• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
Giz said:
Oh, if a person is sufficiently off balance then any impetus might be enough to tip 'em over. In general though, people fall down when shot because of shock or tissue/bone damage.

Probably the biggest reason why deer don't fall over as much as people do [when they've been shot] is that deer don't realize "oh drat, I've been shot and may have been terminally injured" in the same way humans do and therefore don't immediately fall over due to shock.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The effects of a bullet on a human body depend on variables.

Which is why the impossibility of someone ever ending up in a certain position is less than useful to the OP topic.

Trayvon Martin was hit by a bullet, and his body ended up where it ended up.
 
Ryokan said:
If you think a bullet has enough mass to knock a human being back, the Stundie might go to you..
Click to expand...

Not mass, momentum. M x V. ;)

However, I think the frequency with which bullets (from handguns) fired into humans knock them back has to be considered with an eye toward variations in mass of human, and the point of impact relative to that humans center of gravity, and said human's forward momentum, if any, or backward momentum, if any.

Also consider what type of round is in play.
Jacketed, Hollow point, other?

Lots of variables, don't you agree?
 
WildCat said:
You're way off base here tri. It simply doesn't happen. Center of gravity has nothing to do with it. Those deer weigh much less than an average person, and were hit with a high-power round with more than 5 times the force of a 9mm handgun round. The physics is the same whether it's a deer or a person.
Click to expand...

Deer have four legs. ;)

But this has been a fun sub argument to watch.

The last deer I shot didn't fall down until after it had run a few steps. I think its running was due to surprise and shock, and then it fell, and was dead before I got to it.

The round didn't knock it down.
 
Darth Rotor said:
Not mass, momentum. M x V. ;)

However, I think the frequency with which bullets (from handguns) fired into humans knock them back has to be considered with an eye toward variations in mass of human, and the point of impact relative to that humans center of gravity, and said human's forward momentum, if any, or backward momentum, if any.

Also consider what type of round is in play.
Jacketed, Hollow point, other?

Lots of variables, don't you agree?
Click to expand...
12 gauge shotgun slug.
 
WildCat said:
Here's 1st hand, and documented on video. Watch the deer on the left @ the 1:10 mark. Hit square in the shoulder with a 7mm magnum, 140 grain bullet at ~325 yards. At that range it strikes with ~1,800 ft.-lbs. of force, 5 times the muzzle energy of a 9mm round. It doesn't leave its feet.
Click to expand...

That was a through-and-through. Not all of the kin etic energy of the bullet was expended against resistant tissues and structures.

Another doe is shot at about the 3:45 mark. It somehow also doesn't leave its feet.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like it did lift her a few inches, though.

Now, you may also have noticed that you get some blood spatter from both hits.
 
AlexW said:
I heard GZ's buddy interviewed on the radio an hour or so ago and he said he was not at the time of the incident acting in his capacity as Mr. Neighborhood Watch Guy, but rather was driving back from the store himself (according to friend-guy). In any event, if that's the way this all went down, then it makes some sense why GZ didn't identify himself as being part of the neighborhood watch, because he was effectively off duty.
Click to expand...
Then that raises the question as to why Zimmerman was in the location he was, and how he end up parked up on Twin Trees Lane long enough to become aware and then suspicious of Martin, plus the length of the phone call to the police:

tm_aerial.jpg


The red line shows Martin's probable route back to where he was staying (blue marker bottom-right); the small purple rectangle is the approximate position of Zimmerman's vehicle (although it may have been slightly further to the right). The blue marker slightly obscured by the red route line is where the shooting took place, and Zimmerman's house is the blue marker bottom-left.

Let's assume that Zimerman was "driving back from the store." If he came in the "back entrance" (bottom-right), the obvious route would be to take a left onto Retreat View Circle, and then follow it round to his home. Alternatively, he may have driven straight across to the lower part of Twin Trees Lane, then along Long Oak Way, and a left onto Retreat View Circle. Either way, he wouldn't have been anyway near where his vehicle ended up.

On the other hand, if he came in the "main entrance" (top), you'd assume the most obvious route would be to take a right onto Retreat View Circle, and follow it round. Alternatively, he could have driven straigth across, onto Twin Trees Lane, then Long Oak Way, and then the last bit of Retreat View Circle. The latter is a slightly longer route, and is the only one that would put Zimmerman where he ended up, but it still raises questions.

Most importantly, Zimmerman's vehicle would have been facing away from the direction Martin was approaching from, on the opposite side of the road. This would mean that Zimmerman would either have to be turning round to watch Martin, or he was using his mirrors to observe him - either being details missing from what we know Zimmerman has said.

One possible explanation is that Zimmerman may have first spotted Martin walking onto Twin Trees Lane as he (Zimmerman) drove in the main entrance. That may have caused him to carry on to Twin Trees Lane himself (rather than turning onto Retreat View Circle), and then park up there ahead of Martin.

It really doesn't seem credible that Zimmerman just happened to have stopped where he did on Twin Trees Lane (for no explained reason), just as Martin appeared. Either he was parked up there specifically looking out for the burglars he was so concerned about, or he spotted Martin earlier and changed his route and stopped to observe him further. Both put a very different slant on Zimmerman's actions than him innocently "driving back from the store."
 
sgtbaker said:
Well what's so threatening about ending the pursuit and heading back to the car?
Click to expand...
Immaterial, because the "returning to car" claim doesn't make sense. Martin ran onto the footpath between the houses, and would have then turned right directly towards where he was staying. Following him, Zimmerman would have been able to see him as soon as he turned that corner himself. Either Martin has slowed down after he turned the corner, so Zimmerman caught him up, or he had somehow hidden himself in a relatively wide open space long enough for Zimmerman to decide to go back to his vehicle, rather than simply carrying on running to where he was staying.

Unfortuanately, we know there is a very tight timescale between Zimmerman's call to the police ending, and Martin's own phone going dead. Do we really believe there was enough time for Zimmerman to bumble round the corner, realise Martin was no longer in sight, and then turn back without looking around for anyone who might be hiding?
 
Last edited:
Let's not overlook the fact that Z was following close enough to M for M to ask Z what he wanted!!

That is not how close you follow someone if your only intention is to keep an eye on him.
 
Information Analyst said:
[qimg]http://www.nickcooper.org.uk/personal/images/jref/tm_aerial.jpg[/qimg]
One possible explanation is that Zimmerman may have first spotted Martin walking onto Twin Trees Lane as he (Zimmerman) drove in the main entrance. That may have caused him to carry on to Twin Trees Lane himself (rather than turning onto Retreat View Circle), and then park up there ahead of Martin.
Click to expand...
This is the only scenario that makes any sense, especially given the short time line from 911 call to the fatal shot.

So he sees a kid dressed appropriately for the weather and time of day and concludes that he is up to something, and then that the only reason the kid could have been upset was that he was on drugs and angry at having been interrupted at something nefarious.

Any way you slice and dice this, Z comes out looking utterly paranoid.
 
Please keep in mind the forum mirepoix; keep your posts civil, on topic, and address the argument vs attack the arguer (ie. rule 0, rule 11, rule 12).
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar
 
Information Analyst said:
Because it's not relevant, any more than a rape victim having a history of promiscuity.
Click to expand...

That's what I said, so they should have released it themselves, knowing full well it would come out, instead of trying to create a false persona.

They could simply have said, "Yes, Trayvon has had some problems..."

It wouldn't have changed a thing, and it would have blunted these "discoveries" about his character.

As for your rape victim analogy, what if the rape victim wasn't actually raped? See Crystal Mangum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom