Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

Michael Johnson · Apr 10, 2012

joko104 said:
"Michael" gave up. He always does.

Yes you're known for giving up and trolling.

Michael Johnson · Apr 10, 2012

Blackdog said:
OK lets see....

This was my initial response directly to you....

He did not ignore the dispatcher. The dispatcher suggested he should not follow Martin, it was not a command or order to be ignored. - Blackdog

No lie there or even anything to imply.

You then responded with...

Doesn't matter if it wasn't a command. He still ignored the dispatcher and went after him. You questioned Muhammed on whether Zimmerman ignored the dispatcher or not, implying that it never happened when evidence shows he did, and now you're trying to argue the technicality between the dispatcher and Zimmerman.

Next. - Michael Johnson http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-32.html#post1060380089

I then responded...

#1 I did not question Muhammad on anything.
#2 Since I did not question Muhammad, I did not imply anything.
#3 The evidence says the dispatcher "suggested" a course of action and Zimmerman chose to follow a different course. This does not mean he ignored the dispatcher. That is unless you can read Zimmerman's mind?
#4 Now you are trying to accuse me of things I did not say or imply and I have shown your statements to be less than accurate.

Next. - Blackdog http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-32.html#post1060380222

So please point out where I responded to Muhammad to imply something?
Point out where I backtracked on anything I have said? I still maintain since the dispatcher had no real authority to tell him what to do, it was not a matter of ignoring and is irrelevant by and according to the law.

So please point out my lie, or anything else you would like. So far you have done nothing but make a really bad argument and sling mud.

Nothing else.

He did ignore the dispatcher.

Black Dog · Apr 10, 2012

Michael Johnson said:
He did ignore the dispatcher.

I don't agree. The dispatcher had no authority at all and did not give an order. We don't know what Zimmerman's intent was and we still don't. We don't even know if Martin had noticed the car following him already. Too many if's to make any kind of call. In the end he left the car, this however does not mean he ignored the dispatcher.

Of course this still does not cover all the calls of liar, putting words in my mouth and accusing me of things I did not say or do which are all false.

So your posts were nothing but baseless accusations after all.

Michael Johnson · Apr 10, 2012

Blackdog said:
I don't agree. The dispatcher had no authority at all and did not give an order. We don't know what Zimmerman's intent was and we still don't. We don't even know if Martin had noticed the car following him already. Too many if's to make any kind of call. In the end he left the car, this however does not mean he ignored the dispatcher.

Doesn't matter. He ignored it, went after him, TM defended himself, and he got killed.

Of course this still does not cover all the calls of liar, putting words in my mouth and accusing me of things I did not say or do which are all false.

So your posts were nothing but baseless accusations after all.

Oh don't worry, you still lied.

Black Dog · Apr 10, 2012

Michael Johnson said:
Doesn't matter. He ignored it, went after him, TM defended himself, and he got killed.

Oh don't worry, you still lied.

OK I see now. Reality does not matter to your argument or accusations. You just throw them out there and hope no one notices, lol.

blackjack50 · Apr 10, 2012

Blackdog said:
Why would a 911 dispatcher be an expert? They have no training etc. I mean it would be common sense to stop and wait for the police unless he was afraid the suspect would get away. So he made a judgement call that had little to do with any kind of expertise from a dispatcher, they are not trained police officers in any way. Neither was Zimmerman, so even though in the long run it was a bad decision, at the time it had nothing to do with ignoring anyone, but assessing the situation for himself as he was there.

Just because I don't take advice from someone does not mean I was trying to ignore it.

People are acting like somehow they new Zimmerman's intent when we don't know at all.

That statement is so blatantly ridiculous. The "suspect" had done nothing illegal. Not to mention as you CORRECTLY point out, Zimmerman is NOT a trained police man. He is a CCW and neighborhood watch captain. Neither of which gives you authority to arrest. So by pursuing someone who was NOT commiting a forcible felony...what does that say?

blackjack50 · Apr 10, 2012

Michael Johnson said:
Again nobody cares, the lies are in stone anyway. Besides Zimmerman is a monster.

Zimmerman wasn't a monster. He was stupid. If stupidity makes one a monster...then damn near everyone is a monster. Keep in mind that Zimmerman was being gung ho. The evidence does not support a willful murder of Treyvon. It DOES support that Zimmerman was being an idiot though.

Black Dog · Apr 10, 2012

stonewall50 said:
That statement is so blatantly ridiculous. The "suspect" had done nothing illegal. Not to mention as you CORRECTLY point out, Zimmerman is NOT a trained police man. He is a CCW and neighborhood watch captain. Neither of which gives you authority to arrest. So by pursuing someone who was NOT commiting a forcible felony...what does that say?

Martin was not a "suspect" and Zimmerman was not trying to "arrest" anyone according to the evidence. That is a hell of a leap. The only thing ridiculous here is your understanding.

This does not mean a citizen (does not have to be any kind of authority) cannot follow someone.

So you would like to see the ability to follow someone in your own neighborhood made illegal? LMAO!

Excon · Apr 10, 2012

haymarket said:
He rejected the advice of the expert he called. That cannot be denied.

It can be denied because no real advice was given, especially from an expert.

haymarket said:
But it was advice from a professional who he had called for help. The fact that he would ignore that same advice is rather telling about Z and his motives that night.

What advice?
The actual instruction of "let me know if he does anything" or "Just let me know if this guy does anything else"?
Those actual instructions?
Why isn't your side all up in the air about that?
Instead of just a suggestion of "we don't need you to do that."
I mean, if you are going to say he should have followed a suggestion and ignore actual instructions, then your side is being hypocritical.
Could it possibly be because you want Zimmerman to be guilty.

haymarket said:
Thank you for correcting the facts on your training. Allow me then to rephrase my statement to say that the dispatcher knows a hell of a lot more than I do or most other Americans about that sort of situation.

The question of a crime is now being investigated. I am willing to wait for that determination. Until then it is a fact that if Z had stayed in his car that night as the dispatcher advised him to do, neither of us would be engaged in this discussion today and the entire world would be absent this terrible event - sad or otherwise.

March 15, 2012.

Lee said the 911 directions asking Zimmerman not to confront the teenager are not mandatory instructions.

"That is a call taker making a recommendation to him. He's not under a legal obligation to do that, so that is not something we can charge him with," he said.
Fatal shooting of Florida teen turned over to state attorney - CNN.com

March 23, 2012
Official release from Sanford City Manager, quoting Chief of Police.

... , the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you
following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do
that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be
required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and
was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by
Trayvon.
Official release from Sanford City Manager, quoting Chief of Police

Although they have the exact wording of the suggestion wrong, this official release refers to the person as a "telecommunications call taker".

blackjack50 · Apr 10, 2012

Blackdog said:
Martin was not a "suspect" and Zimmerman was not trying to "arrest" anyone according to the evidence. That is a hell of a leap. The only thing ridiculous here is your understanding.

So he wasn't a suspect? So why was he being followed by Zimmerman and why did Zimmerman call the police?

Zimmerman has no authority to arrest. Therefor he has NO reason to pursue.

So you would like to see the ability to follow someone in your own neighborhood made illegal? LMAO!

When said person is not committing a forcible felony? I wonder how you would react if someone constantly followed you, and when you "bravely" confront them and ask them what they are doing and they say, "None of your buisness." how you would feel.

Black Dog · Apr 10, 2012

stonewall50 said:
So he wasn't a suspect? So why was he being followed by Zimmerman and why did Zimmerman call the police?

Because Zimmerman thought he looked suspicious. This did not make him a suspect in any crime.

stonewall50 said:
Zimmerman has no authority to arrest. Therefor he has NO reason to pursue.

Two thing are wrong there.

#1 Anyone can make a citizens arrest.
#2 He was following/pursuing Martin, not attacking or trying to detain Martin, so no crime.

