George Zimmerman looking worse and worse

[fool]

If he's stalking me, I don't care if he's armed or not, honestly. The stalking is enough.

Zimmerman had every right to walk down that side walk.

In this case... following in a car, and then on foot. Clearly trailing and yelling at me.

Oh now I see, you have no idea what your talking about, he didn't follow him in his truck, and he didn't yell at him so now that you know you're wrong will you research the actual facts?

Oh, well shoot him then, right? Kids shouldn't be walking through their dad's girlfriend's neighborhood.

He shot him because he was bashing his head against the ground, but you already knew that since OK Doser showed you the bloody pictures.
And yet you persist.

 

[fool]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the Zimmerman incident at all.

It is interesting that in response to me saying he didn't do anything as bad as beat a woman or put a gun to her head or falsely imprison her, you counter with a picture of him flipping off the camera as if that is worse. Nice try.

Trayvon may have pretended to be a thug, but in real life, Zimmerman has done more thuggish things.




If I see you walking through your neighborhood, follow you in my car for a while, and then get out and pursue you on foot, what will you do to me?

WRONG! Didn't happen.

 

[jgarden]

Zimmerman was told by the police who established by the "Neighborhood Watch Program" not to have a gun or get out of his vehicle to follow what he considered to be a suspicious individual.

He deliberately ignored those warnings and provoked a confrontation that resulted in the death of an unarmed boy.

All Zimmerman had to do was to follow the guidelines provided by the police and none of this would have happened.

 

[fool]

Zimmerman was told by the police who established by the "Neighborhood Watch Program" not to have a gun or get out of his vehicle to follow what he considered to be a suspicious individual.

He had every right to do both.

He deliberately ignored those warnings and provoked a confrontation that resulted in the death of an unarmed boy.

He provoked nothing, he had every right to walk down that sidewalk.

All Zimmerman had to do was to follow the guidelines provided by the police and none of this would have happened.

All Martin had to do was not try to kill Zimmerman and none of this would have happened.

 

[rexlunae]

His name is Trayvon Martin. He attacked a non-black minority neighborhood watch member who knew something was wrong.

What, exactly, was wrong? Trayvon was in his own neighborhood, and as far as anyone has been able to demonstrate, he wasn't doing anything wrong. The only person who is known clearly to have acted badly in this whole scene was George Zimmerman.

He violently attacked him without cause. Why was that? You don't suppose it has something to do with his character do you?

Zimmerman was stalking Martin, after the police told him not to. So, it's not as if he (Zimmerman) was innocent.

 

[fool]

What, exactly, was wrong? Trayvon was in his own neighborhood,

It's hard to respect peoples opinions when they have the facts wrong. It was not Martin's neighborhood, it was Zimmermans.
Not that it makes a difference.

and as far as anyone has been able to demonstrate, he wasn't doing anything wrong.

He was beating Zimmermans head against the side walk. How do you figure that's "not doing anything wrong"?

The only person who is known clearly to have acted badly in this whole scene was George Zimmerman.

Zimmerman was on the phone with the police until he lost sight of Martin, Is calling the cops "acting badly"?

Zimmerman was stalking Martin, after the police told him not to. So, it's not as if he (Zimmerman) was innocent.

Jury found him innocent, exactly what do you think he's guilty of? Watching his neighborhood?

 

[rexlunae]

Then you will get shot too, that was Zimmermans neighborhood, Martin was visiting.

Hold your fire, there, cowboy. No one owns the neighborhood, individually. It was a gated community, so access was limited, but both Zimmerman and Martin had the right to be there. So, that's not an excuse to follow Martin around or to profile him. Being on the neighborhood watch doesn't give you special powers.

Zimmerman had every right to walk down that side walk.

You realize that there's a difference between walking innocently down a sidewalk, and following someone with a gun, right?

 

[jgarden]

... that was Zimmermans neighborhood, Martin was visiting. Zimmerman had every right to walk down that side walk.

Martin had every legal right to visit his father and go to the store for "Skittles" without being stalked by an adult with a gun who chose to ignore the guidelines set by the police for the Neighborhood Watch Program.

If Martin had been accompanied by a dozen friends carrying bicycle chains and baseball bats, I doubt Zimmerman would have been quite so eager to exercise his legal rights to get out of his car and use the "sidewalk."

If "fool" were to come to my neighborhood, would I be justified in shooting him as he returned from the corner store?

 

[rexlunae]

It's hard to respect peoples opinions when they have the facts wrong.

I'll try not to hold it against you.

It was not Martin's neighborhood, it was Zimmermans.
Not that it makes a difference.

It was both, and they both had an equal right to be there.

He was beating Zimmermans head against the side walk. How do you figure that's "not doing anything wrong"?

That wasn't the beginning of the incident. First, he was stalked by a much older guy with a gun. He didn't likely know Zimmerman's intentions, and frankly, if he thought that Zimmerman had ill intentions toward him, he would have been correct. Is attacking the guy probably the right reaction? No. It's disproportionate and likely to cause you more trouble. But, he was also a 17-year-old kid, who generally should be treated somewhat leniently for making mistakes.

Zimmerman was on the phone with the police until he lost sight of Martin, Is calling the cops "acting badly"?

It depends. Given the conversation he had with them, I don't think it speaks in his favor. I think there's little doubt that he sincerely believed Martin was up to something nefarious. The question that remains is whether that belief was well-founded, or based upon racial profiling. I've seen and heard no evidence to support the former, and several things to suggest the later.

Jury found him innocent, exactly what do you think he's guilty of? Watching his neighborhood?

Given his latest actions, extreme bad taste. He's profiting from having shot a kid. Beyond that, it's a bit unbelievable to me that you can act as badly as he seems to have, and end up killing someone, and walk away scott free.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Rednecks like Nick call Martin a thug for flipping off the camera, but are the first ones to buy the poster of Johnny Cash doing it.

What poster was that? What was his purpose?

 

[fool]

Hold your fire, there, cowboy. No one owns the neighborhood, individually. It was a gated community, so access was limited, but both Zimmerman and Martin had the right to be there. So, that's not an excuse to follow Martin around or to profile him. Being on the neighborhood watch doesn't give you special powers.

Exactly. they both had a right to be there.

You realize that there's a difference between walking innocently down a sidewalk, and following someone with a gun, right?

If you're allowed to walk down a side walk and allowed to carry a gun then you're allowed to walk down the side walk with a gun.
1. Zimmermans gun was concealed so has no bearing on the situation as Martin didn't know he had it and
2. Martin approached Zimmermans truck and stared at him, there's no innocently walking down the side walk on Martins part, read the 911 transcript;
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

 

[ClimateSanity]

Upon googling , it seems cash flipped the camera the bird while he was performing at San Quentin prison. Johnny had strong feelings about prison reform and so do I. It was thuggish behavior and Johnny played the role of a thug in his music.

What was trayvons' reason for being a thug, not merely acting like one for effect?

 

[fool]

Martin had every legal right to visit his father and go to the store for "Skittles" without being stalked by an adult with a gun who chose to ignore the guidelines set by the police for the Neighborhood Watch Program.

Martin wasn't "stalked" if anything Martin engaged when he approached Zimmermans parked truck before he took off running.
Read the 911 call;
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

If Martin had been accompanied by a dozen friends carrying bicycle chains and baseball bats, I doubt Zimmerman would have been quite so eager to exercise his legal rights to get out of his car and use the "sidewalk."

He most likely would have done the same thing that he did, stayed in his truck and called 911, he only got out when Martin took off running and he lost track of him.

If "fool" were to come to my neighborhood, would I be justified in shooting him as he returned from the corner store?

You're an idiot if that's how you characterize the situation, Martin was shot because he was beating Zimmermans head against the sidewalk, not because he "came to the neighborhood" as you so glibly put it.

 

[fool]

I'll try not to hold it against you.

I'm not the one with their facts wrong, it was not Martin's neighborhood.
As I said, not that it matters beyond the fact that you got it wrong.
It's hard enough to sort thru these things when we all have the same facts and impossible when we don't.

It was both, and they both had an equal right to be there

They both do have the right to be there yes, not Martins neighborhood.
Him and his Father were visiting his Father's girlfriend.
Martin did not live there.
Are we done with this detail?

That wasn't the beginning of the incident.

Right, Martin approched Zimmerman's truck first.

First, he was stalked by a much older guy with a gun.

Wrong, he approached Zimmerman while he was in his truck parked in front of the club house on the phone with the police.
Read the transcript;
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

He didn't likely know Zimmerman's intentions, and frankly, if he thought that Zimmerman had ill intentions toward him, he would have been correct.

Zimmerman called the cops so you can forget that "ill intentions" line. Do I display "ill intentions" when I call the cops on a suspicious person?

Is attacking the guy probably the right reaction? No. It's disproportionate and likely to cause you more trouble. But, he was also a 17-year-old kid, who generally should be treated somewhat leniently for making mistakes.

He was bashing someones head against the sidewalk.
The concrete side walk.
It would have been great if the cops had showed up in time but they didn't.

It depends. Given the conversation he had with them, I don't think it speaks in his favor. I think there's little doubt that he sincerely believed Martin was up to something nefarious.

No doubt, that's why he called the cops.

The question that remains is whether that belief was well-founded, or based upon racial profiling.

He called the cops, read the transcript. If he called the cops because Martin was black has no bearing on the fact that he did what one is supposed to do when they see a suspicious person.

I've seen and heard no evidence to support the former, and several things to suggest the later.

Irrelevant, he called the cops.

Given his latest actions, extreme bad taste.

I would agree on the bad taste part, he should change his appearance and get on with his life.

He's profiting from having shot a kid.

His life is ruined and he is one of the most reviled figures in recent memory because of all the people who bought into the medias witch hunt.

Beyond that, it's a bit unbelievable to me that you can act as badly as he seems to have, and end up killing someone, and walk away scott free.

He shot someone who was bashing his head into a sidewalk.
What were his choices?
Tell me Rex, forget about what you think about him following him down the side walk with the police on the phone. He's there and Martin is on top of him pounding his head into the side walk, was he just supposed to play dead? Apologize?
What?

 

[rexlunae]

Exactly. they both had a right to be there.

Ok, now that we have that established...

If you're allowed to walk down a side walk and allowed to carry a gun then you're allowed to walk down the side walk with a gun.
1. Zimmermans gun was concealed so has no bearing on the situation as Martin didn't know he had it and
2. Martin approached Zimmermans truck and stared at him, there's no innocently walking down the side walk on Martins part, read the 911 transcript;
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

1. Fair enough. He was still chasing after Trayvon. Trayvon was running away. Fight or flight, his first impulse was flight. He clearly perceived Zimmerman to be a threat, and didn't want to engage him at first.

2. Your argument about the innocence of being on a public sidewalk would apply here to Martin. And if he stared at Zimmerman, that could have been because he correctly perceived that Zimmerman was staring at him, profiling him, calling the police, and discussing him with a dispatcher.

 

[fool]

What poster was that? What was his purpose?

He was flipping the bird to the Nashville Music Industry and country radio because he felt they hadn't supported him or whatever.
There is no evidence that NickM owns that poster.
That has zero to do with the topic of this thread.
https://www.quora.com/Why-was-Johnny-Cash-flipping-the-bird-in-his-famous-photograph

 

[fool]

Ok, now that we have that established...



1. Fair enough. He was still chasing after Trayvon. Trayvon was running away. Fight or flight, his first impulse was flight. He clearly perceived Zimmerman to be a threat, and didn't want to engage him at first.

2. Your argument about the innocence of being on a public sidewalk would apply here to Martin. And if he stared at Zimmerman, that could have been because he correctly perceived that Zimmerman was staring at him, profiling him, calling the police, and discussing him with a dispatcher.

Excellent!
I'm glad we have all that established.
You don't have a right to bash someones head against the side walk because they are discussing you with a police dispatcher.

 

[rexlunae]

Excellent!
I'm glad we have all that established.
You don't have a right to bash someones head against the side walk because they are discussing you with a police dispatcher.

I agree with that much, of course. But if someone is chasing you, that's a little different. If Martin was looking to get into a fight with Zimmerman, why do you suppose he ran away at first?

 

[fool]

I agree with that much, of course. But if someone is chasing you, that's a little different. If Martin was looking to get into a fight with Zimmerman, why do you suppose he ran away at first?

He tried to lose him. And he succeeded.
Zimmerman tried to keep him in sight and failed.
He hung up with the police and that was it until Martin jumped him.
NOW, if it ever came to light that Zimmerman tried to detain Martin in anyway then this would be a totally different story and it would be murder as Zimmerman had no right to detain anyone.
But we don't have evidence of that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Exactly. they both had a right to be there.



If you're allowed to walk down a side walk and allowed to carry a gun then you're allowed to walk down the side walk with a gun.
1. Zimmermans gun was concealed so has no bearing on the situation as Martin didn't know he had it and
2. Martin approached Zimmermans truck and stared at him, there's no innocently walking down the side walk on Martins part, read the 911 transcript;
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

So are you now conceding that this wasn't "Zimmerman's neighbourhood" then?