Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 07:33:06 am
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Off-Topic Board
| | |-+  Trayvon Martin case
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 46 Print
Poll
Question: Do you think Zimmerman is
Guilty   -5 (25%)
Not Guilty   -2 (10%)
Self Defense   -1 (5%)
You don't know enough to decide   -12 (60%)
Total Voters: 17

Author Topic: Trayvon Martin case  (Read 148982 times)
Sunstroke
YJFF Member
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 22787

Stop your bloodclot cryin'!


Email
« Reply #315 on: April 17, 2012, 01:31:01 pm »

I'll go one further- the issue of "rights" flat irritates me. Why are they "rights?" Who made them "rights?" They're not God-given. God's stance on killing people or using violence seem pretty clear. Love thy neighbor.

...and the moment you bring "God" into a legal conversation, I have to throw out every one of your opinions presented in that legal conversation.

Logged

"There's no such thing as objectivity. We're all just interpreting signals from the universe and trying to make sense of them. Dim, shaky, weak, staticky little signals that only hint at the complexity of a universe that we cannot begin to comprehend."
~ Micah Leggat
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #316 on: April 17, 2012, 01:37:16 pm »

Apparently you must not believe me either, then, because the people who established the law are the ones I'm quoting.
The lawmakers who crafted the legislation in 2005 — former Sen. Durell Peaden and current state Rep. Dennis Baxley — said the law doesn’t need to be changed. They believe it has been misapplied in the shooting death of Trayvon by a Sanford crime-watch captain, George Zimmerman.

Zimmerman has not been charged because, police said, it appears he acted in self-defense. The Seminole County state attorney’s office decided Tuesday to take the case before a grand jury.

“They got the goods on him. They need to prosecute whoever shot the kid,” said Peaden, a Crestview Republican who sponsored the deadly force law in 2005. “He has no protection under my law.”

Peaden and Baxley, R-Ocala, say their law is a self-defense act. It says law-abiding people have no duty to retreat from an attacker and can meet “force with force.” Nowhere does it say that a person has a right to confront another.
The 911 tapes strongly suggest Zimmerman overstepped his bounds, they say, when the Sanford neighborhood crime-watch captain said he was following Trayvon and appeared to ignore a police request to stay away.

“The guy lost his defense right then,” said Peaden. “When he said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.”

-EK
Logged
AZ Fins Fan 55
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 5314


Go Phins!!!!!


WWW
« Reply #317 on: April 17, 2012, 01:41:07 pm »

The legality is that to prove murder, you need intent. The very fact that he had a gun is intent. You don't carry a deadly weapon if your plan is to sell a guy lemonade. -EK

I carry a gun every single day of my life, sometimes concealed, sometimes not....I have no intent of murdering anyone. I carry for self defense should I ever actually need it.  Hopefully that day never comes but if it does....I will be prepared to protect myself or my loved ones. Your above statement is very flawed my friend!!!!!!
Logged

R.I.P. Jarian - 11/17/05 - You will be missed and never forgotten. Thanks for the memories my truest friend!!!!!
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #318 on: April 17, 2012, 01:50:23 pm »

You must have missed the post where I said that in general, I have no problem with CCA. IN THIS CASE- and this case is the only one I'm speaking of, not some generality, the intent can be derived by the fact that there is a dead body, a person told to stop pursuit, and a concealed weapon.

Let me put it in a different context. Suppose it's your kid, your brother, your father, or you. Walking home from the store with no weapon- in fact, nothing but a bag of Skittles and an iced tea. Some nutjob who thinks he's the neighborhood Batman shoots your relative dead. How is that defesneable? How would you feel?  -EK
Logged
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #319 on: April 17, 2012, 02:01:13 pm »

Apparently you must not believe me either, then, because the people who established the law are the ones I'm quoting.
The lawmakers who crafted the legislation in 2005 — former Sen. Durell Peaden and current state Rep. Dennis Baxley — said the law doesn’t need to be changed. They believe it has been misapplied in the shooting death of Trayvon by a Sanford crime-watch captain, George Zimmerman.

Zimmerman has not been charged because, police said, it appears he acted in self-defense. The Seminole County state attorney’s office decided Tuesday to take the case before a grand jury.

“They got the goods on him. They need to prosecute whoever shot the kid,” said Peaden, a Crestview Republican who sponsored the deadly force law in 2005. “He has no protection under my law.”


Peaden and Baxley, R-Ocala, say their law is a self-defense act. It says law-abiding people have no duty to retreat from an attacker and can meet “force with force.” Nowhere does it say that a person has a right to confront another.
The 911 tapes strongly suggest Zimmerman overstepped his bounds, they say, when the Sanford neighborhood crime-watch captain said he was following Trayvon and appeared to ignore a police request to stay away.

“The guy lost his defense right then,” said Peaden. “When he said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.”

-EK

You are correct, if Martin was a law-abiding citizen, he had no duty to retreat but if he was only being followed how can he meet "force with force"? There was no force to meet. So, lets say hypothetically,  that Zimmerman was following Martin. Martin felt threatened and got physical with Zimmerman and got the upper hand and was on top of Zimmerman. Punching him and hitting his head on the ground. So are you saying that if Zimmerman just grabbed a nearby brick and bashed Martin repeatedly in the head to protect himself that it would have been ok. Or are you saying that Zimmerman should have just let Martin continue to beat him ? Is your problem with the firearm or Zimmerman supposedly defending himself ?
Logged
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #320 on: April 17, 2012, 02:04:51 pm »

Neither- my problem is with the fact that he was told at a neighborhood meeting specifically NOT to engage in any form of vigilanteism, then told again on the phone not to follow Martin. If he would have not taken the law into his hands, AS HE WAS TOLD, there is no case, no dead body, and no issue. He had multiple chances to do the right thing and not try to be a hero. What did he think, this kid who was 30 pounds smaller than him and not armed, was going to unleash the power of the Rainbow from his Skittles upon the neighborhood? If he would have stayed put, there's no case. There's no way to argue that point. It's indefensible. -EK
Logged
Dave Gray
Administrator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 30395

It's doo-doo, baby!

