Yes, he most certainly is. All it takes for self-defense is preceived danger. Especially when it's been mentioned that after TM confronted him, GZ reached down, for his cellphone, he claims. Could've just as easily have been reaching for his gun, or at the very least exposed the gun to TM. That would definitely give me (if I'm TM) enough reason to feel threatened.

 

What Florida law are you basing these statements on? The self defense/perceived danger comment I mean...

Two completely different scenarios. You can't compare an innocent white mother getting brutally attacked in front of her kid by a black male home invader to an unarmed black 17 year old being followed around his own neighborhood by an armed white/hispanic assailant for no reason.

 

 

 

The scenarios are very similar:

 

In both cases the attackers are UNARMED but the victims are receiving REPEATED BLOWS TO THE BODY. You keep bringing up that TM was unarmed but the laws are pretty clear that the attacker does not have to be armed to be justified in using lethal force.

 

 

 

Should GZ have been following TM around the neighborhood - Nope, he was wrong morally and ethically however, I don't know if legally you can charge him with that. I hope so because while the evidence does not show him to be a murderer, he did act in a wrong manner.

 

Does GZ's follwing TM around justify the beating he received - No, of course not.

 

Is the fact that GZ was follwing TM around (which morally and ethically he should not have) some how cause him to lose his right of self defense - No.

 

That is where it gets muddy. I feel like GZ initiated when he got out of the car with his gun after a dispatcher told him an officer was on the way and that it wasn't necessary for him to follow TM. Others feel like TM initiated when he allegedly started the fight.

 

Definitely agree on the rioting. It couldn't be more stupid to riot in this situation.

 

How do you know he got out of the truck after he was told not to? It seems like I read he was already out of the truck when he was told he didn't need to follow. Regardless, neither are illegal as far as I know.

Getting back to the "possibility" of riots..

 

It really shows the stupidity of most people that participate in riots because the majority of times, they are burning their own neighborhoods, looting their own community stores and service providers. Then when it is all over and nobody wants to relocate or rebuild to those communities, those same idiots are the ones who suffer.

Death can occur in any fight. A couple of years ago, a patron at Dickmans Café in NKY died after he was struck ONE time, fell and hit his head on the ground. So when does the threat of losing life start in a fight? To me, the "threat" starts at being confronted.

 

Is that the status quo now? Get beat up and shoot the winner?

 

His life was not being threatened(per the medical examiner) and he shot his unarmed assailant.

 

If someone is slamming your head in to concrete what are you going to do? Ask them to stop?

 

Also I don't think he had a medical examiner there to ask "are these injuries going to kill me?"

How do you know he got out of the truck after he was told not to? It seems like I read he was already out of the truck when he was told he didn't need to follow. Regardless, neither are illegal as far as I know.

 

Correct, the fact that GZ followed TM in no way takes away he right to defend himself from bodily harm.

It makes me sick to my stomach how much the media has blown this case up, and I point to them as the primary instigators if riots were to ensue as a result.

 

Sure, some can argue that there are certain particulars in this case that warrant this type of exposure, but to me honestly from day one I haven't seen much about it that deserves this type of attention any more than the thousands of cases that happen daily in this country that go unreported and unnoticed.

 

It's been a hype created by the media to have a steady constant story to follow no matter whether or not it's a slow or big news day.

 

On a slow news day, stories pop out of the woodwork that would never have been touched on days consumed by national or international tragedies etc... When something big or tragic happens they shift into overtime and beat us to death with it and make us forget that anything else might be happening. How do they manage to come up with so many stories on days when nothing major is happening? When something big is happening we're made to think that it's the only thing that is.

 

The media is a sham to keep us watching all for the sake of networks to keep the money rolling in from advertisers. Their attempt is mainly to entertain us shamelessly with stories that play on the ugly gossipy nature of humanity that fiend on juicy stories to obsess over. The more tragic, all the better in the case of some people who just love a big story to make their typically boring lives that much more exciting, even at the expense of perhaps thousands of people dying.

 

The media is pathetic, and in many instances, so is humanity. It's a constant brainwashing to the point that the average person can barely see it as such. They just fill their minds on a daily basis with garbage all from a messenger they fully trust who quite often distort, exaggerate, and downright lie to us about the truth. Quite often we never ever hear one iota about things that perhaps we should know about with regard to corruption that lurks around corner, and when we do, it's typically politically driven fabricated nonsense with the intent to falsely sway opinion.

 

If this case ultimately provokes national rioting, that would be a downright shame, and outside of the sorrow and pain it can cause, it would mostly be a shame because it's something that could and should have been avoided.

 

Let's just hope that folks have enough sense not to react poorly, but judging by our history, that's a mighty big request to ask of the common folk with simple and brainwashed minds.

 

Funny how in both situations people say the black guy should die though.

 

:lol2: Come on now, you are better than that. That comes off like if you are not pulling for GZ to be convicted of murder you are a racist.

:lol2: Come on now, you are better than that. That comes off like if you are not pulling for GZ to be convicted of murder you are a racist.

 

I'm just making an observation.

 

I know many people who think Zimmerman is innocent but they aren't racist and I am certain of that.

Correct, the fact that GZ followed TM in no way takes away he right to defend himself from bodily harm.

No, but it does bring up the question of "what else did GZ do that he should not have done?". He was told not to follow, yet he did, puts a lot of things about him into question. If it would have happened right there, where he was when he was on the phone with 911, it would be a lot easier for me to side with GZ. At this point, I cannot.

No' date=' but it does bring up the question of "what else did GZ do that he should not have done?". He was told not to follow, yet he did, puts a lot of things about him into question. If it would have happened right there, where he was when he was on the phone with 911, it would be a lot easier for me to side with GZ. At this point, I cannot.[/quote']

 

Again, according to him he quit following when he was told to. He was apparently already out it his vehicle and following when the dispatcher recommended he stop.

There was a very controversial and infamous criminal trial from some cincy suburb about 6-7 years ago when one punch from a guy killed the other , he stumbled back , fell and hit his head on the curb . They were fighting over parking spots . Guy died So one blow and fall can kill a person. Let alone having another human on top of you slamming your head off concrete .. or as PP put it " a kid and an adult fighting " If you are getting drilled the age of the person kicking the crap out of you ( assuming its not a child ) is not exactly an issue in the heat of the moment.

There was a very controversial and infamous criminal trial from some cincy suburb about 6-7 years ago when one punch from a guy killed the other , he stumbled back , fell and hit his head on the curb . They were fighting over parking spots . Guy died So one blow and fall can kill a person. Let alone having another human on top of you slamming your head off concrete .. or as PP put it " a kid and an adult fighting " If you are getting drilled the age of the person kicking the crap out of you ( assuming its not a child ) is not exactly an issue in the heat of the moment.

 

Nope. And you can kill them for whipping you apparently.

Holy crap, I have been out and didn't think it would hit 6pages.

 

Media has allowed this to become race and IMO wants a riot so they can have news to report.

 

The media controls the minds and actions of many, unbelievable how they can do that, there are a lot of weak minded people.

 

Why put his mom on the stand, she was not there and has no clue to what happened. Only for a sympathy vote by the prosecution, weak if you ask me.

 

Purple Pride has had some awesome responses.