouldn't have made if he was "looking for trouble". And last time I checked you don't need 'authorization' to speak to someone on the street.

I don't know about you, but talking to someone and asking them who they are in an authoritative tone doesn't seem like it would inevitably lead to them smashing my skull into the sidewalk. He was carrying a gun because he was a concealed carry permit holder and it was after dark. We don't "suspect Trayvon assaulted him", we know he did because Zimmerman was bleeding from the face and head and Trayvon wasn't. We know he did because witnesses have confirmed he was on top of him. Zimmerman could have been assaulted simply because Trayvon was a thug: there is no reason (and zero evidence) to think he "provoked a fight" besides the "dickhead" mindset you've painted on the guy who ended up screaming like a girl when he was attacked.

And yet provoking a situation which leads to a death, without malice afterthought, and then calling self defense is still not murder.

Caliber, you know, I don't have a dog in this fight. It is curious to me how people take a relatively ambiguous situation and come to such strong conclusions, in the absence of clear data. That says much more about us, and it's an opportunity to learn something about yourself. Why are you more able to understand the perspective and actions of Zimmerman, who by all accounts instigated the confrontation, instead of the victim?

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Caliber, you know, I don't have a dog in this fight. It is curious to me how people take a relatively ambiguous situation and come to such strong conclusions, in the absence of clear data. That says much more about us, and it's an opportunity to learn something about yourself. Why are you more able to understand the perspective and actions of Zimmerman, who by all accounts instigated the confrontation, instead of the victim?

Because he was also a victim?

I can't wait for the truth to come out about this whole Zimmerman/Martin bullshit.

Fucking hypocritical idiots running wild attacking Zimmerman and digging through his personal life and getting mad every time someone even mentions something about Trayvon's life, when in fact neither factor from either of their lives matter in the slightest.

Do racially motivated killings happen? Yes. Do they happen both ways? (white on black and black on white, black on brown, brown on black) You bet your ass they do.

I'm not going to sit here and talk about all of the recent times white people have been killed or raped or abused because of the color of their skin, because it doens't fucking matter. It has nothing to do with the case at hand.

As this thing starts to boil down, as the racially charged rhetoric burns away and the facts come out, it's becoming apparently clear what this was.

Two people in the wrong place at the wrong time, reacting to something they thought was a genuine threat.

Was Zimmerman too aggressive? Yes.
Did he have a right to question Trayvon? Yes.
Did Trayvon have a right to approach and question why he was being followed? Yes.

However, the line gets drawn when Trayvon decided he was going to attack and attempt to knock out and or kill Zimmerman. He had no right to do that, because while Zimmerman was being accosting, there is nothing that says he didn't have the right to question him.

And that's the plain and simple issue. You don't have the right to physically attack anyone. You have the right to defend yourself, but instigating a physical confrontation is not defense. Obviously we don't know for sure who started the fight, but from the witness testimony and the evidence provided, signs clearly point to Trayvon having started the fight.

Zimmerman was on the ground screaming for help having his skull beaten in, and then he shot Trayvon in self defense.

It's a shitty situation, but that's what happened.

Anyone who brings race or politics into it is a hypocrite of the highest order, because you aren't looking for justice, you're looking to use the incident for your own agenda.

So, lets all shut the fuck up and wait for the proper authorities to make the decision.

[Dr.Bobby]

Ben, at the expense of repeating myself, I'd ask you why you're siding with Zimmerman here and what you think that says about yourself.

Although race is certainly part of the issue, it seems to be more so for some than others. Perhaps that is the defining part of their identification with and determination of the course of sad events.

The real issue for me is the law that allowed this to happen in the first place, and what now needs to be done to prevent a similar tragedy. Sadly, the racial context serves as yet another reminder that we have a long ways to go here in addressing issues of race.

[TigerTank77]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Ben, at the expense of repeating myself, I'd ask you why you're siding with Zimmerman here and what you think that says about yourself.

It says that I don't jump to conclusions about things I haven't researched myself, because "I saw it on the news so it must be true."

Also, if you're thinking about trying to paint me as a racist because I didn't automatically think Zimmerman was guilty, we will have a problem.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

Although race is certainly part of the issue, it seems to be more so for some than others. Perhaps that is the defining part of their identification with and determination of the course of sad events.

Race is part of the issue because everyone seems to want it to be one. In the beginning everyone was blaming it on racist white people. Now we know that race didn't really come into play, despite people still trying to make it a racial issue. They are selling t-shirts with Zimmerman's face, with the words "Pussy ass cracka" on it, for god's sake.

Originally Posted by Dr.Bobby

The real issue for me is the law that allowed this to happen in the first place, and what now needs to be done to prevent a similar tragedy. Sadly, the racial context serves as yet another reminder that we have a long ways to go here in addressing issues of race.

The law didn't allow it to happen, and is pretty much irrelevant. You can argue about it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that even if there wasn't a stand your ground law, Zimmerman was still getting his skull bashed in. Which is illegal.

Also, the reason we have a long ways to go with addressing race, is that only one side of the issue gets addressed. I guarantee you, if Trayvon had beaten Zimmerman to death, or if Trayvon was white, there wouldn't even be a fourth as much coverage about it as there is right now.

You're right, it shouldn't be that way. But you are taking it up with the wrong people.

[thebigmole]

Ben I see what you are saying but here's they way I see. Both Zimmerman and Trayvon ultimately reacted out of fear. Trayvon out of fear of being followed, and Zimmerman out of fear of being beaten worse. However if Zimmerman had NEVER followed Trayvon to begin with Trayvon would not have had a reason to be scared and the fight and shooting never would have happened. The thing is Zimmerman wasn't in the wrong to call Trayvon in, he matched the description of someone who had been burgling the neighborhood recently. But getting out of his car to follow Trayvon is where he crossed the line. And honestly it was stupid, and there's no possible reason for him doing it, and those actions lead to Trayvon's death. So while Zimmerman is probably not guilty of murder, his actions still lead to this boy's death. He does hold responsibility.