I am talking about someone who initiated the physical confrontation. THAT person, according to the law, does have that requirement.
The police didn’t “instruct him not to”.
In England, provocation is not a mitigating factor. Not really relevant, but yeah.
Roy Zimmerman is a musician.
Also, excellent post steronz. You channeling Ignatius C. Reilly there?
In logic “We don’t need you to do …” is quite different from “We need you not to do …” But in English idiom … not so much.
Intriguing that a private citizen who feels he has the right to demand a stranger provide details is unwilling to give his address to police. 
If Trayvon Martin blinked and revealed onyx eyes indicative of demonic possession, and then with supernatural demon strength handlessly hurled Zimmerman twenty feet away while chanting “The Year Is One”, I would then possibly consider Zimmerman only half responsible.
Not a rhetorical question: what is a conceivable scenario in which an unarmed kid deserves to be shot to death?
The neighborhood watch captain has no more authority than the neighborhood pedo.
In English “Don’t do it” and “I don’t need you to do it” carries completely different meaning.
911 dispatchers are not “police”.
If that’s all they did, then yes. But from what I understand, they interviewed others besides Zimmerman. And also observed that Zimmerman had wounds on his body which corroborated his story.
Where are you getting the idea that the police simply accepted Zimmerman’s story without doing other investigation?
A neighborhood watch is not supposed to confront anyone, question them, or follow them around. I’ve been on the receiving end of this kind of behavior, and it can really, really piss you off.
The point is that Zimmerman is under no legal obligation to obey the 911 dispatcher and stop following someone. The 911 operator cannot instruct Zimmerman, in the sense of telling him what to do and expecting him to obey.
Martin was under no obligation to say anything whatsoever to Zimmerman. Nor do I expect that Zimmerman was obligated to give his home address to the 911 operator. Martin would have been perfectly free to respond to Zimmerman as Zimmerman did to the 911 operator - “I don’t feel like telling you”.
It is not against the law to try to talk to strangers.
Regards,
Shodan
When he answers his phone in a movie theater, of course.
Cosigned.
“Supposed” according to who? The law? Not as far as I can tell.
I’m sure it can. But as far as I can tell, it does not constitute, or justify, assault and battery.
Regards,
Shodan
Nor, apparently, at least in Florida, to shoot them if you don’t like their answers.
Delightful that the usual idiots are, in effect, defending the murder of a black innocent. Would be fascinating to hear their reactions if the colors were reversed.
I think you’re wrong on this one. There are several posters who would usually be on one side of a controversy involving race and are on the opposite side in this one. LonesomePolecat, for example, who has made no secret of his views on race in other contexts. jtgain, too, though he’s more in the Clarence Thomas mold.
I’m honestly curious - are you just screwing around or do you really believe with a good degree of confidence that Zimmerman open fire on Martin after Martin gave unsatisfactory answers to Zimmerman’s questions?
Yeah, or the Mongooses, that’s a good team name. “The Fighting Mongooses.”
Well, if the car is on fire…
How long?
A week?
Two weeks?
Three weeks?
Four weeks?
Shortly after the Chief of Police says it was self-defense?
Long enough so that folks can dig up every little bit of dirt they can to throw at the corpse?
CMC fnord!