Whats your opinion on the florida shooting?

[tattedupboy]

Rifleshooter474,

Stop reading the paper, this was a 17 yr old 6'2 180 lb kid. Google his name and look at the updated photos, not the 13 yr old pictures the press has posted.

What does his size have to do with anything? And as for this new piece of information that Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he fired, is that also from this same liberal media that you guys distrust so much?

 

[Bttbbob]

What does his size have to do with anything? And as for this new piece of information that Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he fired, is that also from this same liberal media that you guys distrust so much?

Tattedupboy, Please read the thread, I was answering Rifleshooter474 in line 117 where he said he didn't believe that "That small boy attacked Zimmerman."

Size does matter in disparity of force my friend.

 

[jhodge83]

You say "says he's had domestic violence charges filed against him" the article you linked says "A woman accused the man who fatally shot Trayvon Martin of domestic violence ............ In 2005, a woman filed a petition for an injunction against Zimmerman, claiming that he came to her house and became violent when she told him to leave, Link Removed. Zimmerman, 21 at the time, filed a petition of his own in response."

Why the untruth in your post? Alligations in a civil injunction are far from a crimal complaint with charges. And being arrested ? Is everyone arrested guilty? The charges it happens were dropped ...... based on the account leading up to the arrest can you say overzealous Officer? We don't know and it's only convictions that count in this country last I knew.

well i know that if i were walking down the street and minding my own business, i wouldnt be getting arrested for assaulting a police officer. this guy wanted to be a cop and took it into his own hands. the article also read that the HOA person acknowledge how many time he's "helped solve a lot of crimes". that's the police's job. his job as a watch member is that...to watch and report. that's it. this is further supported by the fact that the dispatcher told him not to pursue the kid. he intentionally put himself into that situation.

 

[georgie4637]

cop wanna bee

Ok neiborhood watch not neiborhood follow, grab or detain hAD IT BEEN A REAL BAD GUY HE WOULD HAVE FOUND HIMSELF IN TROUBLE AND HIS WEAPON TOOK

 

[SGB]

well i know that if i were walking down the street and minding my own business, i wouldnt be getting arrested for assaulting a police officer. this guy wanted to be a cop and took it into his own hands. the article also read that the HOA person acknowledge how many time he's "helped solve a lot of crimes". that's the police's job. his job as a watch member is that...to watch and report. that's it. this is further supported by the fact that the dispatcher told him not to pursue the kid. he intentionally put himself into that situation.

Is this supposed to be some sort of rebuttal? Are you inferring that being accused or arrested means your guilty? Do you realize how many times the "the fact that the dispatcher told him not to pursue the kid" has been shown to be untrue and posted in this thread?

I'm sorry but I don't see the point to your post.

 

[jhodge83]

Is this supposed to be some sort of rebuttal? Are you inferring that being accused or arrested means your guilty? Do you realize how many times the "the fact that the dispatcher told him not to pursue the kid" has been shown to be untrue and posted in this thread?

I'm sorry but I don't see the point to your post.

the point is he overstepped. period. he put himself into the situation. whether it had been this kid or a legitimate burglar.

 

[SGB]

the point is he overstepped. period. he put himself into the situation. whether it had been this kid or a legitimate burglar.

You claim this, but you show nothing factual in support of it. Just the opposite, you've repeated what we know to not be true. Zimmerman has yet to be shown to have broken any law.

 

[Blogengeezer]

Why isn't Every teen killing in LA CAL, (many Every night) on the front page of Every news media across the nation? What exactly is causing This particular case to be 'Tried' In The Media'? 'Tried' on every internet site'? 'Tried' hundreds of times daily, all across the USA? I smell an AGENDA brewing... I don't believe that I am the only one.

This is leading up to something. Be Vigilant, 'the media' does not bark incessantly about nothing in particular, it has an Agenda. I don't believe we will have to wait long to realize what some 'Faction', most likely International complicit with internal US Politics, has in store...for the USA and it's hundreds of Millions of Law Abiding Citizens. Something, some 'LAW' that will bring 'Change' of historic proportions. With This president so 'Executive Order' happy,These two young men, are but pawns in a deadly and Controlling game...... for the Freedom of the USA.

 

[averagejoe]

I still can't get past the fact that Zimmerman was the aggresor in this case. Just because he saw someone walking down the side walk that he didn't know doesn't give him the right to confront him the way he did. Yes I know it was a private gated community but that doesn't mean he knew everyone in that communtiy or their visiting guests or family. He was asked by the dispatcher not to follow the kid and let the law take care of it. He chose to ignore this and take matters in his own hands. Whether he is guilty of murder or not will probably never be able to be proven because of the gross mishandling of this case by the police department. Never the less this idiot has done more damage to our conceal carry rights than any liberal gun hater could ever hope to do.
Just because you have a conceal carry permit does not give someone the license to go out and be a wanna be Wyat Earp. Your first line of defense is always and always will be don't put yourself in harms way. He clearly broke this first rule of self defense period.IMHO

 

[BluesStringer]

I still can't get past the fact that Zimmerman was the aggresor in this case. .... doesn't give him the right to confront him the way he did. .....He was asked by the dispatcher not to follow the kid and let the law take care of it. He chose to ignore this and take matters in his own hands. ....Never the less this idiot has done more damage to our conceal carry rights than any liberal gun hater could ever hope to do.
....does not give someone the license to go out and be a wanna be Wyat Earp.

You really need to read some of the links posted in this thread, specifically the ones posted by SGB. Read the reports by the LEOs that were first on the scene. There is absolutely no evidence, other than agenda-driven media reports, which supports the fantasies I quoted above. None whatsoever.

Blues

 

[averagejoe]

Ok SGB,
I've gotten thru about half of the post and it's late and I have to work tomorrow but I have yet to see anything that changes my opinion. He may or may not be guilty of murder that's not for me to decide thank God. But he was clearly the aggressor by getting out of his vehicle and confronting this kid. There is no law against waling down a damn sidewalk and just because Zimmerman was on a neighborhood watch doesn't give him the right to decide whether this kid belonged there or not. It's quite clear that his kid had every ight to be where he was and if were me and this idiot approached me like that I would have probably reacted with a big F off it's non of his business what I'm doing or where I'm going. As a neighborhood watch volunteer his dutry was to call it in nothing more so yes that puts him clearly in trhe wrong in My opinion. Zimmerman is an idiot and has NO business carry a GUN of any kind.

 

[Oldgrunt]

I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but I can't help but feel that if this were a Black man shooting an unarmed White teenager under the exact same circumstances, that Black man would have been arrested on the spot.

Hey tats: I am not going to flame you because you are possibly right, who knows? There are several things wrong with this story. First, Deputy Dawg was just on Neighborhood Watch. He should have been doing just that, watching. If he had a problem, he should have called the police. I feel he was wrong in approaching the kid as he did and maybe scared the kid as much as he was apparently scared too. Can't blame the kid if he felt he was defending himself from some wierdo. As unfortunate as this has been, it should be handled through the law and the shooter prosecuted if it is found he was wrong. I have seen a change in attitude in the black city manager, or whatever title he has, from his original stance of defending the police. I don't know if he felt pressured by the commotion in the black community or intimidated by the black rabble rousers who always jump into any situation where they can get press. I am not trying to be racist by saying that but, you will have to admit, Al never misses an opportunity to stir the pot. We have had a black teenager kill a white man simply because he needed gas money. Another black teenager got into a gunfight with police, wounded one officer before he, himself, was wounded. There was never any civil unrest over these situations here. Why so much now in Florida and with the DOJ? Is there anything racial in that? Come on, you know as well as I do that this situation is being played up but the eventual outcome may be someone else getting hurt because of a lot of hotheads. I can see racism being intentionally being played up and threats being made by Black Panthers, Muslims (home grown) and others which are deliberately trying to seemingly instigate open race warfare. I don't think any of us want that and it is time for cooler heads to prevail. It can start with you and me, then others can join in and stop all this stuff.

 

[Dale64]

The Brady Bunch has already started using him as the poster child for why we should not be allowed to carry guns.

http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/MessageViewer/?em_id=46521.0&pgwrap=n

 

[S&W645]

So as the kid can't defend himself as he's dead, I'll play devil's advocate.
Zimmerman can be lying in his account. He could very easily have caused the injury he received.
1. Zimmerman approaches Martin asking what he's doing there.
2. Martin says it's none of your business.
3 Zimmerman grabs Martin and says it is my business and you'll answer me.
4. Martin swings to get free and hits Zimmerman in the nose while yelling help. Martin knows of the crime in the area and fears Zimmerman.
5. Zimmerman, angered, grabs Martin tighter.
6. Martin and Zimmerman struggle and Zimmerman goes down on his back.
7. Zimmerman shoots Martin who is above him.
8. Martin falls face down, dead.

