Are you Team Trayvon or Team Zimmerman?

[elucidator]

Its looking like a lot of the confusion here is due to "unofficial" leaks, mostly from a police department looking more and more like a CYA hysteria. Winger sites are full of shocking information about Martin's thug life, etc. that appear to emanate from anonymous sources and are passed along as news.

For instance, who hasn't heard about Zimmerman's "broken nose"? According to who, a broken nose? Was he treated for a broken nose? Where? By what doctor? Any pictures taken of his broken nose? And pictures of his battered head, slammed repeatedly into the sidewalk? Any treatment for that? His bloodstained clothes, tagged and bagged for evidence?

Disinformation is spewing from this situation like a lanced boil.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Considering the fact that Zimmerman has put out two dramatically different versions of the events only a racist or a complete moron would lend any credence to his claims.

Case in point: has Zimmerman actually made any statements? Seems to me that his "statements" turn out to be excerpts from police reports that are not yet officially available, hence, "leaked".

[BigT]

I still marvel at people who haven't figured out that you can make an initial judgment based on what little we already know, and that can't understand that you can both derive character from someone's explanations of what happened, and use that derived character to aid you in determining which story you believe.

There really are only two choices. Either Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman, or Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon. And, based on the stories we've heard, Zimmerman seems more like the assaulting type. The only "evidence" that Trayvon is that type of person is that he's black, less affluent, and was walking around at night, while the "evidence" against Zimmerman keeps piling up.

Is it possible there is some evidence out there that negates all this? Sure. Anything is possible. But, so far, all the new "evidence" has been agreeing with my initial conclusion. Why should I sit back and pretend like I haven't already drawn a conclusion? I'm not a juror. I don't need to be impartial. It's not like it actually matters if I'm wrong.

Plus, even if this guy turns out to be innocent, it's a very good thing that any potential criminals who want to use that fact to try to get away with murder will know that they will have to go through a lot of crap to do so. If it also discourages people from confronting suspected criminals after calling the cops on them, even better. I think we can all agree that Zimmerman is at least guilty of egregious stupidity.

[AnalogSignal]

Originally Posted by madmonk28

God, some of the people posting here are revealing themselves to be racist, hateful fucks. It's good to know for future reference.

Are you on the neighborhood watch of the bulletin board patrolling for suspicious characters?

[foolsguinea]

Anybody called George Zimmerman is probably too boring to live.

George, for Murgatroyd's sake? Whatever his parents were thinking, surely he should have changed it to a nickname by now!

[kambuckta]

Originally Posted by madmonk28

They were thinking that they loved their son and that they would be able to watch him grow into adulthood and raise a family of his own.

So, if I'd hung equal shit on Zimmerman, I'd be chastised for being anti-semitic, right??

madmonk, this thread (in my understanding) is NOT devoted to looking at evidence or politics or any other such thing to come to a side-picking outcome. IOW, it's a joke thread dude. You can choose any reason you like to support either side....and I reckon both Trayvon and Zimmerman are sucky names. But Trayvon gets himself over the line by a whisker.

Oh, btw, in REAL LIFE, I reckon Zimmerman needs to get himself a good lawyer and a bloody good defense team. Here in Australia, he'd be chucked away into jail for a goodly term. And rightly so. Sounds to me (from all the reports here in Aus and on the internet) that he's a righteous arsehole.

YMMV etc

[Stoid]

I think this focus on the idea that Zimmerman is a raging racist is misplaced. Yes, I think he profiled Trayvon as potentially criminal because he was black. I also think that that isn't evidence of some raging racism, nor is it really all that unusual - as I said in the other thread, I think we are all bombarded with negative imagry of young black males and we're human. Zimmerman's profiling of Trayvon is just one fucked up element to the whole George Zimmerman is a Dangerously Deluded Asshole picture.

What's much more disturbing is this law and the support for his behavior under this law. Also more disturbing is the cop's willingness to buy Zimmerman's story which I do think is a problem that smacks of racism in a manner more troubling than Zimmerman's because it's part of the system. SYG or not, from what we know so far they were a little too ready to believe Zimmerman and too ready to dismiss Trayvon as worthless. And THAT is where the racism is upsetting. It's the same reason Joe Horn's behavior being given a pass was so repulsive: it was because of who he shot.

In other words, comes down to gun love, not racism. The people who love their guns and want to be able to walk around with holsters on each hip are the ones who think Zimmerman's behavior makes sense, not KKK members.

