General Discussion

Starry Messenger

(32,342 posts)

48. k&r

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 09:01 PM

Apr 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

180 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The central point about Trayvon Martin-completely missed by the Zimmerman defenders all along [View all] kpete Apr 2012 OP

The main point all along. No to two sets of laws. SYG is for victims, not stalkers! freshwest Apr 2012 #1

CORRECT Skittles Apr 2012 #2

Exactly. That and there should have been an investigation from the get-go Iris Apr 2012 #3

and if Zimmerman was a black man "standing his ground" ... zbdent Apr 2012 #121

You KNOW he would have been arrested on the spot. Iris Apr 2012 #123

BAM!! Yes, that's is exactly what they seem intent on ignoring. I was always taught to do Ecumenist Apr 2012 #4

+1 AnotherDreamWeaver Apr 2012 #6

I have never understood nevergiveup Apr 2012 #5

Zimmerman was much larger 5' 10" and 170# vs 6' 3" and 160#, I don't think so. Also 10 years older doc03 Apr 2012 #9

6'3''? marshall gaines Apr 2012 #28

I hate that meme Iris Apr 2012 #61

Martin's nickname was Slimm. nt Daalalou Apr 2012 #64

Says it all. Iris Apr 2012 #67

So tell us what you think, if you dare. nm rhett o rick Apr 2012 #85

10 Years older? brush Apr 2012 #108

So the gun wasn't an equalizer after all ..... marble falls Apr 2012 #115

I Don't Get It DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2012 #120

Is there any evidence that proves Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon? doc03 Apr 2012 #7

Only all of it Vincardog Apr 2012 #10

Yes Cali_Democrat Apr 2012 #11

No the dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that" and doc03 Apr 2012 #13

LOL!!! Cali_Democrat Apr 2012 #15

What about the girlfriend? n/t doc03 Apr 2012 #18

The girlfriend said Trayvon told her he was being followed by some strange guy Cali_Democrat Apr 2012 #22

And where was Zimmerman after his 911 call? Daalalou Apr 2012 #63

Are you serious? You can hear his laboured breathing AFTER he's told that... But of Ecumenist Apr 2012 #17

But the prosecutors said according to their evidence he continued to follow Trayvon Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #21

Not always. "ok" can mean "I heard you", not "I will do what you say" uppityperson Apr 2012 #23

It can also be a polite way of saying, "Shut up. I've heard enough." JDPriestly Apr 2012 #164

Stalking brush Apr 2012 #109

I wish the dispatcher had been more authoritative but I think Zimmerman would .... marble falls Apr 2012 #116

911 dispatchers usually aren't cops Kennah Apr 2012 #166

Have you never known someone to say one thing and do another? whopis01 Apr 2012 #135

I don't think that it helps the argument much backtomn Apr 2012 #68

Amen n/t doc03 Apr 2012 #69

All of it? HarveyDarkey Apr 2012 #82

Gun brush Apr 2012 #110

But Martin wasn't doing anything illegal Blue_Tires Apr 2012 #114

teenager goes to the store for Skittles and iced tea and winds up dead Skittles Apr 2012 #158

You might want to correct your typo, tblue37 Apr 2012 #173

Zimmerman's own account whe he's on the phone with 911. He was told not to leave his car. He ignores DevonRex Apr 2012 #12

Zimmerman said OK, in my understanding of English that meant he agreed with the doc03 Apr 2012 #16

You have an interesting interpretation... Leftist Agitator Apr 2012 #24

Just because he told the dispatcher "ok" do you really think he stopped? Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #26

"OK" doesn't always mean "I will follow your directions" uppityperson Apr 2012 #29

Your interp may have flown.... AlbertCat Apr 2012 #42

It shows he's a mf-ing liar since he did follow. Then DevonRex Apr 2012 #77

You're reaching pokerfan Apr 2012 #81

You are quite...... A wise Man Apr 2012 #111

Then it would appear your understanding of English is somewhat lacking... LanternWaste Apr 2012 #159

The dispatcher told him that he did not need to follow, but backtomn Apr 2012 #70

Really? wow. eom Ecumenist Apr 2012 #14

I am not defending either one of them. When this case was brought to light we only heard doc03 Apr 2012 #30

If he headed back to his car then how on Earth did they end up fighting so far from the car? Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #33

"I am not defending either one of them." Occulus Apr 2012 #62

Trayvon Martin was dead, so pray tell how did he ever hear "his side"? obamanut2012 Apr 2012 #66

Listen to Zimmerman's first 911 call a couple of more times. JDPriestly Apr 2012 #101

yes, why would you defend Martin? CreekDog Apr 2012 #125

what???? marshall gaines Apr 2012 #27

He said no such thing, the dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that" and Zimmerman said "OK"'. doc03 Apr 2012 #36

