HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Here is what I Don't get ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:34 AM

Here is what I Don't get in the Martin fiasco

Two shots were fired, with a bit of elapsed time. If the first shot hit, why a second? Even if Zimermann feared for his life he wounded Martin, why shoot again?

I know why, what I can"t figure is how the cops thought it could be swept under the rug.

13 replies, 1533 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply Here is what I Don't get in the Martin fiasco (Original post)
rufus dog Mar 2012 OP
grasswire Mar 2012 #1
Cali_Democrat Mar 2012 #3
LisaL Mar 2012 #12
X_Digger Mar 2012 #13
arthritisR_US Mar 2012 #2
bobbyblack Mar 2012 #4
Kennah Mar 2012 #5
Mariana Mar 2012 #7
Kennah Mar 2012 #8
FarPoint Mar 2012 #6
Kennah Mar 2012 #9
slackmaster Mar 2012 #10
LisaL Mar 2012 #11

Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:38 AM

1. two??

I hadn't heard this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:41 AM

3. There are conflicting reports

Some sources say one shot while some witnesses other sources say multiple shots were fired. In one of the 911 calls I heard, it sure sounded like two shots. The Sanford police said one, however, they're clearly corrupt and cannot be trusted.

Time will tell hopefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:27 PM

12. Police say examination of the gun showed that only one shot was fired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:30 PM

13. The second 'shot' on that phone call sounded like..

..the poor woman was holding her breath for a second and let it out, almost like an 'Oof' right into the speaker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:39 AM

2. I think there was only one shot. If there

had been two, Rev Al would have been all over that, IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:41 AM

4. It's like the "STOP RESISTING" thing

They teach you in wannabe cop land that you shoot the victim to kill, then fire another shot down and away from them to say, assuming there are no witnesses of course, that you fired a warning shot first.
Picture Jimbo in South Park..."He's coming right at us"...it is the same line of reasoning...this Zimmerman guy has been wanting to shoot somebody for a long time, and was ready with his "warning shot story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbyblack (Reply #4)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 02:47 AM

5. Another who teaches shooting to kill is talking thru their ass

Shooting to stop is what's justifiable, when a shooting is justified.

That isn't the case in the Zimmerman case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #5)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 05:59 AM

7. I don't think anyone is ever formally taught that

in any classroom or training situation. They learn it from their fellow wanna-be's. The Zimmerman types, the ones who enjoy fantasizing about shooting "bad guys" with their guns, often like to talk amongst themselves about how best to do it, and how to avoid going to prison for it. I've heard it plenty of times. My dad and lots of his friends are like that, although not nearly as bad as Zimmerman - they don't make a hobby of going out looking for "bad guys" to shoot. Anyway, one of the things they all seem to agree on is that if you shoot a "bad guy", you should make sure to kill him, because a corpse can't testify against you in court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #7)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:22 PM

8. There is an equally dysfunctional counter argument: Those who say ...

... shoot the gun out of his hand, or shoot him in the shoulder, or fire a warning shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:35 AM

6. Another thought...

Why didnt the police take the gun into evidence? Even when a police officer fires his weapon and a shooting occurs, they must turn in the weapon...If I understand this correctly, Zimmerman has his gun and it never logged for ballistics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarPoint (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:25 PM

9. Unless he takes a file to it, they can still get the gun and test it

However, that isn't really significant. I don't believe there is much doubt that George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

If there were questions about the range at which Zimmerman fired, then they would be interested in GSR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:26 PM

10. Well, obviously it's a gigantic conspiracy to hide the second shot.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rufus dog (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:26 PM

11. There was only one shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread