Man follows black teen who seems "suspicious" and kills him.

Originally posted by juggerman
a punch in the face can kill you but if i hit you then do nothing else your life is not in immediate danger. If i were to keep hitting you then yes you could shot. it would have to be a continuing threat. Im just saying what i know about how the self defense law works

anything is possible i guess but there is no EVIDENCE that Zimmerman assulted him in any way prior to the beating he took. what we have is evidence that Trayvon punched and slammed Zimmermans head. the why is unimportant since it cant be proven. your opinion of what took place doesnt matter the facts are.

im infering what took place with the facts. you are making up what could have maybe happened with no evidence at all. Even if Zimmerman hit/pushed/slapped/name called Trayvon 1st and Trayvon was intimidated once he got on top of Zimmerman and started slamming his head he was no longer defending himself. he was assulting at that point. He could of hit the guy and ran home screaming for his dad but instead chose to try to beat the guy into the earth.

again i simply infering due to the facts. im not assuming all that much anyway. youre the one making baseless claims such as Trayvon was defending himself with nothing to back it up with. Trayvon could have hit 1st or Zimmerman could have but the fact of the matter is Trayvon took it to where Zimmermans life was in danger. NOTHING shows Trayvon was in ANY danger at all

Has the trial started yet? I'm pretty sure it hasn't. So whatever 'facts' you think you have are at most unverified and probably one sided.

Also you say the 'why' doesn't matter. The 'why' matters very much. Especially because of the stand your ground law, which ironically could work against Zimmerman in the trial if it's decided that he was the one who initiated the confrontation. The 'why' is what the trial is going to be about. Zimmerman's future depends on the 'why'.

Lastly, you aren't allowed to pick a fight with someone and then shoot them when things go south for you in the fight, which is what you implied. That doesn't qualify as self defense because you initiated everything. That would be a pretty idiotic loophole in the law, wouldn't it?

No evidence released to the media outlets so far. Funny how you dismiss my opinion, yet your conclusion that is was self-defense on Zimmerman's behalf is just that, opinion.

Point taken maybe i should change what i said to it is my belief that it was self defense based on the evidence that has been released

No, you're running to conclusions based on minimal information, much of which could have been distorted due to the media.

it was distorted but against Zimmerman in most cases ive seen.

But again, we do know Zimmerman had a gun and we do know Zimmerman pursued Travon (his own words). Travon's not allowed to defend himself against a gunmen?

Again the line where it stops being self defense is when he got on top of him slammed his head into the ground instead of trying to get away.

Lastly, you aren't allowed to pick a fight with someone and then shoot them when things go south for you in the fight, which is what you implied. That doesn't qualify as self defense because you initiated everything. That would be a pretty idiotic loophole in the law, wouldn't it?

Ive already addressed this

I know, and you were wrong when doing so.

Originally posted by juggerman
Point taken maybe i should change what i said to it is my belief that it was self defense based on the evidence that has been released

it was distorted but against Zimmerman in most cases ive seen.

Again the line here it stops being self defense is when he got on top of him slammed his head into the ground instead of trying to get away.

So no "stand your ground" for Travon, just for Zimmerman, eh?

Turning your back on a guy with a gun who followed you and then you punched/pounded is a pretty stupid move, no? Travon couldn't have feared for his life here from the start. No chance at all?

I know, and you were wrong when doing so.

Sorry i meant in general if a person starts attacking and you believe your life is in danger yes. Not if you planned to do it from the getgo thats called intent. Might be hard to prove tho

how is that wrong?

Originally posted by inimalist
not really

name a nation where there would be any controversy on this case?

the only reason there is question is because American gun laws are so insane. Its not that we don't know enough about the scuffle, what we know is an armed man chased down a kid and shot him for some reason...

You didn't get that propaganda right. Let me help you:

"what we know is a WHITE armed man maliciously chased down a child and murdered him for hatred and bigotry reasons."

Now that is more in line with the stupid propaganda.

Juggerman - Is that what the new story is now? That Trayvon Martin somehow planned to have Zimmerman follow him and confront him with a gun so that he'd have an excuse to beat the shit out of him?

So no "stand your ground" for Travon, just for Zimmerman, eh?

im not arguing for "stand your ground". i havent even mentioned it once.

Is that what the new story is now? That Trayvon Martin somehow planned to have Zimmerman follow him and confront him with a gun so that he'd have an excuse to beat the shit out of him?

no that was if Zimmerman/anyone started the fight just to get hit so they could shoot

Originally posted by BackFire
Juggerman - Is that what the new story is now? That Trayvon Martin somehow planned to have Zimmerman follow him and confront him with a gun so that he'd have an excuse to beat the shit out of him?

Oh! Is that the new propaganda?

no

Originally posted by juggerman
im not arguing for "stand your ground". i havent even mentioned it once.

Stand your ground is:"that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first"

But okay, I should have said "no self defense" for Travon out of fear. Considering Zimmerman was the one with a gun.

Stand your ground is:"that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first"

But okay, I should have said "no self defense" for Travon. Considering Zimmerman was the one with a gun.

no proof Trayvon knew he had a gun before the attack began or that he felt threatened. (not at all saying this is how it went down at all since i feel like im gonna get some heat for this) Trayvon could have just decided to hook off on Zimmerman cuz he didnt like how he was approached. as you said before we just dont know

Originally posted by juggerman
no proof Trayvon knew he had a gun before the attack began or that he felt threatened. (not at all saying this is how it went down at all since i feel like im gonna get some heat for this) Trayvon could have just decided to hook off on Zimmerman cuz he didnt like how he was approached. as you said before we just dont know

Say what you mean, and mean what you say, but never hold back because of the fear of what other people say.

but i want to be accepted...

Originally posted by juggerman
but i want to be accepted...

Why? If you stand your ground (just don't be an idiot) then they will have an easier time accepting you.

twas a joke i just didnt want people to assume i was stating thats what actually what happened. a disclaimer of sorts

by "heat" i meant the "oh now your assuming what happened and it was all Trayvon and what if "this" or "that" and such

Originally posted by juggerman
twas a joke i just didnt want people to assume i was stating thats what actually what happened. a disclaimer of sorts

😄

how do you do the smilies?