Teen Killed In Neighborhood Watch Shooting

[Leonard McCoy]

It isn't that Martin isn't important, I think what happened to him is very important. However as far as the legal trial vs. Zimmerman is concerned he only needs to prove that he felt threatened, and how Martin felt doesn't play into that because Zimmerman cannot be expected to know how Martin felt. How Martin acted and how Zimmerman acted are very applicable though.

Interesting distinction. It also further reinforces the point I tried to make about negligence or manslaughter. Zimmerman was following this kid around with a gun was his action and we must ask why? I'm not sure who laid hands on who is the important distinction here, rather we should ask why was Zimmerman following this kid around with a gun in the middle of the night? and was it concealed or not? I believe their are laws against concealed weaponry?

Also I feel I must point out. Zimmerman is the adult in this scenario. Alot of this will depend on what Martin gets tried as.

[jbombard]

Stand Your Ground doesn't allow you to intimidate people into defending themselves then killing them. If they can show that what Zimmerman was doing was stalking Martin, following him, giving him a reason to fear for his life, then Martin attacked him for it then Zimmerman committed murder when he killed him.

In otherwords, stand your ground doesn't defend the aggressor or perceived aggressor.

Indeed but perception is in the eye of the beholder. If the aggression is manifested physically there is something to go on, but how somebody felt is not going to hold up... and frankly our legal system seems to be better at getting people off than convicting people.

[blib]

Zimmerman could have said whatever the fuck he wanted to, that doesn't give Martin the right to touch him. Like I've said before, the thing that matters in this case is who touched who first.

How the hell does that mather? You want america to be the country where its legal to stalk scared kids with a gun at night and if they do something that scares the gun holding stalker he is allowed to shoot them dead?

[Anjerith]

As someone who is fairly neutral on this whole dumb mess, I will pitch in my two cents that this simply shows the need for greater control over who can own a gun.

To all the gun-rights activists, I am not saying no guns, I am saying more training and possibly psych profiling is needed to procure a gun license.

[jbombard]

How the hell does that mather? You want america to be the country where its legal to stalk scared kids with a gun at night and if they do something that scares the gun holding stalker he is allowed to shoot them dead?

I don't think anyone wants that. Also I don't think being scared is enough, being afraid for your life is a different story. The thing about our legal system though is Zimmerman doesn't have to prove he was afraid for his life he just has to say it, the prosecution needs to prove he wasn't beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether or not it can be proved that Martin assaulted him will be key, because if Martin didn't assault him why would he fear for his life? Unfortunately the 911 call isn't conclusive enough one way or the other to be of any real use, especially because it is coming up now and not at trial, by the time it goes to trial the defense against it will be planned out pretty solidly.

[Todgruppe]

Interesting distinction. It also further reinforces the point I tried to make about negligence or manslaughter. Zimmerman was following this kid around with a gun was his action and we must ask why? I'm not sure who laid hands on who is the important distinction here, rather we should ask why was Zimmerman following this kid around with a gun in the middle of the night? and was it concealed or not? I believe their are laws against concealed weaponry?

Also I feel I must point out. Zimmerman is the adult in this scenario. Alot of this will depend on what Martin gets tried as.

Zimmerman had a CCP, and I doubt he was holding his gun out, stalking him like Elmer Fudd.

How the hell does that mather? You want america to be the country where its legal to stalk scared kids with a gun at night and if they do something that scares the gun holding stalker he is allowed to shoot them dead?

See above reference.

The amount of misinformation on firearms is........ breathtaking. You'd think millions of people died........ daily.'

Edit: Forgot which year it was somewhere between 02-06 FBI did a report, over 5000 crimes a day are prevented by firearms. But then you can't bastardize a whole demograph of people making people believe they are uncivilized, barbarians, when in fact we all are. Self-righteous assholes.

Bernie Madoff's are more dangerous than Zimmerman's and yet.........

[alturic]

hmm over this past weekend in my area at least 3 black teens or at least people under 20 died to a gun... wheres jesse jackson now

Was it at the hands of a white or hispanic?

[Jodah]

As someone who is fairly neutral on this whole dumb mess, I will pitch in my two cents that this simply shows the need for greater control over who can own a gun.

To all the gun-rights activists, I am not saying no guns, I am saying more training and possibly psych profiling is needed to procure a gun license.

