As much as gun nuts would like to deny it, there are people out there that carry around firearms in the hopes that one day they might be put in a life-or-death situation where they are justified in pulling their gun out and being a hero. They long for that moment of complete control over someone else. And when you live your life, constantly toting a gun around, in hopes that one day you might be lucky enough to get into a situation where you are justified in using it, it begins to cloud your perception of reality. Small offenses become big injustices. Small threats become life threatening. You escalate stupid shit for no reason. All in a dysfunctional brain's quest to have that moment of absolute power over someone else. I once was with a friend that chased down a car load of kids because they stole two cases of beer from the gas station he worked at. He had their license plate number. He had good descriptions. He even had security video tapes of it all. But he chose to escalate it to where we were doing double the speed limit through residential neighborhoods in the middle of the day. When he cornered them in a cul-de-sac and they got out of their car with baseball bats, he jumped out with 1911 in one hand and a Python 44mag in the other. He ignored reason because he desperately wanted to kill SOMEONE for a long time, so much so that he felt justified in everything he did to try to stop them. Over $20 worth of beer. If you go around your whole life looking for someone to kill, so much so that you escalate stupid shit to where you're justified in killing, is that premeditated murder? Sure you didn't pick the time or the place or the victim. But you do live your whole life in hopes of getting into that situation and take positive action towards that goal. So since people use this alleged "string of burglaries" to try to justify Zimmerman's actions, let's see the evidence. Was there really a string of burglaries, or had Zimmerman's mind been so obsessed with small injustices, that it recognized a garage door left open and a 7-9 year old kid wandering into it as a "burglary"? What are the details of this "thwarted burglary" that he had a hand in thwarting? If brought into the light of day, this alleged "crime spree" that Zimmerman put himself on the front line to stop really just a string of misunderstanding/over-reactions on Zimmerman's part, then there needs to be more thorough of an investigation into the incident. Or maybe not. If they gun lobby had their way, living your life every day in hopes of getting into an escalatable incident in hopes of killing someone would be one of our most cherished rights. I don't think race was a motivating factor. I don't think that taking guns away from the population would stop this kind of thing from happening again. I just think that when someone goes out of their way to harass someone, and then kills that person in self defense, it should be considered murder and those who do it should be punished in the same way they would if they had chosen a victim beforehand. They don't necessarily premeditate the victim or the time or the place. But they do very much live their lives in hope of a random opportunity presenting itself and they become biased towards overreaction and escalation vs. rationality and symmetrical force. And nothing good can come from that.
I disagree If I were in a bad neighborhood and someone was following me, I'd probably try to put some distance between us. Confrontation would be a last resort but not entirely out of the question. If I were in a gated community or even a regular suburb, I'd feel a lot less threatened. I would hope that I'd have my wits about me enough to ask what the problem is and explain my situation. I don't think Zimmerman had his gun out the entire time. A short explanation that Martin was visiting someone in the neighborhood would have probably defused the situation. If it had been me, I would have probably even offered to have the guy walk with me to the house where I was staying and watch me go inside. I've got nothing to hide, and having my pride stung a little bit is better than sticking my chest out and being defiant about it. Like I said, this wasn't a ghetto where someone following you would raise red flags. It was a gated community, which are usually pretty affluent. It sounds like both were equally at fault. Zimmerman was probably too paranoid and Martin felt like he was being disrespected or profiled. It obviously turned violent and I have trouble believing Zimmerman was the first to throw a punch. He was armed, he had no good reason to be any more aggressive than simply following the guy.
Ok then dude, if Trayvon hadn't attacked Zimmerman then he wouldn't need to outrun any bullets would he? You make it sound like Zimmerman was chasing the kid down the street firing shots at his back I mean seriously, 6"2 kid comes out of nowhere and starts beating on you (like the only witness said) you have no idea, you only know he's punching you in the face and you're carrying a weapon. It easy to say he should have done this or that when you're relaxing in your chair going through the few facts you do have in your head.
Hell yeah I do. Maybe you just keep running, but I'd confront the guy because he's obviously not a cop. I'd ask him why the fuck are you chasing me? Im guessing you've never been chased before, well when adrenaline kicks in sometimes that is exactly what happens. Nothing to do with being scared. And I don't think the people really care if they're like Zimmerman or not, its all about revenge. How are you so sure Trayvon attacked him? Even if he did he was fully justified because Zimmerman was fucking chasing him down the street. There was no coming out of no where, that's some bull shit. Zimmerman saw him, Martin tried running away and Zimmerman chased after him. Its not like Martin is secrety Spiderman and somehow jumped from a rooftop and started beating on Zimmerman's face.
[quote name='"gedio"'] It is a normal reaction to attack someone who's following you. I wouldn't hesitate.[/quote] And thats how you end up in a casket. Instead of running for immediate safety youd rather turn around and face uncertainty in a violent situation. That makes a whole lot of sense
As far as I know there was a witness who corroborated at least part of Zimmerman's story. Please note that we may never know what really happened that night. It might be 'normal', but it may not be the best decision, especially in Florida where many people are armed. If you run towards a gunman, he's going to have an easier time shooting you than if you ran away. It's easier to hit a target that is ten yards away than it is to hit one that is fifty yards away. Whether you run or fight depends completely on the exact situation. You aren't privy to the exact circumstances, so you are in no position to decide what was the best decision. ---- Since we're all speculating, I probably would've ran in Martin's situation (unarmed and in a neighborhood I knew), especially if the gated community is anything like the other gated communities in Florida that I've been in. The houses generally aren't THAT far from the road, so it wouldn't be hard to find cover behind a car or a house.
[quote name='"HongKongPhooey"'] At least he didn't go out like a bitch.[/quote] I hope that is sarcastic. Theres no reason for someone to die violently, i dont care what they had to prove. Zimmerman was doing his job, Martin was breaking the law by trespassing.
Note that these are the bare facts pulled from 911 calls and various other news stories. One witness didn't see the entire events unfold and only saw the tail end of it. Martin lived in the neighborhood, and he was trespassing? I thought I had heard it all.
I have been chased before dude, when I was 16 on my bike, by two full grown dudes in their car. I got away by riding my bike down a bike trail with pylons in front of it. Nowhere did I get the idea that confronting the fuckers was a good idea and hey, I got away without a scratch. My adrenaline kicked in and got me the fuck out of there. If I had confronted those guys my ass would have been beat. I'm not sure of anything, but the only witness in the case backs up Zimmerman's story that Martin attacked him. Zimmerman himself said that he lost sight of Trayvon and was heading back to his truck when he was attacked by Trayvon. So the out of nowhere thing isn't "some bullshit". The bullshit is you painting this out like he chased the kid down like an animal when there's no evidence pointing that way, and there is evidence supporting Zimmerman's self defense story.
I hope it was sarcasm, too I don't know if Martin was technically trespassing since he was an invited guest in that community, but his being there was certainly out of the ordinary I stand by my opinion that both are to blame. I don't see how Zimmerman could have justified shooting someone who was running away if that was the choice that Martin made. Martin chose to turn and confront the guy. It would seem that it was a pretty nice neighborhood that he was in, no real threat of being mugged or anything that would necessitate fighting someone who was following him. A cool-headed exchange of words could have defused the situation. Zimmerman obviously jumped to a conclusion, but it doesn't seem like Martin did anything to make a case for his right to be there.
By two people, well yeah I'd run too. Fuck that isn't even fair. One-on-one is a completely different thing entirely. The witness backs up the tail end of it. Oh but I'm sure Zimmerman lost him after literally just seeing the kid running down the street and chasing him. Sure. The evidence is he told the cops he was in pursuit, and Trayvon confronted him for it. Which means there is no more self defense, sorry bro but Trayvon didn't just come out of the bushes and attack Zimmerman like some kind of animal either. Even if he did he's justified because he's being fucking chased, Zimmerman told the Dispatcher that he's chasing Martin.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I really don't think that's a legal reaction. You can't beat someone up just for following you. What if the person isn't actually following you? What if they're following you for an innocent reason? I don't think there's any situation where you can beat the shit out of someone because they seem like they're following you and could, maybe have a weapon. I think Martin would only be justified in attacking if he were attacked first, then he would have been free to defend himself. Likewise if Zimmerman was attacked first, then he should be free to defend himself. I suppose the problem is that we may never know who attacked first. And frankly, that whole "innocent until proven guilty" idea is rather important here.
In the 911 recording, the dispatcher asks Zimmerman his address, he starts to tell her but stops and says something like "I don't want to say it out loud, I don't know where this guy went". Pretty sure I read that Martin took a shortcut between a couple houses, could be that's when Zimmerman got out to pursue him and then lost him. Could be. Who knows, aside from Zimmerman himself.
You don't think there's a possibility that a 160 lb. 17-year-old could outrun a 240 lb. 28-year-old with asthma? I'd say there is. And Zimmerman is going to throw the first punch when all he has is a suspicion? He was probably trying to keep his eyes on the kid until the police showed up. The guy seems like a dime store vigilante but even he must have enough sense to know that you can't assault someone based purely on suspicion. And judging by all the people here who say it's their first reaction to fight someone who appears to be following them, I'd say it's safe to say that was Martin's reaction, too.
I'm pretty sure that the most they could stick Zimmerman with would be manslaughter... Murder is a different animal.
He was following Martin not chasing him dude. The chasing part is you filling in the blanks. He did ignore the dispatcher, but it's understandable from his point of view that he wanted to keep an eye on him until the cops (which he called) showed up. Also the dispatcher just said, "that's not necessary" when he said he was following him. Didn't actually say "Stop following that guy". That's another strike in his favor I might add, if you go after a kid with what some say is a race fueled agressive confrontation in mind, do you really call the cops beforehand and tell them to get over there? I think Zimmerman's certainly a poor neighborhood watch captain, but is he a murderer? Not even close based on available evidence.
Plus, wasn't there something about break-ins happening in the neighborhood previously? So you're a neighborhood watch guy and you see some "thug" looking kid (lets not even play the race card, thugs can be any color of the rainbow) walking slowly down the street, and then he ducks between some houses. Obviously the dude was up to no good in Zimmerman's mind. I think a lot of people would be suspicious in his position. He shouldn't have pursued the kid, mostly for his own safety. The 911 dispatcher is always going to tell you not to follow, not to get involved, because they're trying to protect you. To be fair, I don't think it's impossible that Zimmerman was in the wrong here and maybe he even started the confrontation, maybe he even took the first swing. But I think it's totally unfair to act like that's definitely or even most likely what happened. People get too caught up in the "unarmed black kid killed by non-black man" idea and run with it, because obviously Zimmerman must just be a racist asshole who really wanted to shoot a black kid that night. Come on, let's be a little more fair about it here. The dude is innocent until proven guilty, whether anyone likes it or not.