George Zimmerman arrested on charges of aggravated assault with a weapon
- Thread starter KnighttimeJoe
- Start date
85 you feel it is okay to kill someone with a gun if they are beating you up, even if you are responsible for said a$$ kicking?
and stop with the not guilty...he was found not guilty of Murder 2...if they had gone for man slaughter he would have been found guilty...
Chemmie, you know 85 carries and feels its okay to shoot someone if they hit him, so do yourself a favor and don't follow him...Originally posted by UCFKnight85:
This post was edited on 1/30 12:31 PM by Dmarino110
This is the most idiotic question/comment I've seen from you. And that's saying something.
First off, in what way was Zimmerman responsible for the "ass kicking"? He violated no laws and in fact, had stopped walking in the direction of Martin when he was ambushed. Martin had every opportunity to leave the area but instead he chose to return to the area, hide, and wait for Zimmerman to pass.
Second, your first idiotic question implies that it's not possible to die via blows to the head. Which every single medical journal will prove otherwise. The self defense laws are very clear: you may use lethal force if you are threatened with grave bodily harm. I'd say a guy on top of you, beating you to a pulp, is a pretty good example of that.
I'm sorry the facts of the trial and the fact that hew as found not guilty bother you. Facts tend to bother people who are grasping at straws to make a point.
Once again, is Zimmerman responsible for the death of martin due to his actions even after dispatch told him not to follow martin?
I teach criminal justice at night.
One of our textbooks was updated in 2012. Suddenly it was updated again last year. Very unusual for this text. The previous update was ten years before that. It took me awhile, but I figured out why.
Included in the new version: A discussion of Martin/Zimmerman and justifiable use of force in the various states with several passages critical of Florida.
Edited out of another chapter: Discussion on the case of a battered woman who had been thrown to the ground in her yard and had her head repeatedly bashed into a brick that was partially buried in the flower garden right underneath her head. The man had repeatedly beat her in the past. He only intended to hit her. It was dark and he was drunk. He could not see and did not know the brick was there. Yet, his murder conviction was upheld.
One of our textbooks was updated in 2012. Suddenly it was updated again last year. Very unusual for this text. The previous update was ten years before that. It took me awhile, but I figured out why.
Included in the new version: A discussion of Martin/Zimmerman and justifiable use of force in the various states with several passages critical of Florida.
Edited out of another chapter: Discussion on the case of a battered woman who had been thrown to the ground in her yard and had her head repeatedly bashed into a brick that was partially buried in the flower garden right underneath her head. The man had repeatedly beat her in the past. He only intended to hit her. It was dark and he was drunk. He could not see and did not know the brick was there. Yet, his murder conviction was upheld.
What would happen if chemmie were mugged/murdered by a non white person? Would he go back to being an avid supporter of racist Ron Paul?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Actually they were many witnesses whose testimony supported Zimmerman's defense.
You're the biggest goddamn asshat moron on this board.
This statement shows beyond a reasonable doubt that chemise cares nothing for actual facts and is simply a parrot of the liberal head cases that he reads and watches on TV.
As as for the person above that said they would've gotten a conviction on manslaughter. Manslaughter was considered by the jury as a lesser included offense. The problem is that the same self defense justification that drove acquittal on murder drove acquittal on every single other charge. Which is as it should be. Seriously, if you're going to parrot MSNBC or some other flawed view of the trial, you should at least take the time to research the actual record and the law around it.
I don't know what else to say, as dipshits like chemmie have chosen to deliberately ignore the facts of this entire case and make up their own laws and viewpoints. But I'll try one last time.
The state of Florida has a law that allows for the legal carry of a firearm.
That firearm is required to be concealed while carrying. According to the facts of the case, Zimmerman's firearm was concealed.
If this firearm is concealed, you have a right to carry on with your life in a regular manner.
Like it or not, following someone is not against the law. It would only be against the law if a firearm was brandishes in an aggressive manner, which we know as fact, it was not.
As we know as fact, Zimmerman had stopped his following of TM, and had turned to walk back to where he came from.
As we know as fact, Martin had every opportunity to evade Zimmerman, if he indeed felt threatened by him, but instead deliberately chose to hide, wait, and ambush Zimmerman in an attempt to assault him.
As corroborated by nearby witness testimony, Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating the shit out of him, at which point Zimmerman drew his legally concealed firearm and shot at Martin to stop the attack.
As we know by consulting Florida law, this is a classic example of legal self defense and 100% permitted under law.
That is it. That is the most objective summary of this case, as everyone already understands.
Maybe, just maybe, you'll stop being an idiot and digestthis.
The state of Florida has a law that allows for the legal carry of a firearm.
That firearm is required to be concealed while carrying. According to the facts of the case, Zimmerman's firearm was concealed.
If this firearm is concealed, you have a right to carry on with your life in a regular manner.
Like it or not, following someone is not against the law. It would only be against the law if a firearm was brandishes in an aggressive manner, which we know as fact, it was not.
As we know as fact, Zimmerman had stopped his following of TM, and had turned to walk back to where he came from.
As we know as fact, Martin had every opportunity to evade Zimmerman, if he indeed felt threatened by him, but instead deliberately chose to hide, wait, and ambush Zimmerman in an attempt to assault him.
As corroborated by nearby witness testimony, Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating the shit out of him, at which point Zimmerman drew his legally concealed firearm and shot at Martin to stop the attack.
As we know by consulting Florida law, this is a classic example of legal self defense and 100% permitted under law.
That is it. That is the most objective summary of this case, as everyone already understands.
Maybe, just maybe, you'll stop being an idiot and digestthis.
You said anyone with a gun.Originally posted by chemmie:
Zimmerman wasn't a cop, Pythagoras.Originally posted by Sir Galahad:
So she would be the aggressor if she walked out of her car after a traffic stop?
But, he thought he was.
You get an F for effort. Zimmerman's testimony was backed up by forensic evidence, other witness testimony (yes, there were witnesses), and the unedited recordings of the phone calls. You obviously have not yet read either the court records or any analyses that do not have MSNBC as the source or link. The fact that you have been unable to get past the initial Crump and Parks fable to actually examine the truth of the situation but vehemently argue your false position shows exactly what is wrong with you and much of the people voting democrat in this country. But go ahead and claim troll status to mask your absolute ignorance and your obedience to your liberal mantras. We'll sit here and shake our heads at your stupidity and hope that you really didn't receive a degree from our beloved alma mater.
You can only show someone the door, they have to walk through it. Im guessing some of these people arent reading that big label that says push.
