or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 161

post #2401 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

If I follow you around and start threaten you , the fact you will react with force to defend yourself would allow me to shoot you..
Am I the only one to see a flaw in that legal thinking/??

Well not exactly. I would have to have a reasonable (the reasonableness determined by the jury) belief that I was in immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury. You would have to actually attack me in a manner that put me in serious danger. If I said I was going to kick your ass and you pulled a knife on me (or, say, slammed my head repeatedly into the concrete) then I would have the right to defend myself.
post #2402 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

Well not exactly. I would have to have a reasonable (the reasonableness determined by the jury) belief that I was in immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury. You would have to actually attack me in a manner that put me in serious danger. If I said I was going to kick your ass and you pulled a knife on me (or, say, slammed my head repeatedly into the concrete) then I would have the right to defend myself.

Zimmerman is a mountain of a man and the kid not exactly a beast..

I struggle to think how Zimmerman's life was in danger...

He could easily have fought him off if he wanted to...

You never had a punch-up and feel to the ground and get a few scratches..

If the kid was armed , it would have a kettle of fish..

The fact he has been charged proved the establishment is very worried by that particular case.
post #2403 of 6250
Zimmerman is 5'9" I think. Martin was 6'2". Not that any of that matters if Martin was on top of him slamming his head into the ground.
post #2404 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post

It's a terrible law - but it's the law. In essence, it gives anyone there with a CCW the right to go look for people to shoot dead. You're allowed to go around and provoke a fight knowing that you have a deadly weapon and that if you're successful in getting the reaction you should expect, you have the license to draw and kill, with the law behind you, the NRA and millions of dollars flowing to your defense fund if/when you go to trial. Nice job lawmakers thumbs-up.gif

Exactly!
post #2405 of 6250
Right. Only in America can you "provoke" someone by walking around in your own neighborhood, then kill them when all they did was try to kill you.

Next thing you know women who dress provocatively will think they can shoot men who try to rape them!
post #2406 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post

It's a terrible law - but it's the law. In essence, it gives anyone there with a CCW the right to go look for people to shoot dead. You're allowed to go around and provoke a fight knowing that you have a deadly weapon and that if you're successful in getting the reaction you should expect, you have the license to draw and kill, with the law behind you, the NRA and millions of dollars flowing to your defense fund if/when you go to trial. Nice job lawmakers thumbs-up.gif

Following someone around a neighborhood that has had break-ins is "provoking"?

Whats a matter Greg? Events not adhering closely enough to the template for you?
post #2407 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post

It's a terrible law - but it's the law. In essence, it gives anyone there with a CCW the right to go look for people to shoot dead. You're allowed to go around and provoke a fight knowing that you have a deadly weapon and that if you're successful in getting the reaction you should expect, you have the license to draw and kill, with the law behind you, the NRA and millions of dollars flowing to your defense fund if/when you go to trial. Nice job lawmakers thumbs-up.gif
zimmerman can't fight and was beat up by a 17 year old kid he wanted to pick a fight with?eh.gif
post #2408 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Right. Only in America can you "provoke" someone by walking around in your own neighborhood, then kill them when all they did was try to kill you.
Next thing you know women who dress provocatively will think they can shoot men who try to rape them!

so walking around is the same as following?
post #2409 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

Zimmerman is a mountain of a man and the kid not exactly a beast..
I struggle to think how Zimmerman's life was in danger...
He could easily have fought him off if he wanted to...
You never had a punch-up and feel to the ground and get a few scratches..
If the kid was armed , it would have a kettle of fish..
The fact he has been charged proved the establishment is very worried by that particular case.

clearly not, he is one of those pussies that probably never bothered to learn to learn any type of unarmed SD and is a big man with gun.
post #2410 of 6250
I wonder which side some of you would have supported if it was a BLACK vigilante hunting a WHITE kid with a hoodie.
post #2411 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraiche View Post

I wonder which side some of you would have supported if it was a BLACK vigilante hunting a WHITE kid with a hoodie.

Why not make it the inverse of the current scenario, i.e. BLACK guy shooting an HISPANIC kid in a hoodie?
post #2412 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Why not make it the inverse of the current scenario, i.e. BLACK guy shooting an HISPANIC kid in a hoodie?

Because I'd like to see if race would matter in an extreme case. Would someone switch sides simply because of race.

I personally find the hunter in this case to always to be at fault since he made the decision to put himself in danger in order to be in the position to claim "self-defense".
Edited by Fraiche - 5/19/12 at 2:54pm
post #2413 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraiche View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Why not make it the inverse of the current scenario, i.e. BLACK guy shooting an HISPANIC kid in a hoodie?

Because I'd like to see what if race would matter in an extreme case. Would someone switch sides simply because of race.

I personally find the hunter in this case to always to be at fault since he made the decision to put himself in danger in order to be in the position to claim "self-defense".

So it's not extreme if the dead guy is HISPANIC? confused.gif
post #2414 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

So it's not extreme if the dead guy is HISPANIC? confused.gif

Unfortunately, not in the USA, no. In Mexico, yes.

Love this country, but there are some...legacy beliefs that are still in place.
post #2415 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraiche View Post

I wonder which side some of you would have supported if it was a BLACK vigilante hunting a WHITE kid with a hoodie.

Funny, I feel that way about the Trayvon supporters.

For the record, I know that nobody wants to go back and read this whole thread, but I have shifted my position on this as the evidence came in. I would say the evidence is overwhelming in support of Zimmerman's self-defense claim. I don't call myself a liberal, but I'm sure I'm considered one on the CE. I have no ideological reason to join Team Zimmerman, other than a belief in the rule of law and presumption of innocence.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon