The Zimmerman LIE

the only person who knows what actually happened is jonjon

Originally Posted by Five_seveN

one of the very few people who knows anything about due process, florida law, SYG statutation, firearm/SD laws, prosecutorial discretion, etc and bases his debates on the above instead of emotion, speculation and idiocy is jonjon

Fixed

Originally Posted by JonJon

Fixed

trayvon martin was an inside job.

Originally Posted by Five_seveN

There are several lawyers in this thread, there are also a bunch of kids that wouldn't understand the meat of this debate and our judicial system if they were given a Constitutional Enema. Guess which ones share similar views with me and which ones don't?

Originally Posted by Five_seveN

the only person who knows what actually happened is jonjon

Sucks that he wasn't there. He probably could have the handled the skinny kid without having to kill him.

Originally Posted by JonJon

There are several lawyers in this thread, there are also a bunch of kids that wouldn't understand the meat of this debate and our judicial system if they were given a Constitutional Enema. Guess which ones share similar views with me and which ones don't?

Originally Posted by JonJon

There are several lawyers in this thread, there are also a bunch of kids that wouldn't understand the meat of this debate and our judicial system if they were given a Constitutional Enema. Guess which ones share similar views with me and which ones don't?

Originally Posted by Lair

Sucks that he wasn't there. He probably could have the handled the skinny kid without having to kill him.

Why do you feel that victims should have the burden to use the very least measure of force while being attacked. If someone is beating me or I witness them beating another person to the point they could endure some very serious injuries, it is common sense to use the most effective measure and fastest route to stop that threat and attack. It isn't about killing them or shooting them. Focusing on the tool (gun) or the end result (death) shows a lack of education on our laws. There is not a single law on the books that states a person kill an attacker nor have to shoot them. The law allows deadly force.
Deadly force does not mean kill, it means force that could result in death.

Self defense is not about killing or death or guns, it is about using force legally to stop a threat. Once the threat is stopped, so should your force.

Death is sometimes an unfortunate result, but not always




You guys would probably cry racism and unnecessary force if this dude was carrying and killed all six of his attackers too. Lol

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...#storylink=cpy

zimmerman should have hit him with a pillow, and then prayed about the situation. Then everybody could be happy.

prayed? what are you some religious freak? there is no god so stop trying to convert us with your talk of god. let me explain to you now whay god doesn't exist and why i am superior to you because i don't believe in god......

Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta

prayed? what are you some religious freak? there is no god so stop trying to convert us with your talk of god. let me explain to you now whay god doesn't exist and why i am superior to you because i don't believe in god......

qft, this never happens

Originally Posted by JonJon

Why do you feel that victims should have the burden to use the very least measure of force while being attacked. If someone is beating me or I witness them beating another person to the point they could endure some very serious injuries, it is common sense to use the most effective measure and fastest route to stop that threat and attack.

I don't feel that way at all. I also don't believe that Trayvon Martin laid a hand on Zimmerman. I'll point to the complete and total lack of injuries to Zimmerman's head & face as proof.

You'd think that a guy who claimed he was getting the sh*t beat out of him would at least have a little blood on his shirt, too.

Originally Posted by Lair

I don't feel that way at all. I also don't believe that Trayvon Martin laid a hand on Zimmerman. I'll point to the complete and total lack of injuries to Zimmerman's head & face as proof.

You'd think that a guy who claimed he was getting the sh*t beat out of him would at least have a little blood on his shirt, too.

Well seeing as Zimmerman's jacket was red....... and human blood is red...... and I'm pretty sure Trayvon was human......

Possible explanation

Originally Posted by Lair

I don't feel that way at all. I also don't believe that Trayvon Martin laid a hand on Zimmerman. I'll point to the complete and total lack of injuries to Zimmerman's head & face as proof.

You'd think that a guy who claimed he was getting the sh*t beat out of him would at least have a little blood on his shirt, too.

Even though the cop said he sustained the claimed injuries? You're going to base your analysis on a low resolution tape POST EMT treatment?

obviously the cop is in on it.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Even though the cop said he sustained the claimed injuries? You're going to base your analysis on a low resolution tape POST EMT treatment?

That's another thing - it took the EMT's 8 minutes to treat Zimmerman.

8 minutes. That's not much time to treat a guy who thought someone was beating him to death.

Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta

obviously the cop is in on it.

cops are notorious for covering up for Latinos and wanna-be cops

Originally Posted by Lair

That's another thing - it took the EMT's 8 minutes to treat Zimmerman.

8 minutes. That's not much time to treat a guy who thought someone was beating him to death.

Again... You're focusing on the degree and extent of his injuries to try and justify or not justify self defense.

Using deadly force is not MORE legal if you have worse injuries or any LESS justified if your injuries are of a lesser degree.

I know you don't grasp this fact. Justified deadly force can be just that, justified even if your attacker doesn't almost kill you.

If Zimmerman was being beaten up and unable to escape or defend himself or end the attack, he is justified in using force to stop it.

The only way I can see Zimmerman at fault here is if he attacked FIRST or if he drew his weapon FIRST without a threat being present.
I don't believe that to be be the case.

Who was the FIRST aggressor and who/when continued the escalation?
This isn't a black and white (lol) open and shut case necessarily

PS: Following someone, challenging their presence on private property or otherwise confronting them is NOT aggression or escalation