As I have said 100 times over, Zimmerman as far as we know broke no law.

stonewall50 said:
When said person is not committing a forcible felony? I wonder how you would react if someone constantly followed you, and when you "bravely" confront them and ask them what they are doing and they say, "None of your buisness." how you would feel.

He was not "constantly" following Martin. Nice try at hyperbole with a pinch of strawman. The rest of your statement makes almost no sense.

blackjack50 · Apr 11, 2012

Blackdog said:
Because Zimmerman thought he looked suspicious. This did not make him a suspect in any crime.

So he looked suspicious. Why?

Two thing are wrong there.

#1 Anyone can make a citizens arrest.
#2 He was following/pursuing Martin, not attacking or trying to detain Martin, so no crime.

As I have said 100 times over, Zimmerman as far as we know broke no law.

1) As an EX COP (who hopefully actually had some field experience)...do you REALLY want to encourage people to make citizens arrests? How do you think that would end? More justifiable homicides? More people trying to act like police officers?

2) He was pursuing someone who had EVERY right to be where he was. Treyvon...as far as we know...broke no law. After all how do we not know that he did not feel threatened? Did Zimmerman identify himself? If Treyvon and Martin scuffeled for a fully minute, why was the only evident damage of a fight the bullet wound to the chest? I do find that curious. Not damning. But curious. I also find it very odd that you can know for certain he didn't try to detain him.

Again I ask you...if someone was stalking you, and they had not identified themselves, and then after losing them...how would you react if you bumped into them?

It may not make sense to you...but Trayvon, by multiple accounts, asked Zimmerman why he was following him. What we know is that Zimmerman reached for a phone, and Trayvon jumped him. What would you do if you were in that situation? Someone is following you, and you have done NOTHING wrong, and then when you bump into them (because that is what it looks like happened), and you ask him why he is following you...and instead of giving you a straight answer he reaches for something? Huh? What? You being a concealed carry would likely reach for you own gun? This kid being unarmed and 17...could possibily have reaced out of self defense as well?

I don't think you get that IF Trayvon was still alive he would actually be able to have another set of events, and he might actually have probably cause to claim self defense as well. But he can't. He was shot by a Kel Tech 9mm in the chest, by a man who should have known to stay in his vehicle.

You clearly don't understand what the "Spirit of the Law" means. Just to clue you in...the intent of self defense laws does NOT involve someone seeking out criminals to invoke them. It is a last resort. As it should ALWAYS be.

You being as "expert" as you claim to be should understand that the CCW community should NOT want Zimmerman to be treated with kid gloves, that the investigation was botched, and that the chances of backlash were VERY high.

Black Dog · Apr 11, 2012

stonewall50 said:
So he looked suspicious. Why?

1) As an EX COP (who hopefully actually had some field experience)...do you REALLY want to encourage people to make citizens arrests? How do you think that would end? More justifiable homicides? More people trying to act like police officers?

2) He was pursuing someone who had EVERY right to be where he was. Treyvon...as far as we know...broke no law. After all how do we not know that he did not feel threatened? Did Zimmerman identify himself? If Treyvon and Martin scuffeled for a fully minute, why was the only evident damage of a fight the bullet wound to the chest? I do find that curious. Not damning. But curious. I also find it very odd that you can know for certain he didn't try to detain him.

Again I ask you...if someone was stalking you, and they had not identified themselves, and then after losing them...how would you react if you bumped into them?

It may not make sense to you...but Trayvon, by multiple accounts, asked Zimmerman why he was following him. What we know is that Zimmerman reached for a phone, and Trayvon jumped him. What would you do if you were in that situation? Someone is following you, and you have done NOTHING wrong, and then when you bump into them (because that is what it looks like happened), and you ask him why he is following you...and instead of giving you a straight answer he reaches for something? Huh? What? You being a concealed carry would likely reach for you own gun? This kid being unarmed and 17...could possibily have reaced out of self defense as well?

I don't think you get that IF Trayvon was still alive he would actually be able to have another set of events, and he might actually have probably cause to claim self defense as well. But he can't. He was shot by a Kel Tech 9mm in the chest, by a man who should have known to stay in his vehicle.

You clearly don't understand what the "Spirit of the Law" means. Just to clue you in...the intent of self defense laws does NOT involve someone seeking out criminals to invoke them. It is a last resort. As it should ALWAYS be.

You being as "expert" as you claim to be should understand that the CCW community should NOT want Zimmerman to be treated with kid gloves, that the investigation was botched, and that the chances of backlash were VERY high.

This whole debate (for lack of a better term) with you has been nothing but a series of hyperbole and strawman arguments. You completely ignore my responses and then two posts later ask the same question or try and make the same point worded differently. Then to top it off you post out and out lies. Please point out where I was I was an expert on CCW? I said I HAVE my CCW. Of course you will ignore that question as well. You are good at that if nothing else.

We know Zimmerman handled the situation badly. This does not make him guilty of a crime. This does not ignore the spirit of the law.

You keep using hyperbolic language to help reinforce your imbecilic arguments that rather than logic, are based on emotion.

Trayvon Martin was not a kid...

View attachment 67125691

1. multiple LARGE tatoos, at age 17
2. *burglary tools*, women’s jewelry & reports of multiple burglaries in his dad’s neighborhood
3. reports he assaulted a bus driver
4. long 10-day suspension (which is why he was staying with his dad across town)
5. heavy use of gang lingo on the remnants of his mySpace page
6. requests for him to peddle pot on his page

His parents went out of their way to erase his Twitter page because of gang connections and his user name "NO_LIMIT_NIGGA" could it be image scrubbing? No he was just a perfect 12 year old, oh wait that picture is wrong.

Now it is unfortunate the man got killed. It is unfortunate Zimmerman handled it badly. It is unfortunate morons try to portray Zimmerman as less than savory while Martin is some kind of angelic hero. In the end the truth is all that matters.

I would make a list of all the strawman arguments do date, but it would take up an entire page.

The funny part is I think you are trying desperately to recover from the stupidity of your original post. You know the one you never responded to and then flew into fallacy mode here: #102 http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-11.html#post1060365123 :2wave:

joko104 · Apr 11, 2012

stonewall50 said:
So he looked suspicious. Why?

1) As an EX COP (who hopefully actually had some field experience)...do you REALLY want to encourage people to make citizens arrests? How do you think that would end? More justifiable homicides? More people trying to act like police officers?

2) He was pursuing someone who had EVERY right to be where he was. Treyvon...as far as we know...broke no law. After all how do we not know that he did not feel threatened? Did Zimmerman identify himself? If Treyvon and Martin scuffeled for a fully minute, why was the only evident damage of a fight the bullet wound to the chest? I do find that curious. Not damning. But curious. I also find it very odd that you can know for certain he didn't try to detain him.

Again I ask you...if someone was stalking you, and they had not identified themselves, and then after losing them...how would you react if you bumped into them?

It may not make sense to you...but Trayvon, by multiple accounts, asked Zimmerman why he was following him. What we know is that Zimmerman reached for a phone, and Trayvon jumped him. What would you do if you were in that situation? Someone is following you, and you have done NOTHING wrong, and then when you bump into them (because that is what it looks like happened), and you ask him why he is following you...and instead of giving you a straight answer he reaches for something? Huh? What? You being a concealed carry would likely reach for you own gun? This kid being unarmed and 17...could possibily have reaced out of self defense as well?

I don't think you get that IF Trayvon was still alive he would actually be able to have another set of events, and he might actually have probably cause to claim self defense as well. But he can't. He was shot by a Kel Tech 9mm in the chest, by a man who should have known to stay in his vehicle.

You clearly don't understand what the "Spirit of the Law" means. Just to clue you in...the intent of self defense laws does NOT involve someone seeking out criminals to invoke them. It is a last resort. As it should ALWAYS be.

You being as "expert" as you claim to be should understand that the CCW community should NOT want Zimmerman to be treated with kid gloves, that the investigation was botched, and that the chances of backlash were VERY high.

^ Another person who claims that being totally apathetic towards others, perfectly self-centrix and a coward is now required by law and anyone who isn't like him is a criminal who should be beaten to death.

People used to complain about how people would just watch assaults and crime happen and do nothing. Now many people such as in that message claim that not only should people never do anything for others, but it is illegal to. They believe it is both morally wrong and even allows a person to be killed if the person acts as anything but an apathetic coward.

I have not been in "civilized" modern society for long and there are many good and superior aspects of it for certain. But the level of cowardice, fear and lack of giving a damn about anyone who doesn't directly benefit yourself is sometimes shocking. So many if not most are not people, they are sheeple. And many rage that everyone else must be too.

Zimmerman not only did not nothing wrong, he was one of the few people of the neighborhood who gave a damn about others and wasn't just a complete coward.

joko104 · Apr 11, 2012

Blackdog said:
This whole debate (for lack of a better term) with you has been nothing but a series of hyperbole and strawman arguments. You completely ignore my responses and then two posts later ask the same question or try and make the same point worded differently. Then to top it off you post out and out lies. Please point out where I was I was an expert on CCW? I said I HAVE my CCW. Of course you will ignore that question as well. You are good at that if nothing else.

We know Zimmerman handled the situation badly. This does not make him guilty of a crime. This does not ignore the spirit of the law.

You keep using hyperbolic language to help reinforce your imbecilic arguments that rather than logic, are based on emotion.

Trayvon Martin was not a kid...

View attachment 67125691

1. multiple LARGE tatoos, at age 17
2. *burglary tools*, women’s jewelry & reports of multiple burglaries in his dad’s neighborhood
3. reports he assaulted a bus driver
4. long 10-day suspension (which is why he was staying with his dad across town)
5. heavy use of gang lingo on the remnants of his mySpace page
6. requests for him to peddle pot on his page

His parents went out of their way to erase his Twitter page because of gang connections and his user name "NO_LIMIT_NIGGA" could it be image scrubbing? No he was just a perfect 12 year old, oh wait that picture is wrong.

Now it is unfortunate the man got killed. It is unfortunate Zimmerman handled it badly. It is unfortunate morons try to portray Zimmerman as less than savory while Martin is some kind of angelic hero. In the end the truth is all that matters.

I would make a list of all the strawman arguments do date, but it would take up an entire page.

The funny part is I think you are trying desperately to recover from the stupidity of your original post. You know the one you never responded to and then flew into fallacy mode here: #102 http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-11.html#post1060365123 :2wave:

He was a 17-year-old 6 foot tall juvenile delinquent who was killed in self defense who was engaged in felony aggravated assault at the time he was shot by his victim.

Other than himself of course, who is most responsible are his rotten parents. Just the fact that they let him out wandering around while he was on his third explusion from school and the reasons for those demonstrates the irresponsibility of his parents. If there is any lesson to be learned, it is what happens to children raised by don't-give-a-damn parents like his.

LizardofOz · Apr 11, 2012

I think regardless of what will happen, Zimmerman will be punished in some manner and get at least 5 years of jailtime. It probably doesn't help that his lawyers dropped him after he started doing things against their advice to him.

I keep hearing this kid was a thug etc but really he was just an average black kid that thought he was ganster, just like in KY, you got your average white kid who thinks he's Billy Bad-Ass. I wonder how you guys would judge a white kid from KY that got killed the same way, that had a bunch of rifles, knifes, rebel flags, tatoos on him, got in trouble at school, and listened to death metal? Because I probably described at least a million white kids.

Black Dog · Apr 11, 2012

JohnWOlin said:
I think regardless of what will happen, Zimmerman will be punished in some manner and get at least 5 years of jailtime. It probably doesn't help that his lawyers dropped him after he started doing things against their advice to him.

It's a shame that the prosecutor is trying to find something to charge him with for purely political reasons. Not because he actually broke any law.

JohnWOlin said:
I keep hearing this kid was a thug etc but really he was just an average black kid that thought he was ganster, just like in KY, you got your average white kid who thinks he's Billy Bad-Ass.

Average 17 year old's don't get 10 day suspensions or assault bus drivers. They are also not suspected of burglaries. I am not trying to disparage the youth, but he does not sound average.

JohnWOlin said:
I wonder how you guys would judge a white kid from KY that got killed the same way, that had a bunch of rifles, knifes, rebel flags, tatoos on him, got in trouble at school, and listened to death metal? Because I probably described at least a million white kids.

Out of 300,000,000 people, that is not average, lol. Seriously, the white kid you described is not getting in trouble with the law by assaulting people or suspended from school. In all honesty if it was reversed and it was a black guy who shot a white kid it would be just as bad. A political **** storm either way.

We are not judging Trayvon Martin, we are saying he was no angle and to portray him as such is a lie to increase ratings for networks and more power for the race baiters.

PrometheusBound · Apr 11, 2012

haymarket said:
He knows a hell of a lot more about that job than you or I do.

He rejected the advice of the expert he called. That cannot be denied. And then he killed a kid as a result. And that cannot be denied either.

If that guy had stayed in his car that night, we never would have heard of him and Martin would be alive today. And that cannot be denied either.

A citizen is obligated to follow suspicious characters. You can't assume that Martin didn't deserve to be followed. We don't know if he was an innocent child or a potential killer, so we don't know if we are worse off with him dead. Judging by his over-reaction in assaulting Zimmerman, we are probably better off with Martin dead. Zimmerman saved his own life and the lives this punk would have eventually taken.

PrometheusBound · Apr 11, 2012

joko104 said:
^ Another person who claims that being totally apathetic towards others, perfectly self-centrix and a coward is now required by law and anyone who isn't like him is a criminal who should be beaten to death.

People used to complain about how people would just watch assaults and crime happen and do nothing. Now many people such as in that message claim that not only should people never do anything for others, but it is illegal to. They believe it is both morally wrong and even allows a person to be killed if the person acts as anything but an apathetic coward.

I have not been in "civilized" modern society for long and there are many good and superior aspects of it for certain. But the level of cowardice, fear and lack of giving a damn about anyone who doesn't directly benefit yourself is sometimes shocking. So many if not most are not people, they are sheeple. And many rage that everyone else must be too.

Zimmerman not only did not nothing wrong, he was one of the few people of the neighborhood who gave a damn about others and wasn't just a complete coward.

The title of the Charles Bronson movie, Death Wish should really refer to a suicidal society that coddles criminals, runs away from suspicious behavior instead of confronting it, and expects that having police is enough to control crime despite the fact that police rarely are in the right place at the right time to stop criminals.

Black Dog · Apr 11, 2012

PrometheusBound said:
A citizen is obligated to follow suspicious characters.

According to whom? No law or even moral directive says a private citizen has to follow anyone for any reason.

PrometheusBound said:
You can't assume that Martin didn't deserve to be followed. We don't know if he was an innocent child or a potential killer, so we don't know if we are worse off with him dead.

It is true we can't assume, this does not make his death any less a tragedy no matter what may have happened later in his life.

PrometheusBound said:
Judging by his over-reaction in assaulting Zimmerman, we are probably better off with Martin dead. Zimmerman saved his own life and the lives this punk would have eventually taken.

This is such unadulterated bull**** I don't even know what to say. If I do say it, I will get hit by the mods.

Lets just say this comment is without a doubt the most ignorant statement I have seen in awhile.

Michael Johnson · Apr 11, 2012

PrometheusBound said:
A citizen is obligated to follow suspicious characters. You can't assume that Martin didn't deserve to be followed. We don't know if he was an innocent child or a potential killer, so we don't know if we are worse off with him dead. Judging by his over-reaction in assaulting Zimmerman, we are probably better off with Martin dead. Zimmerman saved his own life and the lives this punk would have eventually taken.

Nice trolling there.

How would you feel if you read a disgusting comment like the one you stated above about your flesh and blood.

Jryan · Apr 11, 2012

Blackdog said:
This whole debate (for lack of a better term) with you has been nothing but a series of hyperbole and strawman arguments. You completely ignore my responses and then two posts later ask the same question or try and make the same point worded differently. Then to top it off you post out and out lies. Please point out where I was I was an expert on CCW? I said I HAVE my CCW. Of course you will ignore that question as well. You are good at that if nothing else.

We know Zimmerman handled the situation badly. This does not make him guilty of a crime. This does not ignore the spirit of the law.

You keep using hyperbolic language to help reinforce your imbecilic arguments that rather than logic, are based on emotion.

Trayvon Martin was not a kid...

View attachment 67125691

1. multiple LARGE tatoos, at age 17
2. *burglary tools*, women’s jewelry & reports of multiple burglaries in his dad’s neighborhood
3. reports he assaulted a bus driver
4. long 10-day suspension (which is why he was staying with his dad across town)
5. heavy use of gang lingo on the remnants of his mySpace page
6. requests for him to peddle pot on his page

His parents went out of their way to erase his Twitter page because of gang connections and his user name "NO_LIMIT_NIGGA" could it be image scrubbing? No he was just a perfect 12 year old, oh wait that picture is wrong.

Now it is unfortunate the man got killed. It is unfortunate Zimmerman handled it badly. It is unfortunate morons try to portray Zimmerman as less than savory while Martin is some kind of angelic hero. In the end the truth is all that matters.

I would make a list of all the strawman arguments do date, but it would take up an entire page.

The funny part is I think you are trying desperately to recover from the stupidity of your original post. You know the one you never responded to and then flew into fallacy mode here: #102 http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-11.html#post1060365123 :2wave:

wow, just wow...

And I'm sure Trayvon confessed all of this to Zimmerman right before Trayvon jumped Zimmerman. This was probably followed by a intellectual debate on Trayvon's philosophy on life and therefore transpired into a decision to take a life...

LMFAO

(Again, I will point out I'm neutral on this topic)

Black Dog · Apr 11, 2012

Jryan said:
wow, just wow...

And I'm sure Trayvon confessed all of this to Zimmerman right before Trayvon jumped Zimmerman. This was probably followed by a intellectual debate on Trayvon's philosophy on life and therefore transpired into a decision to take a life...

LMFAO

(Again, I will point out I'm neutral on this topic)

Well if you do a quick internet search you will see like most people this is all well documented.

But that's OK, just keep being not so funny.

Yea and your neutral. :roll:

Jryan · Apr 11, 2012

Blackdog said:
Well if you do a quick internet search you will see like most people this is all well documented.

But that's OK, just keep being not so funny.

Yea and your neutral. :roll:

You must of missed my point. My point, which invalidates EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOURS IN THAT POST, is that Zimmerman knew NOTHING about that kid when he started following. (With the exceptions of the obvious, he was black, he wore a hoody, it was 1 am, he was in a neighborhood prone to breakins, ...) To derive the things you listed from what he knew would paint Zimmerman as a Skizotypical, which I guess makes Zimmerman innocent if he concluded that from those facts...

Black Dog · Apr 11, 2012

Jryan said:
You must of missed my point. My point, which invalidates EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOURS IN THAT POST, is that Zimmerman knew NOTHING about that kid when he started following. (With the exceptions of the obvious, he was black, he wore a hoody, it was 1 am, he was in a neighborhood prone to breakins, ...) To derive the things you listed from what he knew would paint Zimmerman as a Skizotypical, which I guess makes Zimmerman innocent if he concluded that from those facts...

Then you completely missed the point of my post which makes your post nothing but a strawman. Look at my post and actually read it.

Then I would appreciate you purchasing a clue, lol.

Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

Do you agree with Florida Law on use of deadly force?

Agree

Disagree

I oppose the Second Amendment completely

There should be no rule of law

Libturd Destroyer

Libturd Destroyer

King Of The Dog Pound

Libturd Destroyer

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

Libturd Destroyer

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound