Zimmerman Found Not Guilty

[Cheshire Cat]

Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!

I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.

Was it irresponsible gun ownership or the laws for stand your ground?

[JayBird]

Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!

I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.

Was it irresponsible gun ownership or the laws for stand your ground?

I would say both, the media was itching for something big to happen in Florida because such a controversial law was passed. And had Zimmerman been a responsible gun owner, he would've assessed the situation and only fired as a last resort, not some scrapes and bruises.  But personally, I feel Stand Your Ground is just a matchbox waiting in the kindling and should be a thread of its own.

[Cheshire Cat]

Here is the text from the Tampa article:  http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-a-duty-to-retreat-from-a-fla-law-as-it-stands/2131594
   
There is a difference between respecting the jury's verdict clearing George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and acknowledging the essential injustice of a Florida law that all but encourages reckless behavior. The verdict Saturday says less about race in America than it does this nation's capacity for violence. Another innocent life has been lost, and the nation searches again for some meaning beyond that the tragedy was lawful.

The jury late Saturday cleared Zimmerman of second-degree murder and a lesser charge of manslaughter in the February 2012 fatal shooting of Martin in the Central Florida city of Sanford. The neighborhood watch volunteer had ignored a police dispatcher's advice and followed the 17-year-old as he walked home from a convenience store in a gated, suburban community. Zimmerman — concerned about burglaries in the area — confronted Martin, and claimed he shot the unarmed teen in self-defense after Martin knocked him to the ground and beat his head on the concrete.

The prosecution presented an incoherent narrative at trial, but the case was hard from the start. Authorities initially sent mixed signals about whether a crime took place, and race (Martin was black, Zimmerman is Hispanic) interjected a sharp and polarizing emotion into the case. The jurors owe the nation some insight into what led to an acquittal; a fuller understanding of the verdict could ease public tensions. But a major factor was the Florida law that gives people wide latitude to use deadly force to defend themselves — even if they cause the confrontation.
Related News/Archive

While Zimmerman did not seek immunity from charges under "stand your ground," he apparently benefited from a less-discussed part of the 2005 law that expanded protections for using force in self-defense. Before the law, defendants had to show that they used every reasonable means to avoid danger before using force. But "stand your ground" removed the obligation to retreat in most circumstances. Zimmerman not only had no legal duty to retreat, the judge said in jury instructions, but the right to stand his ground and meet force with force.

In the most comprehensive effort of its kind, the Tampa Bay Times last year examined 200 "stand your ground" cases and found that the law has worked to free killers and violent attackers whose self-defense claims seem questionable at best. In nearly a third of the cases examined by the Times, defendants initiated the fight — and still went free. A former Republican state senator who sponsored the bill said the law was never meant to protect defendants who put themselves in harm's way. But the criminal justice system has been blind to that intent, as defendants merely have to show reasonable cause to fear bodily harm.

The most productive way to channel the frustration with the verdict is to change Florida's "stand your ground" law to recognize that individuals who initiate confrontations are not then immune from responsibility of the consequences. Legitimate self-defense cases would still be protected, but it would remove the near-amnesty that people have to act recklessly, putting themselves and others in harm's way. The law as it stands is an invitation to more bloodshed and heartache, and a society more divided.

[Cheshire Cat]

Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

They certainly allow for it.  No argument about that from me. 

[Jameson]

Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!

I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.

Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.

[Jameson]

Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

That is simply your opinion. That is not factual.

[Demosthenes]

Guns are meant for self-defense. If you are a responsible conceal carry holder, and you are jumped, hit, and you think someone is reaching for your gun... you are defending yourself.

[JeffreyS]

Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!

I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.

Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.

Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

[Jameson]

Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

That is simply your opinion. That is not factual.

dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

No, they're not. That's why we have gun laws, concealed weapons permits, etc.

I don't hear of guns being used as a negotiation point in day to day life. Do you? When's the last time you heard of someone using a gun to cut in line at the grocery store? Or negotiate a better dinner bill with their waiter? Or to get a better rate from their lawn guy? Oddly, I can't recall many incidents ever happening like this.

Surely, you can google and find an isolated incident (or 5) of some crazy who has done something like this before in an attempt to prove how commonly uncommon it might be.

[strider]

So, you are walking down the street and some stalker walks up and grabs you in your privates.  You resist and you hit the guy in the face.  He pulls a legal gun and shoots you.  Today there is a very good chance he will get away with it.

This is what this case, this jury and what the court instructions told me.  Once the tables are turned and you, the initial victim, have the upper hand, "Stand Your Ground" switches from you to your attacker and he gains the protection.

I was feeling better believing it was all about race, Zimmerman got off because Martin was black  At least then it made sense.  Wasn't any more right, but one can understand it.  History and personal experience tells us it still happens more than we like it to.

The actual result without playing the race card? Now that is what is really scary. 

[Jameson]

dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

And I would totally suggest that you reconsider your fairly silly claims about my words.  I have said from the beginning that its about another gun owner murdering someone in cold blood, but getting away with it legally.

The race discussion was started by a fairly racist troll, and I responded to him.

Sorry that you are having trigger word issues.

You on page 19: "NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

[Cheshire Cat]

Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!

I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.

Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.

Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Yes Jeffrey all those thing could have happened but they didn't.  If you watched the trial and listened to what was said about how the law applies to this situation the case turned on the fact that at the moment Zimmerman perceived he was at risk of "serious bodily harm" he could lawfully pull the trigger.  It is also speculation that this was or was not the only thing Zimmerman could have done.  The reality is that it did happen and the way the law is written today, along with the charges the State chose to go with which specifies a jury cannot convict if there is reasonable doubt is precisely why this case ended the way it did.  I am by no means absolving Zimmerman.  He should have kept his bottom in his car but he didn't.  Leaving his car was stupid, shortsighted, a whole bunch of things, but it wasn't illegal.  To me it looks like the law is what needs to be discussed and revisited.  Deciding after the fact who was responsible or not won't change the outcome.  When we the people think there is injustice in our system, we need to address that injustice and work to change the system. 

[JeffreyS]

I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

[Jameson]

Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

JeffreyS, last resort as in he's on the ground, being bloodied and pummeled by someone bigger than him, he is obviously losing the fight, and no one is coming to his aid. Would your life not feel threatened if you were in his position? Would you lay there and get beaten unconscious?

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, he (and Trayvon) had opportunities to end the situation and neither of them did. It's a tragedy from every angle.

[acme54321]

Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?