[Stoid]

Originally Posted by kambuckta

:You can choose any reason you like to support either side....and I reckon both Trayvon and Zimmerman are sucky names.

I sure am glad we finally got an explanation of how the hispanic guy is named Zimmerman....

[kambuckta]

Originally Posted by Stoid

I sure am glad we finally got an explanation of how the hispanic guy is named Zimmerman....

Y'see? That's why this thread is meant to be a parody thingy. In Australia (where I live) anyone with the surname of Zimmerman is going to be of Jewish roots, not from South America.

[RedFury]

Originally Posted by colonial

That Zimmerman guy is a world record asshole, and anyone who sticks up for him is totally fucked up.

Thanks. Saves time typing.

Fuck Zimmerman & his "supporters."

[Mince]

Originally Posted by madmonk28

God, some of the people posting here are revealing themselves to be racist, hateful fucks. It's good to know for future reference.

I guess you don't go in much for satire, eh? That's good to know for, you know, future reference.

[Harborwolf]

This whole thing stinks. Trayvon Martin is walking home from 7-11 and sees a strange man following him in a truck. George Zimmerman is driving around in his truck and sees a strange person walking so he decides to follow him. In his initial report, Zimmerman gets out of his truck after losing Trayvon. A confrontation follows with Trayvon punching George in the face and knocking him over. George then shoots Trayvon in self defense and this is when things get messy with varying witness reports.

What I have problems with is that technically both of them could be using the Stand Your Ground law. Trayvon attacked a strange man that was following him. Zimmerman fired shots at a suspicious kid who was attacking him. That if Zimmerman was a cop, he'd likely be held accountable for this but since he isn't there seems to be no legal recourse. The SYG law seems to give extralegal powers to mere schlubs with weapons. South Park and "They're coming right for us!" As long as you feel threatened, it's open season.

And what I really really really really really have a problem with (really) is that in all this anger at Zimmerman and accusations of racism and impassioned cries for justice, we're mainly looking at the symptom (Zimmerman) and not the cause (Stand Your Ground).

[saoirse]

Originally Posted by Chefguy

I don't know...do you? Following the kid is not a crime. Disregarding instructions is not a crime. Ignoring the kid's requests is not a crime. The kid's girlfriend. . .really? So hearsay is now proof? So what exactly in any of that provides the burden of proof necessary for a conviction? I'm not defending the shooter; I'm just saying that the baying hounds need to dial down the rhetoric, and let the cops do their investigation thoroughly before making a bad bust.

Yeah, because there's NO circumstance where hearsay can be used as evidence. None at all. Except if the person making the statement was dead or something, and it was something he was saying at the time the incident occurred. That would be different, of course. But what are the chances of that being the case?

[gamerunknown]

If one is punched, or even beaten, shooting the person administering the beating is hardly a proportionate response.

That said, Roy Zimmerman is awesome.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by elucidator

There's a Fuckhead Hall of Fame?

There is! Interestingly enough, also located in Cleveland.

[amanset]

Originally Posted by Sitnam

Zimmerman is the vampire cause that'd be the only reason someone would volunteer to drive around at night looking for thugs, Trayvon is the werewolf because that is the only possible way a 140 lb. kid could lay wood on a man driving a car.

He attacked him with his penis?!

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by brazil84

Here's what is apparently Zimmerman's account of what happened.



Assuming that's true, it was probably justifiable for him to defend himself with deadly force.

Of course, it's possible that Zimmerman was lying or exaggerating. But it's bit early to make that call.

The problem I've got is that Zimmerman provoked the incident which led directly to the death of a human being. IANAL, but an investigation for a possible charge of manslaughter would seem to be in order here. I have to agree the police were much too quick to dismiss the case as self-defense.

Trayvon doesn't come across as an angel here, either. He followed Martin back to his car and threw the first punch. He should have had the good sense to just walk away and let Zimmerman go on pretending to be Dirty Harry.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by madmonk28

I'm surprised by the number of people who don't see anything threatening in Zimmerman's behavior. Are you saying that if you were walking home and some random guy with a gun got out and asked you who you were and what you were doing, it wouldn't bother you, or seem threatening?

Wa the weapon clearly visible? I seem to recall that Zimmerman (hereinafter referred to as The Idiot) had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by madmonk28

I'm surprised by the number of people who don't see anything threatening in Zimmerman's behavior. Are you saying that if you were walking home and some random guy with a gun got out and asked you who you were and what you were doing, it wouldn't bother you, or seem threatening?

If I were walking someplace and someone asked me my business, I would be entirely within my rights to tell him to blow it out his ass and keep walking.

He would not be within his rights to interfere with my walking in any way. He would not be within his rights to threaten me with the gun. I would not be within my rights to attack him.

If I did attack him, and knocked him down, and sat on his chest pounding his face, it is entirely possible that he would be within his rights to shoot me.

We don't know if that's how it went down. The conclusion is obvious, therefore - Zimmerman should spend the rest of his life in prison.

Regards,
Shodan

[Really Not All That Bright]

Jesus Christ.

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

The problem I've got is that Zimmerman provoked the incident which led directly to the death of a human being. IANAL, but an investigation for a possible charge of manslaughter would seem to be in order here. I have to agree the police were much too quick to dismiss the case as self-defense.

Trayvon doesn't come across as an angel here, either. He followed Martin back to his car and threw the first punch. He should have had the good sense to just walk away and let Zimmerman go on pretending to be Dirty Harry.

I...

Fuck.

I agree with Lonesome Polecat.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

The problem I've got is that Zimmerman provoked the incident which led directly to the death of a human being.

The incident that led directly to Martin's death was the shooting, not the confrontation.

I am backing out of my space in the parking lot, and I don't see you and hit your fender, denting it. You jump out of your car and shoot me. The incident that led directly to my being shot is not hitting your fender. IYSWIM.

Regards,
Shodan

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

Wa the weapon clearly visible? I seem to recall that Zimmerman (hereinafter referred to as The Idiot) had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

According to the reports it was in a holster on his waist. Also while he did have a permit to carry I'm not sure it was concealed carry.

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

Trayvon doesn't come across as an angel here, either. He followed Martin back to his car and threw the first punch. He should have had the good sense to just walk away and let Zimmerman go on pretending to be Dirty Harry.

The only evidence we have that Trayvon either followed Zimmerman back to his car or that he "threw the first punch" was Zimmerman's word and he's not credible.

Jails are full of people convicted of murder who claimed "self-defense".

We're going to need more than just the word of a racist thug who shot a 17-year-old kid to death for walking while black.

[sachertorte]

My probably not popular opinion is that there should be consequences for killing someone even if it really was self-defense. I'm not talking death penalty, but something.

I get that if someone truly fears for his life, then killing someone else is a reasonable reaction. But I also feel that if you TRULY feared for your life, then you should be willing to exchange your survival for x months in the slammer.

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by Frank

As far as I can tell, the kid standing his ground and defending himself against an armed hooligan is not a crime.

If Zimmerman's story is true, then Martin did commit a crime.

So when say, "As far as you can tell..." did you conclusively determine that Zimmerman's story was false? How?

I am absolutely amazed at the people who are so confident that they know what happened here.

Many of those same people, I'd bet, also confident they knew what happened when those entitled jocks raped that poor woman in North Carolina.

And then when the story developed, and it turned out they didn't.... it wasn't anyone's fault.

How about simply waiting for the release of the police report, and not forming an opinion until then?

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

The only evidence we have that Trayvon either followed Zimmerman back to his car or that he "threw the first punch" was Zimmerman's word and he's not credible.

Why is that?

[brazil84]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

The problem I've got is that Zimmerman provoked the incident which led directly to the death of a human being.

I would say it depends on what the provocation is. I can think of a lot of words and actions which are likely to provoke a strong negative response which should not necessarily waive the provoker's right of self defense.

I have to agree the police were much too quick to dismiss the case as self-defense.

What should they have done which was not done? Is there some important witness who was not interviewed? (I don't know the answer to this question.) Is there some important piece of evidence which was not looked at or tested? (Again, I don't know the answer to this question.)

Trayvon doesn't come across as an angel here, either. He followed Martin back to his car and threw the first punch. He should have had the good sense to just walk away and let Zimmerman go on pretending to be Dirty Harry.

If that's really what happened, then it seems like a real stretch to charge Zimmerman with anything.

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

The problem I've got is that Zimmerman provoked the incident which led directly to the death of a human being. IANAL, but an investigation for a possible charge of manslaughter would seem to be in order here. I have to agree the police were much too quick to dismiss the case as self-defense.