Now Zimmerman is the only one alive to tell what happened. The witness saw them struggling but did that witness see what lead up to the struggle. Who is the aggressor and who isn't? Martin had every right to stand his ground. Zimmerman did too. Phone call told him that the police did not need him to do that as far as following Martin. A timeline of Zimmerman's phone call, Martin's girlfriend's phone call, plus Martin's phone records would show how much time had elapsed between when Zimmerman was told not needed to follow and when Martin's phone went dead. If there is a big gap in Zimmerman and PD time and when Martin's phone goes dead time, then next you need to know how far Zimmerman was from his truck. Returning the gun to Zimmerman quickly before all evidence was in was stupidity on the police's part. Was Zimmerman's shirt seized as evidence? Were Martin's clothes seized?

And sad to say SGB, nothing says it could not have happened that way with what is out in public right now.

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27

And.

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27.

 

[Wyldekard]

The Charleston Examiner link: Link Removed that claims the kid was beating on Zimmerman points to a TV station video: Link Removed that says the Sanford police on March 16th spoke exclusively to the Orlando Sentinel:Orlando news, information, weather, hurricane coverage, sports, entertainment, restaurants, real estate, jobs, business, classifieds - OrlandoSentinel.com and provided new details including witnesses who say the kid was beating up Zimmerman. I can't find this story in the Sentinel website. Can anyone provide a link to this story in the Orlando Sentinel website?

 

[SGB]

So as the kid can't defend himself as he's dead, I'll play devil's advocate.
Zimmerman can be lying in his account. He could very easily have caused the injury he received.
1. Zimmerman approaches Martin asking what he's doing there.
2. Martin says it's none of your business.
3 Zimmerman grabs Martin and says it is my business and you'll answer me.
4. Martin swings to get free and hits Zimmerman in the nose while yelling help. Martin knows of the crime in the area and fears Zimmerman.
5. Zimmerman, angered, grabs Martin tighter.
6. Martin and Zimmerman struggle and Zimmerman goes down on his back.
7. Zimmerman shoots Martin who is above him.
8. Martin falls face down, dead.

Now Zimmerman is the only one alive to tell what happened. The witness saw them struggling but did that witness see what lead up to the struggle. Who is the aggressor and who isn't? Martin had every right to stand his ground. Zimmerman did too. Phone call told him that the police did not need him to do that as far as following Martin. A timeline of Zimmerman's phone call, Martin's girlfriend's phone call, plus Martin's phone records would show how much time had elapsed between when Zimmerman was told not needed to follow and when Martin's phone went dead. If there is a big gap in Zimmerman and PD time and when Martin's phone goes dead time, then next you need to know how far Zimmerman was from his truck. Returning the gun to Zimmerman quickly before all evidence was in was stupidity on the police's part. Was Zimmerman's shirt seized as evidence? Were Martin's clothes seized?

And sad to say SGB, nothing says it could not have happened that way with what is out in public right now.



And.

Well only one flaw ............ you have nothing to support any of it. That's why it's called conjecture and is worth less than the space it's printed on.

 

[SGB]

Ok SGB,
I've gotten thru about half of the post and it's late and I have to work tomorrow but I have yet to see anything that changes my opinion. He may or may not be guilty of murder that's not for me to decide thank God. But he was clearly the aggressor by getting out of his vehicle and confronting this kid. There is no law against waling down a damn sidewalk and just because Zimmerman was on a neighborhood watch doesn't give him the right to decide whether this kid belonged there or not. It's quite clear that his kid had every ight to be where he was and if were me and this idiot approached me like that I would have probably reacted with a big F off it's non of his business what I'm doing or where I'm going. As a neighborhood watch volunteer his dutry was to call it in nothing more so yes that puts him clearly in trhe wrong in My opinion. Zimmerman is an idiot and has NO business carry a GUN of any kind.

"Even If" your version were the case please tell me what law Zimmerman would have broken by approaching anyone and asking questions? You can't, because there aren't any.

Which begs to ask, "How is Zimmerman "the agressor" ? People keep saying it, but no one has shown any proof of it. Do you have some verifiable information that lends credance to that claim?

And what if I told you that based on your assertion that you would respond with an aggressive emotional vulgarity to a stranger approaching you and asking a question that you sir are not emotionally stable enough to carry a firearm?

So much the trap of accepting conjecture and involving emotion when attempting to sort fact to render an INFORMED opinion.