You still have not answered everyones other points Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #39

sickened marshall gaines Apr 2012 #51

Yes he chased the kid through a few yards and shot him in the back. Rex Apr 2012 #32

Oh now he shot him in the back, that's news n/t doc03 Apr 2012 #37

Ok abelenkpe Apr 2012 #44

no!!!! marshall gaines Apr 2012 #52

do you truly believe pretending you have a point will actually make it so? fascisthunter Apr 2012 #57

Here abelenkpe Apr 2012 #43

What he says here suggests he still plans on following Trayvon Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #47

That just occurred to me, too. LAGC Apr 2012 #118

He also told the police to call him when they got to the neighborhood. nclib Apr 2012 #50

Yea Zimmerman answered yes to "Are you following him?" You conveniently leave doc03 Apr 2012 #53

You know that "then we find out" isnt proof? You should supply links rhett o rick Apr 2012 #87

Interesting how you convienently ignore so much of the story to make Zimmerman appear innocent. SmellyFeet Apr 2012 #117

Absolutely pitiful! EOTE Apr 2012 #163

excellent marshall gaines Apr 2012 #54

lol.... yuh fascisthunter Apr 2012 #56

But you have to get into the mind of a Zimmerman defender. Cali_Democrat Apr 2012 #8

Yep. Black folks are allowed to stand up for themselves and get all uppity, doncha know. Ecumenist Apr 2012 #19

Apparently a 27 year old with a history of violence and disregarding the law Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #38

excellent! Carolina Apr 2012 #49

Thanks Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #79

Dude! Cosmocat Apr 2012 #104

Quixote1818 and Carolina brush Apr 2012 #112

This message was self-deleted by its author brush Apr 2012 #113

Quixote1818 kpete Apr 2012 #170

"No one." Absolutely. right. on. patrice Apr 2012 #20

+1 99 Percent Sure Apr 2012 #25

K&R n/t myrna minx Apr 2012 #31

and another. (nt) enough Apr 2012 #34

I have to disagree stupidicus Apr 2012 #35

I always want to believe that I can not longer be surprised Cosmocat Apr 2012 #105

I'll assume you meant stupidicus Apr 2012 #138

Yeah Cosmocat Apr 2012 #179

Agreed wholeheartedly relayerbob Apr 2012 #40

It's called subject Apr 2012 #41

No, wait -- you only get to stand your ground if you have a gun in your hand! pnwmom Apr 2012 #45

No doubt that "Zimmerman's actions launched the whole sequence of events." Vattel Apr 2012 #46

All Zimmerman had to do was stay in his SUV and no one would have died. A Simple Game Apr 2012 #60

Zimmy got a loaded gun shimonitanegi Apr 2012 #71

k&r Starry Messenger Apr 2012 #48

One thing obvious here if most of you all were called for jury duty on this doc03 Apr 2012 #55

really... it took a thread to make you feel that way?! fascisthunter Apr 2012 #58

I hope marshall gaines Apr 2012 #59

We're being unfair? caseymoz Apr 2012 #74

Seeing as the moron stalked and executed a kid minding his own business Cosmocat Apr 2012 #106

This cold-blooded murder could have been prevented... liberalmuse Apr 2012 #65

Let's face it, SYG is an Old West throwback. caseymoz Apr 2012 #72

Yes. It's the crux of the whole "SYG" problem. DirkGently Apr 2012 #73

Sounds like subject Apr 2012 #76

No reason it couldn't work that way. Provoke a confrontation. Get response. Fire. (nt) DirkGently Apr 2012 #78

Someone here mentioned it, and I think it is at the heart Cosmocat Apr 2012 #107

Thus the emphasis on "who" has a weapon, vs. what, where, how, etc. DirkGently Apr 2012 #172

kpete, I'm saddened that someone of your stature here Skip Intro Apr 2012 #75

Take away the death and the fight and lets just look at how it all started Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #88

How is following someone down a street different than tapping your phone sans warrant?!? Seriously?? X_Digger Apr 2012 #90

I agree it's not against the law to follow someone Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #92

It's morally reprehensible to profile, yes. X_Digger Apr 2012 #94

You are right that it shouldn't be put on par with tapping your neighbor's phone. Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #96

The jury will have to decide whether following Trayvon was an aggressive JDPriestly Apr 2012 #102

There is generally nothing illegal about following and verbally confronting a person. X_Digger Apr 2012 #124

It might or might not be illegal depending on the circumstances. JDPriestly Apr 2012 #161

What would be the purported charge (for following and confronting)? X_Digger Apr 2012 #162

There would not be any charge if there had not been a fight, an assault or in this case, a killing. JDPriestly Apr 2012 #176

How can calling people that are defending Zimmerman's behavior "Zimmerman defenders" rhett o rick Apr 2012 #89

Defend people who stalk, pursue and gun down unarmed teenagers...get called out Cali_Democrat Apr 2012 #91

Indeed. And, chervilant Apr 2012 #139

Being stalked and pursued The Wizard Apr 2012 #80

Psst. Stand your ground only applies to guns. The gun has a right to stand its ground McCamy Taylor Apr 2012 #83

Actually, you're right. If he broke Zimmerman's neck no one would claim SYG. Kablooie Apr 2012 #100

A person generally doesn't legally have the right to take a swing at someone following them, no. X_Digger Apr 2012 #84

Stand your ground does give you the right to swing at someone you think is a threat Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #93

Only what a reasonable person would consider a threat. X_Digger Apr 2012 #95

I would think that would depend on the perception of the person who is being followed Quixote1818 Apr 2012 #97

I'm talking about the legal standard.. X_Digger Apr 2012 #98

What if Trayvon had been a female walking alone at night and followed and approached polly7 Apr 2012 #99

Had Zimmerman grabbed her, yes. That would be justified. X_Digger Apr 2012 #128

Really?? polly7 Apr 2012 #134

You being in terror is not justification, legally, no. X_Digger Apr 2012 #137

Why are you making shit up that didn't happen? nt. polly7 Apr 2012 #140

We're already off in hypothetical land (your post #99) X_Digger Apr 2012 #141

My hypothetical didn't descend into yuk-yuk land. nt. polly7 Apr 2012 #144

No, you wanted to spin a hypothetical that works for you. X_Digger Apr 2012 #146

Do you really believe anyone terrified by a stalking, threatening nutcase with a gun would polly7 Apr 2012 #148

Now you add 'threatening with a gun'.. don't move those goalposts. X_Digger Apr 2012 #149

No, if you're going to use force to defend yourself, all you really have to know at the polly7 Apr 2012 #152

You're assuming the gun was out at the time? That doesn't fit any narrative presented so far. X_Digger Apr 2012 #153

This message was self-deleted by its author polly7 Apr 2012 #171

Believe it or not, as humans, we are expected SATIRical Apr 2012 #165

What?!? chervilant Apr 2012 #142

PS chervilant Apr 2012 #143

If you don't want to understand self-defense justification, feel free to ignore. X_Digger Apr 2012 #147

How Did Martin Know It Wasn't A Ped/Rapist Following Him In The Night? DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2012 #122

He didn't. But until Zimmerman did something actually illegal, it doesn't rise to the legal standard X_Digger Apr 2012 #126

We Don't Know What Happened After From The Point Zimmerman Began Stalking Martin DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2012 #130

That's my guess as well (tried to detain Martin). X_Digger Apr 2012 #131

One Scenario Is Zimmerman Tried To Stop Martin But Martin Kept On Walking DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2012 #132

In that scenario, force would be justified, yes. X_Digger Apr 2012 #133

What about the next person Zimmerman confronts MattBaggins Apr 2012 #150

Not legally, no. X_Digger Apr 2012 #151

How about.... Mattylock Apr 2012 #154

If he were brandishing it, that would be a forcible felony. (and justification for deadly force) X_Digger Apr 2012 #155

I would bet Mattylock Apr 2012 #156

Possibly, but knowing someone is armed also doesn't make the apprehension 'reasonable'. X_Digger Apr 2012 #157

Has anyone indicated it was on his hip? SATIRical Apr 2012 #167

apparently it was in an inside-the-pants waist holster TorchTheWitch Apr 2012 #175

That would depend. JDPriestly Apr 2012 #168

It's the same 'reasonable man' test as before. X_Digger Apr 2012 #169

But in a case like this one in which the facts are uncertain and JDPriestly Apr 2012 #174

Most 'uncertain' cases do in fact go to a jury (or at least a trial).. X_Digger Apr 2012 #180

That's been my take all along ecstatic Apr 2012 #86

I hope this is pounded into the jury onlyadream Apr 2012 #103

Not according to these attorneys who appeared on NPR. sinkingfeeling Apr 2012 #119

And as far as Zimmerman's "wounds". . annabanana Apr 2012 #127

If some creep had polly7 Apr 2012 #129

"I believe that following someone is NOT standing your ground. It is invading theirs." ProfessionalLeftist Apr 2012 #136

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Apr 2012 #145

Brainwashed paradigm: Zimmerman defenders vs. all others just1voice Apr 2012 #160

zimmerman will bond out and there will NEVER be a trial solarman350 Apr 2012 #177

Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence | CSPAN (Video) sfpcjock Apr 2012 #178