No disagreement -- the investigation needs to be complete.

The problem is -- do you arrest Zimmerman in the meantime? And the answer to that is no, because Florida law says that a person who uses force as permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force - and that "criminal prosecution" means arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

So in order to arrest, the police have to have probable cause that Zimmerman's use of force was unlawful. This is unlike traditional self-defense law, which requires that the accused raise self-defense during trial.

Trayvon doesn't come across as an angel here, either. He followed Martin back to his car and threw the first punch. He should have had the good sense to just walk away and let Zimmerman go on pretending to be Dirty Harry.

If true. We don't know this, any more than we know anything else. For all we know, Treyvon didn't follow anyone and was accosted by Zimmerman, grabbed or punched first and only used for to defend himself. We can't state that Zimmerman's version happened any more than we can state that it didn't.

Which is why we don't have a way to arrest Zimmerman.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by Grey area

Beyond the incident the media circus is absolutely ridiculous. Zimmerman's probably a world class idiot and a murderer but do they really need to use an outdated, middle/primary school picture of Martin and Zimmerman's mugshot?

Despite our fondness for excluded middles, it is quite possible to believe that Zimmerman was likely motivated by a racist assumption that a black kid minding his own business was Up To No Good, and that his reckless behavior at a minimum set events in motion that led to a kid's needless death, and that he should absolutely face at least the possibility of charges based on whatever evidence exists and has yet to come forward---

AND to acknowledge that the media hype is outrageous and unhelpful as it frequently is, and that ridiculous things are being said by people on both sides, and yes that it's probably a calculated move for Team Trayvon to parade photos of a beaming, aw-just-LOOK-at-that-face! 14-year-old kid while Team Zimmy evidently has nothing but a sad-sack mugshot of a doughy middle-aged loser, and to instinctively find something a bit tacky in Trayvon's mom trying to trademark slogans with her son's name for "future projects that will assist other families with similar tragedies"...

So yeah, there's a middle there. It's the big wide thing that a lot of people don't seem to notice.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by sachertorte

My probably not popular opinion is that there should be consequences for killing someone even if it really was self-defense. I'm not talking death penalty, but something.

I get that if someone truly fears for his life, then killing someone else is a reasonable reaction. But I also feel that if you TRULY feared for your life, then you should be willing to exchange your survival for x months in the slammer.

You are correct - this is not going to be very popular. Mostly because it is very unfair - why should an innocent person spend months in prison because he or she was attacked?

Regards,
Shodan

[enomaj]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

Just to say that I think a Pit Thread should be opened on "I hate the whole Team X vs Team Y" syntax that started with the Twilight Saga.

I'm pretty sure this started when Brad Pitt left Jennifer Aniston for Angelina Jolie.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

According to the reports it was in a holster on his waist. Also while he did have a permit to carry I'm not sure it was concealed carry.

Open carry is not permitted in Florida except while target shooting at a licensed venue, hunting, fishing or camping, or going directly to and from those activities.

Originally Posted by Bricker

...in order to arrest, the police have to have probable cause that Zimmerman's use of force was unlawful. This is unlike traditional self-defense law, which requires that the accused raise self-defense during trial.

I don't think he was disputing that. Just the fact that the police had already written the case off as a justifiable homicide until the public outcry.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by Shodan

The incident that led directly to Martin's death was the shooting, not the confrontation.

I am backing out of my space in the parking lot, and I don't see you and hit your fender, denting it. You jump out of your car and shoot me. The incident that led directly to my being shot is not hitting your fender. IYSWIM.

Regards,
Shodan

Not a good comparison, I think. The original incident in your analogy is an accident, not deliberate provocation. If you start a fight in a bar and accidentally kill the guy you're fighting, you're up for manslaughter. Well, The Idiot was out looking for trouble and found it. I suspect having that gun along made him more aggressive.

Black kid in a hoodie? Meh, I'd probably watch him more closely than most other folks. But follow him, demand to know what he's doing there or touch him in any way? Aw, hell no.

[Buck Godot]

Originally Posted by Bricker

The problem is -- do you arrest Zimmerman in the meantime? And the answer to that is no, because Florida law says that a person who uses force as permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force - and that "criminal prosecution" means arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

So in order to arrest, the police have to have probable cause that Zimmerman's use of force was unlawful. This is unlike traditional self-defense law, which requires that the accused raise self-defense during trial.

Non snark question: Ignoring racism for a moment, if Trayvon had beaten Zimmerman's face into the pavement past the point of death and then said that he was just standing his ground against someone following him with a gun against whom he felt threatened would the same defense work for him?

In other words is it self defense to defend yourself against the possibility of your opponent's self defense?

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Buck Godot

Non snark question: Ignoring racism for a moment, if Trayvon had beaten Zimmerman's face into the pavement past the point of death and then said that he was just standing his ground against someone following him with a gun against whom he felt threatened would the same defense work for him?

In other words is it self defense to defend yourself against the possibility of your opponent's self defense?

Sure, if the jury thinks the other person initiated the use of force (by brandishing his weapon, for example), or that hypo-Trayvon's use of force was the result of justifiable fear of injury.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by brazil84

What should they have done which was not done? Is there some important witness who was not interviewed? (I don't know the answer to this question.) Is there some important piece of evidence which was not looked at or tested? (Again, I don't know the answer to this question.)

Well, if I understand all this correctly, and I'm not at all sure that I do, the police investigation was done on the spot and lasted for two or three hours, if that. At the very least, the case should have been referred to the DA's office. Any case involving violent death deserves more than that.

[Emtar KronJonDerSohn]

Hey guys, it's me again. Thank you for fighting my ignorance since 1973. I now know that I was in fact a racist yesterday and all days prior. To this end, I have submitted myself to an accelerated schedule of electro shock therapy at the southern poverty law center's liberal reeducation camp. Now that I am cured, I am almost ready to judge these men as a non-racist!

I feel conflicted though, as I was raised to believe criminal investigations should rely on factual evidence. Now I know we should only judge on the content of one's character, but Al Sharpton and Martin's parents and lawyer only seem to focus on the color of everyone's skin. What should I do?

[Vinyl Turnip]

Dunno. Hang out with Shodan and build a 200-foot strawman?

[Really Not All That Bright]

Change your fucking screen name.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

Sure, if the jury thinks the other person initiated the use of force (by brandishing his weapon, for example), or that hypo-Trayvon's use of force was the result of justifiable fear of injury.

No, the law allows only the use of sufficient force to defend yourself or another. In other words, you use ony enough force to eliminate immediate danger. If you sucker punch someone who's holding a knife on your wife and he runs away, you are not entitled to chase him down and continue beating him. And if it is not necessary to use deadly force, you are obligated not to use deadly force.

But IANAL, so check with an attorney before you make any plans.

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

I have it on pretty good authority that they didn't interview the victim.

You are smarter than your name indicates.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

No, the law allows only the use of sufficient force to defend yourself or another. In other words, you use ony enough force to eliminate immediate danger. If you sucker punch someone who's holding a knife on your wife and he runs away, you are not entitled to chase him down and continue beating him. And if it is not necessary to use deadly force, you are obligated not to use deadly force.

Right, which is why Zimmerman would have had to pull his gun or something before Martin would have the right to act in self defense.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

Just to say that I think a Pit Thread should be opened on "I hate the whole Team X vs Team Y" syntax that started with the Twilight Saga.

According to this, all these preceded "Team Edward/Team Jacob":

-- Team Jolie/Team Aniston
-- Team Clarkson/Team Cowell
-- Team Macca/Team Heather
-- Team Pam/Team Karen

[elbows]

Team Trayvon.

I don't think you should be able to take my life because you 'perceive' a threat. Report me, suspect me, maybe, but certainly not shoot me.

Wanna be cops are a very dangerous breed. That is the scariest part of the whole Street Monitor/Kinda Cop dynamic. It attracts a bad element. They seem all cooperative and abiding to start, but a little power goes straight to their head, and next they are overstepping their authority.

He was told not to follow the kid. He did. Team Trayvon.

[Terr]

Originally Posted by Buck Godot

Non snark question: Ignoring racism for a moment, if Trayvon had beaten Zimmerman's face into the pavement past the point of death and then said that he was just standing his ground against someone following him with a gun against whom he felt threatened would the same defense work for him?

In other words is it self defense to defend yourself against the possibility of your opponent's self defense?

Yes, according to Florida law. (If the situation meets criteria that are in the law).

[Hampshire]

Originally Posted by LonesomePolecat

If you start a fight in a bar and accidentally kill the guy you're fighting, you're up for manslaughter.

