Of the various articles online related to the number of "homicides by gunshot" in the United States either per day or per year, the total is somewhere between 30-40 a day, and roughly 11,000 to 14,000 or so per year.

 

With that said, how is it that our entire nation is all obsessed with this ONE murder??? ... and not just as a quick passing murder report like the many quick murder reports we hear on the local news daily that are forgotten in a day or two???

 

It would appear that the majority of the general public that can't get enough of this story has been supplied the addictive drug called "murder mystery" by the media to the point that they can't kick the habit. This one particular drug is one they've decided to push on us so that we need MORE MORE MORE!!!

 

Folks young and old are so jacked up on this ONE "murder mystery" to the point that they can't even see that they've been drugged.

 

If everyone is so concerned, how is it that other murders do not spawn such concern and points of view related to them???

 

The general public is so easily manipulated it isn't even funny.

 

There are many people today in this country that are downright depressed, disturbed, angry, and distraught by this verdict. It's being discussed everywhere. I've noticed an uncomfortable vibe when being out in public. I've overheard various folks of all races either whisper or spout out their feelings.

 

There were other murders reported this week in the news. Haven't heard any mention of them beyond a quick blurb on TV. How come???

 

Some can point out certain particulars of this case and say that this warrants this exposure. I ain't buying it. I'm sure that there's details about other murders that easily could as well, but we don't hear about them.

 

A steady diet of this ONE murder by the MEDIA has CREATED concern and interest well beyond what it necessitates, and the general public is too blind to notice even in their own riled up feelings to realize that they've been MADE to take notice of it.

 

It's my belief that the media could pick out of a hat one of the 30-40 murders that happen daily and pound the chosen one down our throats constantly to the point that before you know it, no matter the particulars, it'll have people at the water coolers and in the streets talking about it. Somehow we'll all just suddenly believe, because we've been told, that chosen murder from the hat deserves to be obsessively discussed. It must be because the news keeps reporting it, so it must be very important and worthy of non stop discussion.

 

Humanity is such a funny peculiar animal. We're not nearly as bright as we think we are. Our behavior is way more related to our programming then most would care to admit. It's actually scientifically proven that in a nutshell we're entirely a product of our programming and trained just as we train a pigeon or our cute friendly house pets. Anyone who knows about the "Pavlov Dog Theory" knows exactly what I'm talking about. This is not to say that I'm above it either. I've been programmed to understand the science behind human behavior and I'm very glad that I was because beforehand I had the notion that what made people tick was mostly related to chance. My earlier programming had me way off the mark.

 

When I get frustrated with society I have to remind myself that it's because the majority of them too are "Way off the mark" and can't help it. They just don't know any better and really not much fault of their own.

 

The bell rings, they salivate.

GZ really had no basis to call the police. His reasoning was nebulous. That is what started this whole situation. No basis existed.

There has been an amazing amount of misinformation posted in this thread and this is one of the best examples. Look at the photos of the locations of the buildings and sidewalks in the neighborhood. It was raining that night, so we can assume that that the grass was wet. Instead of hurrying down the sidewalk to reach his destination, Zimmerman reported that Martin was hanging close to the apartment buildings. Whether Martin was traveling near the front of the buildings or their back entrances, his path would have taken him close to the entrances and windows of the residents. That is not normal behavior.

 

People behaving as Zimmerman described Martin was behaving are often reported as "prowlers." That is nothing new an there is nothing nebulous about it. In a neighborhood that had experienced recent home invasions, it is perfectly understandable why Zimmerman reported Martin's suspicious behavior.

 

Martin had the same opportunity to call police if he believed that he was being profiled and stalked as Zimmerman. Instead, Martin called his girlfriend to tell her that a crazy ---cracker was following him. When Martin had the opportunity to proceed home after Zimmerman lost sight of him, he chose to turn back and attack Zimmerman. At least that is what the timeline, physical evidence, and witness testimony seems to support. On the night of the shooting, Martin voluntarily submitted to interviews and a voice stress analysis - without consulting a lawyer. That behavior is not typical of somebody who just committed a crime.

 

Zimmerman was attacked and shot Martin in self-defense. That is what Zimmerman claimed, the evidence supported his claim, and the jury agreed.

 

Alan Deshowitz makes an excellent case that the prosecutor in this case should be investigated for denying Zimmerman's civil rights by withholding exculpatory evidence from the judge to overcharge the case and for withholding evidence that the state was required to turn over to the defense during discovery. The state employee who blew the whistle on Ms. Corey's misconduct was fired on the day that the jury began its deliberations. Dershowitz believes that Corey's actions warrant disbarment.

 

There was no reason for this story to have been nationalized, except that the Obama campaign thought that it would help the reelection campaign. The real crime here was the politicization of a local crime that was correctly handled by local law enforcement from the beginning.

I misspoke. How do you know that he considers himself Hispanic? Just from what box he checked on a voting application? I'll assume (and pardon me if I am wrong) that you've never had to worry about what box to check on an application. Next time you fill an application out of any type that you have to give ethnicity, look at the "Caucasian" or "white" option. Usually it says "non-Hispanic" afterwards. I never feel like I am being truthful on any application, unless I can check both "Caucasian" and "Hispanic." Regardless of which one I check (and I alternate, if I am forced to choose only one), I feel like I am letting one side of my family down.

Just Google "zimmerman considers himself hispanic" and take your pick of sources. There will be a long list of results to answer your question.

Of the various articles online related to the number of "homicides by gunshot" in the United States either per day or per year, the total is somewhere between 30-40 a day, and roughly 11,000 to 14,000 or so per year.

 

With that said, how is it that our entire nation is all obsessed with this ONE murder??? ... and not just as a quick passing murder report like the many quick murder reports we hear on the local news daily that are forgotten in a day or two???

 

It would appear that the majority of the general public that can't get enough of this story has been supplied the addictive drug called "murder mystery" by the media to the point that they can't kick the habit. This one particular drug is one they've decided to push on us so that we need MORE MORE MORE!!!

 

Folks young and old are so jacked up on this ONE "murder mystery" to the point that they can't even see that they've been drugged.

 

If everyone is so concerned, how is it that other murders do not spawn such concern and points of view related to them???

 

The general public is so easily manipulated it isn't even funny.

 

There are many people today in this country that are downright depressed, disturbed, angry, and distraught by this verdict. It's being discussed everywhere. I've noticed an uncomfortable vibe when being out in public. I've overheard various folks of all races either whisper or spout out their feelings.

 

There were other murders reported this week in the news. Haven't heard any mention of them beyond a quick blurb on TV. How come???

 

Some can point out certain particulars of this case and say that this warrants this exposure. I ain't buying it. I'm sure that there's details about other murders that easily could as well, but we don't hear about them.

 

A steady diet of this ONE murder by the MEDIA has CREATED concern and interest well beyond what it necessitates, and the general public is too blind to notice even in their own riled up feelings to realize that they've been MADE to take notice of it.

 

It's my belief that the media could pick out of a hat one of the 30-40 murders that happen daily and pound the chosen one down our throats constantly to the point that before you know it, no matter the particulars, it'll have people at the water coolers and in the streets talking about it. Somehow we'll all just suddenly believe, because we've been told, that chosen murder from the hat deserves to be obsessively discussed. It must be because the news keeps reporting it, so it must be very important and worthy of non stop discussion.

 

Humanity is such a funny peculiar animal. We're not nearly as bright as we think we are. Our behavior is way more related to our programming then most would care to admit. It's actually scientifically proven that in a nutshell we're entirely a product of our programming and trained just as we train a pigeon or our cute friendly house pets. Anyone who knows about the "Pavlov Dog Theory" knows exactly what I'm talking about. This is not to say that I'm above it either. I've been programmed to understand the science behind human behavior and I'm very glad that I was because beforehand I had the notion that what made people tick was mostly related to chance. My earlier programming had me way off the mark.

 

When I get frustrated with society I have to remind myself that it's because the majority of them too are "Way off the mark" and can't help it. They just don't know any better and really not much fault of their own.

 

The bell rings, they salivate.

 

Blue pill, Red pill. You're Spot On.

Washington Post

 

Good For Him.

There has been an amazing amount of misinformation posted in this thread and this is one of the best examples. Look at the photos of the locations of the buildings and sidewalks in the neighborhood. It was raining that night, so we can assume that that the grass was wet. Instead of hurrying down the sidewalk to reach his destination, Zimmerman reported that Martin was hanging close to the apartment buildings. Whether Martin was traveling near the front of the buildings or their back entrances, his path would have taken him close to the entrances and windows of the residents. That is not normal behavior.

 

 

I obviously am posting an opinion. We only have one version of the story. My 99-cent psychological analysis says GZ is out looking to be Johnny Law and saw a black kid and assumed he was up to no good without any proof. How do we know TM was truly acting suspicious? How do we know where he truly was? We don't. It's all speculation.

Zimmerman was attacked and shot Martin in self-defense. That is what Zimmerman claimed, the evidence supported his claim, and the jury agreed.

 

.

 

As I've said I think the jury got it right. However, let's be clear. The jury simply said there's not enough evidence to show that GZ acted with "ill will" or "hatred." The verdict does not say he clearly acted in self-defense. If you believe it did then you also believe that OJ didn't have anything to do with two deaths in 1994.

Washington Post

 

Good For Him.

 

That's really appalling. This supports the fact that the media is to blame for this. For some reason they needed to create a race war, and they succeeded...

As I've said I think the jury got it right. However, let's be clear. The jury simply said there's not enough evidence to show that GZ acted with "ill will" or "hatred." The verdict does not say he clearly acted in self-defense. If you believe it did then you also believe that OJ didn't have anything to do with two deaths in 1994.

No they did not say that, they must have believed self defense or the jury instructions would have lead them to manslaughter.

 

Not sure of your OJ tie in here

DOJ looking to see if they need to bring a civil trial against GZ.

 

Doesn't this this set a huge precedent if they do this and every trial be put on the desk of DOJ. GZ was found not guilty, now they go to try and appease people.

No they did not say that, they must have believed self defense or the jury instructions would have lead them to manslaughter.

 

Not sure of your OJ tie in here

 

Incorrect. A jury NEVER decides someone is innocent. They decide if the state proved their case. The state didn't. The jury might be 80% sure GZ was guilty but that 20% is why he was ruled "not guilty."

 

The state charged 2nd degree murder. The burden was on them to prove the shooting was NOT in self-defense. They did not. The jury's job was not to prove it WAS in self-defense.

 

Therefore, the OJ analogy is appropriate(unless you believe OJ was truly innocent).

Incorrect. A jury NEVER decides someone is innocent. They decide if the state proved their case. The state didn't. The jury might be 80% sure GZ was guilty but that 20% is why he was ruled "not guilty."

 

The state charged 2nd degree murder. The burden was on them to prove it. They did not. It doesn't mean he's innocent.

 

Therefore, the OJ analogy is appropriate(unless you believe OJ was truly innocent).

And they may have decided it was 100% on TM (unlikely) but we don't know. Your saying "the verdict didn't show he acted in self defense" is pure speculation on your part. The jury very well may have been convinced by the defense that he did in fact act in Self Defense, thus the verdict.

I agree that it does not mean he's innocent but It also doesn't mean that he's still guilty, yet unproven.

And they may have decided it was 100% on TM (unlikely) but we don't know. Your saying "the verdict didn't show he acted in self defense" is pure speculation on your part. The jury very well may have been convinced by the defense that he did in fact act in Self Defense, thus the verdict.

 

It's not speculation. I'm saying the jury's job was NEVER to prove he acted in self-defense. It wasn't. Their only job was to see if the state proved what they charged. They said the state didnt'. OJ's jury said the state didn't prove he murdered anyone. That jury didn't say he was innocent.

I agree that it does not mean he's innocent but It also doesn't mean that he's still guilty, yet unproven.

 

No problem. We agree on that. You said I was wrong when I said the verdict did NOT mean he was proven to act in self-defense. That's not correct. That's all I was saying.