Psych profiling wouldn't have caught someone like Zimmerman. A person can be a completely calm upstanding person in regular day to day routines and go batshit crazy in a moment of stress (such as being assaulted.) Furthermore, his police record only included misdemeanors, which even in New York (one of the strictest states for handgun possession) is not grounds for denial of a CC permit.

[alturic]

As someone who is fairly neutral on this whole dumb mess, I will pitch in my two cents that this simply shows the need for greater control over who can own a gun.

To all the gun-rights activists, I am not saying no guns, I am saying more training and possibly psych profiling is needed to procure a gun license.

While I'm unbiased on my siding of your comments, my question is why are you even bringing this up? Is zimmerman psycho? Did he need to be trained more on when it was acceptable to use said gun?

[tiporispit]

Zimmerman had a CCP, and I doubt he was holding his gun out, stalking him like Elmer Fudd.




See above reference.

The amount of misinformation on guns is........ breathtaking. You'd think millions of people died........ daily.

In fact, by statistics from Bill Clinton's own administration, firearms are used in defense by law-abiding citizens 1.5 million times a year. They're used in crimes 440,000 times a year. Let the gun-control zombies L2Math.

[alturic]

Psych profiling wouldn't have caught someone like Zimmerman. A person can be a completely calm upstanding person in regular day to day routines and go batshit crazy in a moment of stress (such as being assaulted.) Furthermore, his police record only included misdemeanors, which even in New York (one of the strictest states for handgun possession) is not grounds for denial of a CC permit.

Wouldn't have "caught" him doing what? I know god damn well that if I did carry a weapon (open carry or concealed) if someone did try and assault me I would pull it out. Shooting the person is another story since I've never been in that situation, but if I had a weapon, hell even a knife (because I know we all carry large knifes around) I would most certainly pull out any weapon if someone was assaulting/trying to assault me.

[Jodah]

Interesting distinction. It also further reinforces the point I tried to make about negligence or manslaughter. Zimmerman was following this kid around with a gun was his action and we must ask why? I'm not sure who laid hands on who is the important distinction here, rather we should ask why was Zimmerman following this kid around with a gun in the middle of the night? and was it concealed or not? I believe their are laws against concealed weaponry?

Also I feel I must point out. Zimmerman is the adult in this scenario. Alot of this will depend on what Martin gets tried as.

Every state has a concealed carry permit available with certain requirements. Some states only allow CC (New York) others allow possession without a CC permit (Pennsylvania.) Furthermore, certain state permits are accepted in other states. I, personally, have New York, Utah, and Florida CC permits which cover me for the majority of the continental US.

---------- Post added 2012-04-03 at 02:26 AM ----------

Wouldn't have "caught" him doing what? I know god damn well that if I did carry a weapon (open carry or concealed) if someone did try and assault me I would pull it out. Shooting the person is another story since I've never been in that situation, but if I had a weapon, hell even a knife (because I know we all carry large knifes around) I would most certainly pull out any weapon if someone was assaulting/trying to assault me.

"Caught" refers to the quoted person's post implying that Zimmerman should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place, thus avoiding the whole situation.

Edit: I stand corrected about an earlier statement. After further research Illinois is the only no-issue state in regards to CC permits. All other states are will-issue (qualified = get permit) or may-issue (qualified might = permit.)

[alturic]

I still say based on NOTHING more than the facts that the media have shown to us, Zimmerman was within his rights. The ONLY reasoning why it's almost open and shut (based off nothing BUT the evidence the PUBLIC has seen) is because there is no-one to refute his claims.

That is the exact reason why when laws that give people authority to use any type of force against others needs to be clearly, and concisely defined. Would someone look-up a law to see if they are within their right to shoot someone as a situation was arising, no it wouldn't but it would certainly allow people to know what lawmakers meant when they said "imminent threat of death" or "great bodily harm" because I know sure as hell if I ask 10 people what "great bodily harm" means each answer is different.

---------- Post added 2012-04-02 at 10:27 PM ----------

"Caught" refers to the quoted person's post implying that Zimmerman should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place, thus avoiding the whole situation.

Oh, I know you meant it towards him, which is why I was asking "caught" him how? It's not like the guy was interviewed by police and deemed he needs to be institutionalized and shouldn't been allowed to carry a weapon.

[Todgruppe]

I still say based on NOTHING more than the facts that the media have shown to us, Zimmerman was within his rights. The ONLY reasoning why it's almost open and shut (based off nothing BUT the evidence the PUBLIC has seen) is because there is no-one to refute his claims.

That is the exact reason why when laws that give people authority to use any type of force against others needs to be clearly, and concisely defined. Would someone look-up a law to see if they are within their right to shoot someone as a situation was arising, no it wouldn't but it would certainly allow people to know what lawmakers meant when they said "imminent threat of death" or "great bodily harm" because I know sure as hell if I ask 10 people what "great bodily harm" means each answer is different.

Yes, but other laws also give criminal on unnecessary protection. For example in some states, if someone is robbing your house the most you can do is call the cops, they can literally being carrying your TV out the door and unless they make a "threat" towards you, all you can do is call the police and wave goodbye. It leaves the only thing to do to stop them, is kill them, dead men tell no tales. You would then have to go through a whole different system of analysis that won't go into.

[Mekh]

Some US citizen please fill me in on one detail here: If a cop kills a suspect or perp there's an automatic investigation usually, isn't there? Even if it was open-and-shut, the department head or whoever would have a look at that case. And those are professionals. Why was Zimmerman not detained pending investigation?

[jbombard]

I still say based on NOTHING more than the facts that the media have shown to us, Zimmerman was within his rights. The ONLY reasoning why it's almost open and shut (based off nothing BUT the evidence the PUBLIC has seen) is because there is no-one to refute his claims.

That is the exact reason why when laws that give people authority to use any type of force against others needs to be clearly, and concisely defined. Would someone look-up a law to see if they are within their right to shoot someone as a situation was arising, no it wouldn't but it would certainly allow people to know what lawmakers meant when they said "imminent threat of death" or "great bodily harm" because I know sure as hell if I ask 10 people what "great bodily harm" means each answer is different.

---------- Post added 2012-04-02 at 10:27 PM ----------



Oh, I know you meant it towards him, which is why I was asking "caught" him how? It's not like the guy was interviewed by police and deemed he needs to be institutionalized and shouldn't been allowed to carry a weapon.

The tough part about "imminent threat of death" or "great bodily harm" is that it can be tough even for an officer of the law to determine. If somebody was slamming my head into the concrete, I wouldn't be stopping to think how bad I was really getting hurt or when it might possibly end, and if I had any kind of weapon nearby I would be grabbing it and using it.

It all comes down to really is whether or not Martin assaulted Zimmerman because if he did, regardless of motivations and how people felt it is going to be nigh impossible to convict Zimmerman.

[Fojos]

Was it at the hands of a white or hispanic?

Most likely at the hands of other black people. That's usually the case.

So under the circumstances do you believe he would be tried as a minor or an adult?

Here in Sweden, an adult male interfered when three late teens were assaulting someone for not wanting to give them more cigarettes. One of the guys hit the interfering adult hard enough to make him faint and hit the curb, making him suffer some sort of brain damage and heavy cases of ptsd. The boys basically got no punishment at all, community service, because they weren't above 18. They had even commited many crimes before.

[Wells]

If a cop kills a suspect or perp there's an automatic investigation usually, isn't there?

yes, though the scope depends on the incident.

Why was Zimmerman not detained pending investigation?

You can only detain people for a short period of time without charging them.

[Todgruppe]

Some US citizen please fill me in on one detail here: If a cop kills a suspect or perp there's an automatic investigation usually, isn't there? Even if it was open-and-shut, the department head or whoever would have a look at that case. And those are professionals. Why was Zimmerman not detained pending investigation?

There is an investigation still on going. Professionals are also held to a higher standard, even open and shot perp shoot people would be bellowing corruption if there was no investigation. Someone would leak it press would grab wind and shit would hit the fan.

[alturic]

Yes, but other laws also give criminal on unnecessary protection. For example in some states, if someone is robbing your house the most you can do is call the cops, they can literally being carrying your TV out the door and unless they make a "threat" towards you, all you can do is call the police and wave goodbye. It leaves the only thing to do to stop them, is kill them, dead men tell no tales. You would then have to go through a whole different system of analysis that won't go into.

I'm confused. I mean technically if someone is robbing your house, carrying your tv out right in front of you... as bad as it is, you can't say you are in danger of "great bodily harm" or "imminent death".