26384964 davebgray@comcast.net davebgray floridadavegray
WWW Email
« Reply #321 on: April 17, 2012, 02:11:37 pm »

So are you saying that if Zimmerman just grabbed a nearby brick and bashed Martin repeatedly in the head to protect himself that it would have been ok. Or are you saying that Zimmerman should have just let Martin continue to beat him ? Is your problem with the firearm or Zimmerman supposedly defending himself ?

Yes, so long as Zimmerman stopped, once there was no longer a threat.  If he smashed him with a brick once to get Trayvon to stop hitting him, you'd have no complaints from me.
Logged

I drink your milkshake!
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #322 on: April 17, 2012, 02:13:10 pm »

Yes, so long as Zimmerman stopped, once there was no longer a threat.  If he smashed him with a brick once to get Trayvon to stop hitting him, you'd have no complaints from me.

I concur. -EK
Logged
CF DolFan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 16870


cf_dolfan
« Reply #323 on: April 17, 2012, 02:15:23 pm »

My point is that if you are pursuing someone, and confront them for no reason other than you simply feel like it and disregard what someone has told you to do, the fact that you're carrying a gun speaks to motive. I'm being pretty specific here, so don't twist my words-
Your speaking assumtions and not specifics. There has been no proof he confronted anyone. In fact the 911 tape offers the opposite as he stopped pursuing, if you believe he stopped when the wind stopped, and then he continued talking to the operator for another 1 and a half minutes after being suggested " OK. We don't need you to do that". This whole assumtion that he must have continued is as much as an assumtion that he confronted him. You just as well assume he went to the moon too because none of the evidence says he went to the moon.
Logged

Getting offended by something you see on the internet is like choosing to step in dog shite instead of walking around it.
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #324 on: April 17, 2012, 02:20:26 pm »

If he didn't continue, and he admitted that Martin was running away, then how did they get into an altercation AT ALL? The only possible way that could happen is if he did, in fact continue. He admitted that Martin was fleeing. That's not an assumption. That's a fact. -EK
Logged
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #325 on: April 17, 2012, 02:24:33 pm »

Apparently you must not believe me either, then, because the people who established the law are the ones I'm quoting.
The lawmakers who crafted the legislation in 2005 — former Sen. Durell Peaden and current state Rep. Dennis Baxley — said the law doesn’t need to be changed. They believe it has been misapplied in the shooting death of Trayvon by a Sanford crime-watch captain, George Zimmerman.

Zimmerman has not been charged because, police said, it appears he acted in self-defense. The Seminole County state attorney’s office decided Tuesday to take the case before a grand jury.

“They got the goods on him. They need to prosecute whoever shot the kid,” said Peaden, a Crestview Republican who sponsored the deadly force law in 2005. “He has no protection under my law.”

Peaden and Baxley, R-Ocala, say their law is a self-defense act. It says law-abiding people have no duty to retreat from an attacker and can meet “force with force.” Nowhere does it say that a person has a right to confront another.
The 911 tapes strongly suggest Zimmerman overstepped his bounds, they say, when the Sanford neighborhood crime-watch captain said he was following Trayvon and appeared to ignore a police request to stay away.

“The guy lost his defense right then,” said Peaden. “When he said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.”

-EK
I've got a full understanding but their intent is not what is written according to the judges.
Logged
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #326 on: April 17, 2012, 02:28:37 pm »

I believe that remains to be seen- either in the manner in which the trial ends up or in a subsequent revision of the law. -EK
Logged
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #327 on: April 17, 2012, 02:56:34 pm »

Yes, so long as Zimmerman stopped, once there was no longer a threat.  If he smashed him with a brick once to get Trayvon to stop hitting him, you'd have no complaints from me.

Once ? How do you determine when to stop ? Not sure how many of you have been in a confrontation, but most people don't just stop. If the other person doesn't stop, do you ? What if Travon saw the weapon and reached for it or there was a struggle for it ?

If he didn't continue, and he admitted that Martin was running away, then how did they get into an altercation AT ALL? The only possible way that could happen is if he did, in fact continue. He admitted that Martin was fleeing. That's not an assumption. That's a fact. -EK

Or Martin could have felt "disrespected" like many of these fake "I'm a real man" wanna be thugs these days and tried to be a tough guy. LIFE IS NOT A RAP VIDEO, too many people think that they deserve some sort of respect from total strangers. They don't !!!  Don't tell me about it, I deal with these idiots everyday. The funny part is when you call their bluff and they start whining and crying about racism.
Logged
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #328 on: April 17, 2012, 03:01:26 pm »

Gee, why would they say anything about racism when YOU just pointed out that life isn't a rap video. What a fail. Martin was running. He couldnt have felt "disrespected" because Zimmerman wasn't there to disrespect him until he pursued Martin. Why is that such a point of contention? This is SO absurdly black and white, it baffles me that there is any argument. Yes or no- if Zimmerman would have kept his happy ass inside and not followed at all when he was told to stop, would he have shot Martin? -EK
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 03:03:19 pm by EKnight » Logged
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #329 on: April 17, 2012, 03:08:35 pm »

Badger brings up a good point and I would like to see how that flies in court. Apparently part of Zimmerman's statement is that Martin tried to go for Zimmerman's gun when it became exposed in the struggle. If this is fact, does that change any of your opinions (not stating it is fact but just curious about your position)?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 46 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines