Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Bob001]

The continuing debate here seems to be whether GZ was legitimately in fear for his life from an unarmed 17-year-old. Here's a question: Would GZ have been following TM, or even gotten out of his truck, if he hadn't been packing heat? The fact that he has a CCP is irrelevant; what's legal isn't always smart. (Personally, I think GZ should have been arrested and given the opportunity to make his self-defense argument to a jury.)

 

[TheL8Elvis]

He told investigators it was not his son and later backtracked.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/orlando...peak-out-in-trayvon-martin-case-28640523.html

http://miami.cbslocal.com/video/689...n-martins-brother-speaks-exclusively-to-cbs4/

11:00 minutes in , the brother is "not sure" who is crying for help. Kudos to him for an honest answer.

 

[Kestrel]

You keep posting that. What are you claiming the redacted word is?

JREF has an auto censor that automatically redacts certain words in user posts. The word Zimmerman used is a synonym for rectum that starts with the letter "a".
Spelling the word differently to avoid the auto censor is a violation of JREF rules.

ETA: A recording of Zimmerman's call to the police can be found in the Wikipedia article Shooting of Trayvon Martin^WP.

 

[sgtbaker]

JREF has an auto censor that automatically redacts certain words in user posts. The word Zimmerman used is a synonym for rectum that starts with the letter "a".
Spelling the word differently to avoid the auto censor is a violation of JREF rules.

ETA: A recording of Zimmerman's call to the police can be found in the Wikipedia article Shooting of Trayvon Martin^WP.

Cleverly hiding behind asterisks, I see. How do we know for sure that you weren't saying ******** and not ********?

 

[Chris L]

Here's a question: Would GZ have been following TM, or even gotten out of his truck, if he hadn't been packing heat?

Excellent question. My guess is no, the gun gave him a sense of power that led him to do something very stupid. I believe he went into the situation believing that the gun gave him the edge in any likely confrontation, so he could afford to be reckless. What happened was a direct result of that belief.

 

[sgtbaker]

Excellent question. My guess is no, the gun gave him a sense of power that led him to do something very stupid. I believe he went into the situation believing that the gun gave him the edge in any likely confrontation, so he could afford to be reckless. What happened was a direct result of that belief.

That's a pretty heavy assumption. We have a couple/few gun carriers involved in this discussion. I ask them how much "power" is added to their sense of self, when packing? Based on their responses in other threads discussing the posession and use of firearms, it seems like, if nothing else, carrying gives them a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

 

[varwoche]

http://miami.cbslocal.com/video/689...n-martins-brother-speaks-exclusively-to-cbs4/

11:00 minutes in , the brother is "not sure" who is crying for help. Kudos to him for an honest answer.

Maybe, maybe not. For all we know, he's not so "not sure".

 

[sgtbaker]

http://miami.cbslocal.com/video/689...n-martins-brother-speaks-exclusively-to-cbs4/

11:00 minutes in , the brother is "not sure" who is crying for help. Kudos to him for an honest answer.

I think that video, at least for me, brings it back to the human level. All this stirring about racial motivations and cover ups and conspiracies, the protests chanting, "I am Trayvon," and "Justice for Trayvon," for some reason it dehumanizes the issue, to me. It's like taking the offense and victim status off the individual and puts in on the population, taking the focus off the family who feels the very real impact of this.

I have never lost a child or a sibling to any circumstances, never mind under questionable circumstances. I feel so much for the Martin family. For all talk of legalities and how charges are applicable; if what we know to be facts are the entirety of the facts available in this case, legally, I have doubts that they would be able to prosecute (though I am no expert and could be wrong). How do you console a family who lost a son and brother; tell the family that thems the breaks and sometimes bad things just happen?

 

[Chris L]

That's a pretty heavy assumption. We have a couple/few gun carriers involved in this discussion. I ask them how much "power" is added to their sense of self, when packing? Based on their responses in other threads discussing the posession and use of firearms, it seems like, if nothing else, carrying gives them a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

I'm sure that for most gun owners, it does indeed give them a greater sense of responsibility. In this case though (given the context), I'm inclined to think not. Zimmerman was doing (in my opinion) something very foolish that did not reflect responsible gun ownership. If you carry a firearm, you have the responsibility to avoid unnecessary confrontations, as such things can quickly turn lethal. The real question being of course, how necessary was this confrontation?

 

[sgtbaker]

I'm sure that for most gun owners, it does indeed give them a greater sense of responsibility. In this case though (given the context), I'm inclined to think not. Zimmerman was doing (in my opinion) something very foolish that did not reflect responsible gun ownership. If you carry a firearm, you have the responsibility to avoid unnecessary confrontations, as such things can quickly turn lethal. The real question being of course, how necessary was this confrontation?

It's been challenged to death, the presumption that Zimmerman intended on or had any real reason to believe there would be a confrontation. From one perspective, the fact that "Zimmerman's suspect" (which I add was only a suspect in his mind) ran away, may give him no real reason to believe that a confrontation would occur. As far as I know, none of the previous burglaries in the area involved any type of violence. They were all the average, run of the mill crimes of opportunity; empty house, easy access, or object left unsecure. From the wording, I gather he believed Trayvon to be a part of this crime spree.

 

[RandFan]

That's a pretty heavy assumption. We have a couple/few gun carriers involved in this discussion. I ask them how much "power" is added to their sense of self, when packing? Based on their responses in other threads discussing the posession and use of firearms, it seems like, if nothing else, carrying gives them a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

I think you raise a very fair point. I'm guessing our perceptions about those who have guns are due in part to bias. But I also wonder if we shouldn't be skeptical of what gun owners tell us about how they feel about guns. Like those personality tests often demonstrate, people kinda know what they should say. I wonder if most people would admit that they feel like Dirty Harry because they had a gun.