This is as good of an analogy as any.
Strip away the two guys backgrounds, their color, age, the setting, etc. and you're left with a simple confrontation between two hard headed individuals getting into a pissing match not unlike a bar fight.
Sure, one of them started it, but just like cops responding to a bar brawl trying to find out who started it is not only impossible but also pointless.
A verbal confrontation ensues and soon escalates into a physical confrontation.
Two men fighting. Doesn't matter what it's about. People fight every day.
Throw a gun into the mix though and it gets tricky. At what point does one of the guys have a right to introduce a gun into the fight? When he's losing? When he feels his life is in danger? When is that?
It just gets really murky and it seems no one has a clue where this imaginary line is that if one crosses you have a right to kill them back. Scary stuff.

[steronz]

After ending my telephone conversation with the emergency dispatch operator, I began heading back to my home, where I planned on completing the sweaters I was knitting for orphans in Sudan. It was then that I remembered that my good friend Trayvon was visiting his father, and surely that was the man I saw walking home. Imagine my embarassment! I decided that it wouldn't be fair to let the police rough up the poor lad, so I turned around to return to the place I last saw him.

"Excuse me!" I called. "Oh Trayvon! Lovely night isn't it? Amazing how the moon reflects off the clouds. Say, what have you got there? Skittles? My, I do love me some Skittles. But as you can see, I already possess a character of, how shall we say, rather rotund proportions, so I must not partake. But thank you for your kindly offer. I just wanted to warn you that I made the, gosh, how should I put this, ever so understable mistake of alerting the local constables of a suspicious person in the area. Little did I know at the time, dear friend, that it was merely Mr. Martin, traversing the streets of our fine neighborhood on his return trip from a snack merchant."

It was then that things got ugly. Trayvon said that he didn't think our neighborhood was particularly fine at all. In fact, he said he believed it sucked! Such offensive language from the mouths of babes. I wouldn't stand idly by while he disparaged our fine community, so I said, "Trayvon, what would your father say if he heard you talking like that? Perhaps we should go tell him now, what do you think?" And Trayvon replied, rather angrily, "Fuck you, spic cracker beaner honkey. I bet you don't even have the fucking gonads to shoot me point blank in the chest."

Well, I was taken aback, to be sure, but I did my best to regain my composure. "Now Trayvon," I stumbled, but the remainder of my thoughts were soon aswirl in floating stars and tweety birds. As I regained my composure, it become apparent that I had been socked, right in the nose! Well, I had no idea it was to come to fisticuffs, but if he was stewing for a fight, I wasn't about to go down easy.

Except that I went down easy. You see, I have a bad knee here, from the time I rescued that family from a burning apartment building. Already bewildered from a shattered nasal bone, I was unable to maintain an upright stature as Trayvon shoved me to the earth. "Trayvon, how could you! We were supposed to go yachting in the Hamptons this summer!" I cried, as my head cracked the pavement. Blow after blow, he rained his rage down on me. I pleaded with him to take mercy, but he was clearly engaged in the recreational use of marijuana. Reefer, as a I believe the negroes like to call it.

I had nearly lost all hope by the time young Trayvon grabbed the sidearm out of my holster. "Don't do it!" I screamed, as he held the barrel firmly against his own chest. His last words to me, coldly uttered, were, "You're going to hang for my death, Jewboy." And then he closed his eyes and discharged a single round into himself."

I was beside myself with grief. When the detectives arrived, I couldn't bear the thought of the Martin family learning that their son had committed suicide. For you see, I'm a devout Catholic, and my religion believes that the souls of those who end their own lives are not destined for eternal rest. So I did the only noble thing I could do in that situation -- I took the blame for his death. Oh, forgive me! I could have done so much more to save the life of this troubled youth. Perhaps if I had shared his Skittles after all, none of this would have ever happened.

[Emtar KronJonDerSohn]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

Change your fucking screen name.

My parents gave me this screen name because they love me and would prefer I not die violently as a teenager.

[Terr]

Originally Posted by Hampshire

Throw a gun into the mix though and it gets tricky. At what point does one of the guys have a right to introduce a gun into the fight? When he's losing? When he feels his life is in danger? When is that?

When he can reasonably fear for his life and he has no reasonable venue of escape.

[Kimballkid]

Originally Posted by gamerunknown

That said, Roy Zimmerman is awesome.

Who the hell is Roy Zimmerman?