 

[Woody1960]

The Brady Bunch has already started using him as the poster child for why we should not be allowed to carry guns.

http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/MessageViewer/?em_id=46521.0&pgwrap=n

I guess they shoudnt let us have gasoline either then, because of the 2, 16 yo black teens that poured gas on the 13 yo white kid and lit him on fire on his front pourch.{Cause he was white**. O wait,that didnt make the national news, did it?

 

[BluesStringer]

I had not heard of this story before seeing this thread a couple or three days ago. In fact, when I first saw it, I passed on reading the whole thread, as the story seemed rather run-of-the-mill to me. Then I started hearing the news reports and talk-radio segments and came back to read the thread. I still say it should be a run-of-the-mill story, hardly worth Sharpton getting involved, or giant protests happening in NYC over a shooting (even a questionable one) in Sanford, FL.

My gut instinct was that it was not a good shoot, but I reserved comment to see how actual facts would be treated. At this point, thanks in large part to SGB and Wyldekard's last post, I wouldn't trust a media reporter's rendition of events if their tongue came notarized! And that's the problem with a plethora of posts here on the subject, they have failed to scrutinize the sources feeding their misinformed opinions, instead simply parroting them over and over again.

Wyldekard's links include a short interview with a witness to the fight. The witness corroborates Zimmerman's version of events to the letter, even acknowledging that Zimmerman called to him for help while he was on his back in the grass getting pummeled by Martin. The fight lasted long enough that the witness said he "went back inside" to call 911, implying that he was viewing the altercation from just feet away on his porch. He went on to say that as he was on the phone with 911, he went upstairs and heard the single gunshot on his way to a window that the reporter directed his cameraman to pan up to, which was directly above where the fight happened. This witness was very close to the action and puts Zimmerman on the bottom, and even used the words, "...getting beaten up" by Martin. This interview was done later in the afternoon of the early-morning incident. The events were still very fresh in the witnesses' mind.

That witness account would probably be enough for me, but there's more. Another of Wyldekard's links, in fact two of them, point to reports that say the PD played the 911 tape for Martin's father that we've all heard of someone crying out for help before the gunshot could be heard, and Martin's father said that wasn't Trayvon's voice! This corroborates the above-mentioned witness account of Zimmerman yelling for help.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman pursued or initiated the confrontation with Martin. The 911 operator told him they didn't need him to follow him, and he said "OK." A second later he told the operator that Martin was coming towards him.

The manipulation of Martin's character by the media is stunning. The pictures being used of him make him out to be a harmless little cherub. The media has repeated that he was a model student many times. The fact is though, he was a 6'-2" high school football player who was serving a 5-day suspension from school when the event happened. That doesn't make him a killer or a robber, but it certainly does call into question the squeaky-clean image the media has bestowed upon him posthumously. 5-day suspensions don't happen for an unexcused absence or something equally as trivial. They happen for pretty serious infractions of either school rules or the law, or both. Hopefully, someone will uncover what he did to earn that penalty and provide a more complete and accurate picture of who this young man was. Whatever, his suspension was the reason he was at his father's house on a school night, a long ways from home or his school.

Zimmerman sustained injuries to his face and the back of his head. The back of his sweater was wet and had grass cuttings all over it, according to multiple police reports from the first officers on the scene. The witness says he was "getting beaten up." I am uncomfortable with him shooting an unarmed teenager, but then again, if he felt he was getting ready to lose consciousness, and perceived the violence coming from Martin was great enough to be a threat to his life, he was justified in shooting. Pinned on my back, taking a "beating" from anyone, a 17-year-old or otherwise, I may well have done the same thing, and I'd venture to say that many of the folks trashing Zimmerman, if they actually scrutinized the available facts, and ignored all the news and talk-radio pontifications, would come to the same conclusion. Whether or not that's true though, it is real easy to spot those who have attempted to scrutinize the available facts, and those who haven't. You make yourself look silly and easily-led by an agenda-driven media when you join the latter group. I'd suggest you read before you opine on this subject.

Blues

 

[S&W645]

Well only one flaw ............ you have nothing to support any of it. That's why it's called conjecture and is worth less than the space it's printed on.

And all you have is one side of the story as Martin is dead. Who is to say that Zimmerman is not lying to coverup what really happened to start with? Did the "witness" see it from the start? If not, then nothing that witness says can clear Zimmerman. Because the facts are that there was a fight with both people having the right to stand their ground. Until there is a complete forensics report, which I doubt if the evidence was preserved due to the PD giving the gun back, you only have Zimmerman's side of the story. But I do agree, Al and Jesse should keep their noses out of it. A thorough investigation will now be done after the fact is the only good thing to come out of this story. The Sanford PD botched it.