The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **achilles** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:34 pm

spidertour02 wrote:
Stop using self-defense as an excuse. That's never been established.

Again, it could end up that he killed Martin in self-defense, but that's not one of the established facts. Following Martin because he was black and there had been a string of robberies with black suspects, going against the instructions of the police operator, Martin being unarmed, injuries to Zimmerman's face, etc. are established facts.

Actually, it has. According to eyewitness testimony, and the physical evidence. Nor did Zimmerman "stalk" anyone. He followed someone he didn't recognize. Stupid, sure, but understandable, considering what had been going on in the neighborhood. With by the way black as victims as well as perps, but you don't seem to care about that.

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:37 pm

It's not understandable to pretend to be Batman unless you're a douche.

by **achilles** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:38 pm

syxxpakk wrote:He stalked him because he was black. If he would have listened to the EMS or wasn't racist, a kid isn't dead. The end. But of course since it's a black kid, you're trying every which way to say: "IT'S OK BECAUSE OF SELF DEFENSE." If it was a white kid and a black man that killed him, your tone would be completely different.

Well, like I said, Zimmerman better stalk himself, since HE'S part black. :lol:

Seriously, are you going for comedy? I mean it's well established by now that Zimmerman was far from a racist, despite pathetic attempts to portray him as such. Funny how you and Martin's family, who never met the guy know him better than his BLACK neighbors who insist he's not racist at all. Or, you know the black kids he mentored. :lol:

by **achilles** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:41 pm

LobsterJ wrote:
There is nothing inherently bigoted about the facts of this story? If Zimmerman were black and Martin white, do you think we would have even HEARD of this story? No, because Zimmerman would be in jail.

Anyhow, I say bigot because those are the people who have been trying to frame this since the outset as some big buck negro attacking a law-abiding citizen, trying to characterize Martin as a "thug" and a "trouble-maker" when he was just a kid. Not an adult, a kid, in the eyes of the law.

You mean like the papers who for almost a month only ran pictures of Martin as a little 13 year old and Zimmerman in a sinister mug shot, instead of the Martin who towered over Zimmerman, or the Martin calling himself a name I won't repeat? Like those people?

by **Eli Katz** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:53 pm

As for the other thing, that's a huge stretch. Most people's reaction to seeing a gun leveled at them would be to freeze or to run, not to charge and attack.

This is an absurd point, devoid of context.

Zimmerman was stalking Martin. No doubt, being stalked at night freaked Martin out. If Zimmerman, after stalking Martin, pulled out a gun and said something threatening or belligerent, Martin may have responded with fists. You don't have to be a Navy Seal to respond instinctively to danger and to fight for your life.

But none of us knows what went down. The released evidence tells us almost nothing about the points between Zimmerman confronting Martin to Zimmerman shooting Martin. We know Zimmerman gets punched; we know Martin is shot; we know little else. You can speculate all you want, but you can't claim to have a persuasive theory of the confrontation and shooting.

All we know for certain is that Zimmerman was told not to follow Martin, but did so anyway, got his ass kicked as a result, and then killed Martin. From my standpoint, Zimmerman deserves some level of punishment for instigating an absolutely avoidable killing. But so far, I haven't seen enough evidence to warrant second-degree murder charges.

by **e_galston** » Sun May 20, 2012 1:31 am

what i find funny, is there's all this outrage over this case, yet at the same time in florida, a woman is facing jail time (possibly for many years) for firing a gun at the ceiling, and NOT harming anyone, after her abusive husband (who had spent YEARS beating the shit out of her) had threatened to kill her. i'm sure its because the woman who fired the gun is black that's why we aren't hearing anything about it though...

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Sun May 20, 2012 3:15 am

Sitebreaker wrote:what i find funny, is there's all this outrage over this case, yet at the same time in florida, a woman is facing jail time (possibly for many years) for firing a gun at the ceiling, and NOT harming anyone, after her abusive husband (who had spent YEARS beating the shit out of her) had threatened to kill her. i'm sure its because the woman who fired the gun is black that's why we aren't hearing anything about it though...

