• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

An interesting and similar stand your ground case in Florida

vendur said:
Just in case you were silly enough to think that there were no racial/political motives in GZ's prosecution/lynching :

Prosecutors cite Stand Your Ground Law in not charging shooter of Palm Harbor driver - Tampa Bay Times
Click to expand...

From the article: "The March 6 shooting appears to have some similarities to the case of Trayvon Martin..."

1. Brandon Baker went to 2 different bars that night
2. It was 2AM
3. His blood Alcohol level was 0.1666, twice the level of intoxication in Florida
4. He was driving
5. Pepper Spray, a non-lethal force, was initially used before a shot was fired

Ahh, you are right!!! Case closed, pack it up Corey!!! They found us out:lamo:lamo:lamo

The similarities are a gun was used to fire one shot....and...that is all folks.

So much fail:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
From the article: "The March 6 shooting appears to have some similarities to the case of Trayvon Martin..."

1. Brandon Baker went to 2 different bars that night
2. It was 2AM
3. His blood Alcohol level was 0.1666, twice the level of intoxication in Florida
4. He was driving
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that drinking, being out at 2 am, or driving allowed someone to kill another person. How very libertarian of you to be concerned with such things, though. ROFL

hawke812 said:
5. Pepper Spray, a non-lethal force, was initially used before a shot was fired

Ahh, you are right!!! Case closed, pack it up Corey!!! They found us out:lamo:lamo:lamo

The similarities are a gun was used to fire one shot....and...that is all folks.

So much fail:lol:
Click to expand...


Yes, he tried pepper spray. GZ tried and even more non-lethal force called " HELP, HELP!".

Poor saint skittles would still be with us today if only GZ had not forgotten his pepper spray in his Klan robes.
 
vendur said:
I wasn't aware that drinking, being out at 2 am, or driving allowed someone to kill another person. How very libertarian of you to be concerned with such things, though. ROFL

Brandon Baker was in the act of a DUI/DWI. Trayvon Martin was walking.


Yes, he tried pepper spray. GZ tried and even more non-lethal force called " HELP, HELP!".

Poor saint skittles would still be with us today if only GZ had not forgotten his pepper spray in his Klan robes.
Click to expand...

I don't know man you have some twisted view of things:lol:

This case is not even remotely similar:lol:
 
The dude was drunk and up on coke . . . and we're suppose to believe he was just sweet and nice all the time - even then? we're suppose to believe the word-of-mouth from a brother who let his high,drunk brother DRIVE?

No - I see no similarities - I see people trying to make similarities exist when there are none. . . but per events - I see none.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
The dude was drunk and up on coke . . . and we're suppose to believe he was just sweet and nice all the time - even then? we're suppose to believe the word-of-mouth from a brother who let his high,drunk brother DRIVE?

No - I see no similarities - I see people trying to make similarities exist when there are none. . . but per events - I see none.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Nolimitnigga was a choir boy, or so I heard.
 
hawke812 said:
From the article: "The March 6 shooting appears to have some similarities to the case of Trayvon Martin..."

1. Brandon Baker went to 2 different bars that night
2. It was 2AM
3. His blood Alcohol level was 0.1666, twice the level of intoxication in Florida
4. He was driving
5. Pepper Spray, a non-lethal force, was initially used before a shot was fired

Ahh, you are right!!! Case closed, pack it up Corey!!! They found us out:lamo:lamo:lamo

The similarities are a gun was used to fire one shot....and...that is all folks.

So much fail:lol:
Click to expand...

Not so fast, as they say. The similarities are much more than that. The shooter followed the victim in his car after engaging him at a stop light. When the victim stopped his car and got out, instead of driving away, the idiot stayed there. Testimony from eye-witnesses conflicts with the shooter's statement that the victim came up to his car and accosted him through the car window -- at which time he sprayed him with pepper spray and then shot him.

How about rolling up the window and driving away? How about not following him in the first damned place? I've reported drunk drivers on 911 before -- sometimes with the license number, sometimes not -- but ​I have never followed a drunk driver. I've stayed as far away from them as possible, as a matter of fact.

Same fact remains: Had the shooter not followed the driver, the driver wouldn't have been shot.

Sounds similar to me...
 
MaggieD said:
Not so fast, as they say. The similarities are much more than that. The shooter followed the victim in his car after engaging him at a stop light. When the victim stopped his car and got out, instead of driving away, the idiot stayed there. Testimony from eye-witnesses conflicts with the shooter's statement that the victim came up to his car and accosted him through the car window -- at which time he sprayed him with pepper spray and then shot him.

How about rolling up the window and driving away? How about not following him in the first damned place? I've reported drunk drivers on 911 before -- sometimes with the license number, sometimes not -- but ​I have never followed a drunk driver. I've stayed as far away from them as possible, as a matter of fact.

Same fact remains: Had the shooter not followed the driver, the driver wouldn't have been shot.

Sounds similar to me...
Click to expand...