 

[This is The End]

You left out age, size, strength, recent actions, statements indicating intentions... the Totality Of The Circumstances.

No court is going to render a decision on the facts as you presented them.

OK they are the exact same age, 25. They are identical twins. They are the exact same strength. The recent actions and statements indicating intentions are: They were inside the bar and a girl likes both of them so they get into a fight over her.

Could someone help me with Florida law in a hypothetical.

Two people are in Florida, they leave a bar and get into a fight. All witnesses agree the fight was mutually started and that the two people were still sober.

One of the two people, now Person A, gets the clear upper hand and is beating Person B senseless. Then Person B pulls out a gun and kills Person A.

Under Florida law would person B have any valid argument for that shooting being justified.

So, in that case would it be at all possible that it is a justified, self defense, case in Florida or in another state if you so desire.

 

[sgtbaker]

I think you raise a very fair point. I'm guessing our perceptions about those who have guns are due in part to bias. But I also wonder if we shouldn't be skeptical of what gun owners tell us about how they feel about guns. Like those personality tests often demonstrate, people kinda know what they should say. I wonder if most people would admit that they feel like Dirty Harry because they had a gun.

I can't argue any of that. I just find the assumption that he must have felt bolder a matter of drawing facts from his/her conclusion.

 

[Cylinder]

OK they are the exact same age, 25. They are identical twins. They are the exact same strength. The recent actions and statements indicating intentions are: They were inside the bar and a girl likes both of them so they get into a fight over her.



So, in that case would it be at all possible that it is a justified, self defense, case in Florida or in another state if you so desire.

Yes. The justification is judged solely from the actor's perspective. It's possible (though unlikely)to have a situation where both parties to an altercation have justification.

 

[Chris L]

It's been challenged to death, the presumption that Zimmerman intended on or had any real reason to believe there would be a confrontation. From one perspective, the fact that "Zimmerman's suspect" (which I add was only a suspect in his mind) ran away, may give him no real reason to believe that a confrontation would occur. As far as I know, none of the previous burglaries in the area involved any type of violence. They were all the average, run of the mill crimes of opportunity; empty house, easy access, or object left unsecure. From the wording, I gather he believed Trayvon to be a part of this crime spree.

On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that a "suspect" might not react with violence if confronted by someone who could threaten his freedom, no matter how nonviolent his crimes have been up to then. A real police officer (and I think even a wanna be) would not make that assumption.

 

[Chris L]

I think you raise a very fair point. I'm guessing our perceptions about those who have guns are due in part to bias. But I also wonder if we shouldn't be skeptical of what gun owners tell us about how they feel about guns. Like those personality tests often demonstrate, people kinda know what they should say. I wonder if most people would admit that they feel like Dirty Harry because they had a gun.

I don't think you can make blanket statements about gun owners based on what Zimmerman may have done.

 

[This is The End]

That's a pretty heavy assumption. We have a couple/few gun carriers involved in this discussion. I ask them how much "power" is added to their sense of self, when packing? Based on their responses in other threads discussing the posession and use of firearms, it seems like, if nothing else, carrying gives them a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

Yes, it would normally give an average person a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

However, it likely works the opposite way on a Whacker.

Earlier in the thread convincing evidence was presented that Z is a Whacker or, more specifically, a Wannabee Whacker:

Another variation is the wannabee, someone who is not in any way involved in emergency services at all, but who wants people to think they are. Again, they tend to use their personal car or truck to do this.

 

[sgtbaker]

I don't think Z's new lawyer has any idea what ‘Shaken Baby Syndrome’ is:

Trayvon Martin case: George Zimmerman’s lawyer invokes ‘Shaken Baby Syndrome’ as defense

I assume the new lawyer is saying that Z suffered concussion effects. I doubt that considering how he looked 30 minutes later in the police vid. But I am not a doctor.

Did you read the article, though? The title is incredibly misleading. In no way did he even remotely suggest that Zimmerman suffered actual brain damage or shaken baby syndrome. He responded to the accusation that a gun is excessive force against an assault and pointed out that you don't need a gun to kill a person. Damage to the brain can be deadly, no weapon required. The reporter going into detail about shaken baby syndrome is irrelevant to what the attorney is saying. All he said in the quoted is, if you hit your head hard enough [whether it be a single impact on the ground or shaken, with force, inside the skull] you can die from that.

 

[sgtbaker]

Yes, it would normally give an average person a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

However, it likely works the opposite way on a Whacker.

Earlier in the thread convincing evidence was presented that Z is a Whacker or, more specifically, a Wannabee Whacker:

This relies on knowing what Zimmerman was actually thinking. You can theorize that he was, based on what little you have been presented on him. However, concluding he is a whacker by lining up a definition of one, with little snippets about his life being shared by a media that's been less than reliable when dealing with facts, then using that likelyhood to support a second likelyhood that he probably felt like Dirty Harry is not a very stable argument.

 

[This is The End]

Did you read the article, though? The title is incredibly misleading. In no way did he even remotely suggest that Zimmerman suffered actual brain damage or shaken baby syndrome. He responded to the accusation that a gun is excessive force against an assault and pointed out that you don't need a gun to kill a person. Damage to the brain can be deadly, no weapon required. The reporter going into detail about shaken baby syndrome is irrelevant to what the attorney is saying. All he said in the quoted is, if you hit your head hard enough [whether it be a single impact on the ground or shaken, with force, inside the skull] you can die from that.

Yes I read the article. The lawyer should never have compared it to Shaken Baby Syndrome. It's not the reporters fault that the lawyer did that. I realize the lawyer was making an analogy, an awful one at that.