Dog bites man. Black people firing guns isn't news. Probably the Heat won a basketball game.

by **HNutz** » Sun May 20, 2012 7:25 am

If Zimmerman didn't have a gun, he might be in the hospital and Martin might be in jail for beating him. Who knows if/when Martin would have stopped?

by **DMM** » Sun May 20, 2012 8:39 am

HNutz wrote:If Zimmerman didn't have a gun, he might be in the hospital and Martin might be in jail for beating him. Who knows if/when Martin would have stopped?

True. So how come it's legal to defend your life by shooting somebody to death, but it's not OK to beat somebody to death (or hospitalization) when defending your life, from an armed assistant no less (who did end up killing the other person)?

by **HNutz** » Sun May 20, 2012 8:45 am

DMM wrote:True. So how come it's legal to defend your life by shooting somebody to death, but it's not OK to best somebody to death (or hospitalization) when defending your life, from an armed assistant no less (who did end up killing the other person)?

Because at some point, they're no longer a threat...?

by **syxxpakk** » Sun May 20, 2012 9:06 am

If Zimmerman wasn't trying to get off by being like Charles Bronson in the first place, Trayvon would never have done a thing to him.

by **achilles** » Sun May 20, 2012 9:46 am

Sitebreaker wrote:what i find funny, is there's all this outrage over this case, yet at the same time in florida, a woman is facing jail time (possibly for many years) for firing a gun at the ceiling, and NOT harming anyone, after her abusive husband (who had spent YEARS beating the shit out of her) had threatened to kill her. i'm sure its because the woman who fired the gun is black that's why we aren't hearing anything about it though...

I've heard of it, and don't entirely agree with it. The reason given was that she fired in the direction of a room that was occupied. What I would have done would be a fine, and an order to take a firearms safety class. I wouldn't take the gun, since it seems to be her only mean of protection from the guy. And I wouldn't imprison her. I believe the NAACP is protesting against this.

by **achilles** » Sun May 20, 2012 9:49 am

DMM wrote:True. So how come it's legal to defend your life by shooting somebody to death, but it's not OK to beat somebody to death (or hospitalization) when defending your life, from an armed assistant no less (who did end up killing the other person)?

It is legal to do so---IF you can prove the standard reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Zimmerman seems to meet that test, (though the final decision on that will be made either by a judge or a jury, assuming it gets to trial, which I doubt). Martin? Based on the available evidence, there's nothing that suggests Zimmerman was threatening him. It can't be ruled out, either, and likely never will, but the evidence suggests it's unlikely.

by **achilles** » Sun May 20, 2012 9:52 am

HNutz wrote:
Because at some point, they're no longer a threat...?

True, but if the person continues to be a threat until a fatal blow is landed, and that blow is deemed to be necessary by the person who delivers it to survive, and the jury buys that with the reasonable person test....then the person who throws the fatal blow is still off the hook in terms of a criminal case. I would note that such cases have sometimes resulted in civil judgments. However, if in the Martin/Zimmerman case, Zimmerman successfully invokes the stand your ground law, it's my understanding that a civil case would be forestalled.

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Sun May 20, 2012 12:31 pm

syxxpakk wrote:If Zimmerman wasn't trying to get off by being like Charles Bronson in the first place, Trayvon would never have done a thing to him.

Yeah, this is my perspective on this issue.

I'm not a white-guilt ridden liberal intent on making this a race issue because minorities are always the victims and whitey is the great oppressor, nor am I a white victim conservative who needs to use lawyer-speak and technicalities to excuse what Zimmerman did so that whitey can finally win one from these dang minorities that keep getting protected by Nobama.

I think Martin probably was suspicious looking, and probably a thug as well judging on how he was beating the shit out of Zimmerman.

But this is all Zimmerman's fault. He's not Charles fucking Bronson, as Syxx says. He's not fucking Batman. It's not his place to troll the neighborhood carrying a gun and stalking "criminals." That sort of behavior is insane for one, but also it is highly douchey. I've known people like that, and they are neither stable mentally nor likable.

If Zimmerman had gone to the police (and listened to what they said), none of this would have happened. Might he have been defending himself when he shot Martin? Maybe. Even probably. But was that situation his fault to begin with? Yes.

People can argue the technicalities of the law all they want, but strip all the bullshit away, Zimmerman stuck his nose where it didn't belong against the better judgement of anyone with sense and against the recommendation of professionals, and so he is at fault for what happened.