Unless the civilian operator was making it clear that he wasn’t personally requesting Zimmerman to do “that”. Ya know, to dissuade any possible legal action in the future. “WE” didn’t tell him to do that. “HE” did it on his own. “We’re” not legally responsible for his actions.
Whether this is so or not, it was still reckless of Zimmerman to disregard it, to have followed Martin in the first place, and to have exited his truck to try and locate him.
This never gets old. The usual suspects just can’t resist arguing the case over and over, even though their guy won. Seems rather defensive. Why is that?
Not sure. I can’t find a single time any pro-Zimmerman person has started a thread this year.
So it seems to me that the “usual suspects” on the other side of the aisle are the ones to start a new topic about how terrible Zimmerman is, which prompts the rebuttals.
I didn’t think anyone was disputing “how terrible Zimmerman is,” just the legality of some of his actions.
That’s right. You guys are so easy.
Fighting ignorance.
Zimmerman didn’t appear to show a lack of care about risks or danger, and didn’t appear to act without thinking about the results of his actions. It doesn’t appear, to me, that Zimmerman acted recklessly.
Zimmerman was well aware that criminals had been operating in his neighborhood and he was aware that he might come face to face with his neighbors, or an intruder, while walking in his neighborhood.
And when Junior G-Man Zim declared that “these assholes always get away with it”, we can be assured that racial animus played no part, he simply identified Martin as fitting the typical profile of an asshole.
After all, he was walking about needlessly and recklessly eyeballing various buildings in a manner very much like that of a prospective burglar!
Oh, you mean you’re just fishing for a reaction? :dubious:
Racial animus? Martin had referred to the brown skinned Zimmerman as a (insert “n” word here) and then left the relative security of the area near his father’s girlfriend’s home to travel some 300 feet to attack someone he didn’t know anything about. (Such as whether or not his intended victim was armed.)
Zimmerman was thinking in terms of “assholes”, which is not a term used to describe any specific race. The FBI searched Zimmerman’s past looking for a possible racial animus - and didn’t find any.
I didn’t start the thread. But I do enjoy the entertainment.
Oh, well, yes, of course, had he seen a young white man walking aimlessly about in his gated community and recklessly eyeballing houses, he would have responded in precisely the same way! Yes, that’s perfectly obvious!
It’s perfectly non-falsifiable, either way.
Maybe not the first thing he thinks of when they try to give him their drink orders.
Hesitation followed by being punched in the face and falling on my ass and someone jumping on me?
I don’t think Zimmerman was out that night to kill someone and I am almost positive that Martin was not out looking for trouble. Zimmerman wanted to stop some crime and so he ended up harrassing an innocent boy that matched the description of the burglars in recent burglaries (or at least his skin color did). He called 911 and they asked him not to get involved but he got involved anyway and there was a confrontation and he killed the innocent boy.
Lets assume that at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was reasonably in fear of his life. Was this boy rabid, that he would assault a complete stranger with sufficient ferocity to put this man in fear of his life? Or is it more likely that he was trying to defend himself from what could reasonably be seen as an imminent threat to HIS life?
That sort of confusion might mean that whichever party survived the confrontation would have gotten off under stand your ground laws (considering where the burden of proof lays in Florida). And this is the problem with stand your ground laws. You can have situations where two people of good will can end up killing each other because the rules of engagement allows for these sort of situation.
I see this argument all the time, and it is bunk. It is absurd to think that either Martin or Zimmerman, during those 30 seconds (or was it 50?) of physical confrontation were in any way calculating their chances of getting acquitted because of Florida laws if they killed the other guy. The law did not cause the confrontation. The law was applied after the confrontation to decide whether to send Zimmerman to jail.
Well, shit, not only am i embarrassed at you for saying it, I’m embarrassed at myself for laughing. Twofer.
The law gave Zimmerman the confidence to confront Martin, and in general gives those with a hero fantasy the “right” to act like vigilantes, knowing that they will be protected by law if things go south
Do we actually know that Zimmerman was even aware of that law which wasn’t even raised as a defense.
He seems to have been more motivated by having an explosive temper, or what could euphemistically be called “anger management issues”(having been fired as a bouncer for being too rough on customers, multiple times been in trouble with the law and having three different women all file restraining orders and IIRC domestic violence charges against him) and quite probably by the fact that just hours earlier he and his wife had had a major fight which ended with her driving off to her parents house.
I think it’s safe to say he was emotionally compromised and what should have been a simple verbal confrontation turned violent.