Okay, so we got following and the shot. Anything else?

This is not enough to compare the two and come to the conclusion the OP did...
 
hawke812 said:
Okay, so we got following and the shot. Anything else?

This is not enough to compare the two and come to the conclusion the OP did...
Click to expand...

Nope, those are the only similarities I noticed. Just wanted to point them out. You're right about the conclusion reached, I'm afraid. ;)

FAIL.
 
MaggieD said:
Nope, those are the only similarities I noticed. Just wanted to point them out. You're right about the conclusion reached, I'm afraid. ;)

FAIL.
Click to expand...

If anything this case is far worse than the GZ/TM case, as he could have easily put the car in reverse/drive and got out of there. GZ didn't have that option after he was attacked, as far as we know. What do you think are the major differences that are relevant in a court of law per the charge of 2nd degree murder? Because this case is by large worse than the GZ/TM one, and they not only did not charge him with manslaughter or 2nd degree, they totally never filed any charges. That speaks directly to my comment.

You are basically a moron if you think GZ got charged with ANYTHING in this case if it weren't for racist/race hustlers in the media.
 
vendur said:
If anything this case is far worse than the GZ/TM case, as he could have easily put the car in reverse/drive and got out of there. GZ didn't have that option after he was attacked, as far as we know. What do you think are the major differences that are relevant in a court of law per the charge of 2nd degree murder? Because this case is by large worse than the GZ/TM one, and they not only did not charge him with manslaughter or 2nd degree, they totally never filed any charges. That speaks directly to my comment.

You are basically a moron if you think GZ got charged with ANYTHING in this case if it weren't for racist/race hustlers in the media.
Click to expand...

I think George Zimmerman was charged with a crime because of the protests by his family and others crying racism. So, in that, i would agree with you. However, where we disagree is that your example you've provided here illustrates that fact.
 
MaggieD said:
I think George Zimmerman was charged with a crime because of the protests by his family and others crying racism. So, in that, i would agree with you. However, where we disagree is that your example you've provided here illustrates that fact.
Click to expand...

That's not the question I asked : what do you think are the major differences that are relevant in a court of law per the charge of 2nd degree murder?
 
vendur said:
If anything this case is far worse than the GZ/TM case, as he could have easily put the car in reverse/drive and got out of there. GZ didn't have that option after he was attacked, as far as we know. What do you think are the major differences that are relevant in a court of law per the charge of 2nd degree murder? Because this case is by large worse than the GZ/TM one, and they not only did not charge him with manslaughter or 2nd degree, they totally never filed any charges. That speaks directly to my comment.

You are basically a moron if you think GZ got charged with ANYTHING in this case if it weren't for racist/race hustlers in the media.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the name calling:lol:

I did well in school, good grades. Went to college. Have a pretty sweet job. Stayed out of trouble, married and have two kids.

But alas, I am a moron for believing something different than others. Oh the horror, whatever shall I do:(
 
vendur said:
That's not the question I asked : what do you think are the major differences that are relevant in a court of law per the charge of 2nd degree murder?
Click to expand...

There are few, which is the reason I think the charges were brought against Zimmerman because of political pressure.

Since the guy was in his car when the pepper spray/shooting happened, there's no doubt that the victim was the aggressor. They found pepper spray residue on the inside of the car window which indicated to the investigators that the victim was, indeed, trying to get at the shooter even after being sprayed. (That's what the investigation showed anyway.)

Zimmerman, on the other hand, wasn't in his car. He was following Martin, at least at first. Who was the aggressor? If the prosecution can prove it was Zimmerman, then they may get a jury to convict him. If they can't prove that? I think he walks.

The cases are really very similar. Except the investigation into the case you've presented, found that the victim was the aggressor. If Zimmerman can prove that? Zimmerman walks, too.
 
MaggieD said:
There are few, which is the reason I think the charges were brought against Zimmerman because of political pressure.

Since the guy was in his car when the pepper spray/shooting happened, there's no doubt that the victim was the aggressor. They found pepper spray residue on the inside of the car window which indicated to the investigators that the victim was, indeed, trying to get at the shooter even after being sprayed. (That's what the investigation showed anyway.)
Click to expand...

You've never watched any of those shows with the police officer dashboard cams recording someone attacking a cop from the seat of his/her car, huh? The state has already admitted to not knowing who started the altercation in GZ's case, btw.




MaggieD said:
The cases are really very similar. Except the investigation into the case you've presented, found that the victim was the aggressor. If Zimmerman can prove that? Zimmerman walks, too.
Click to expand...

As per above, the state has no evidence regarding who started it. GZ doesn't have to prove any such thing anyway, in Florida, just that he was in reasonable fear of his life or serious injury. If you consider this a "difference", it's a legal irrelevant one, hence not what I asked for.
 
vendur said:
You've never watched any of those shows with the police officer dashboard cams recording someone attacking a cop from the seat of his/her car, huh? The state has already admitted to not knowing who started the altercation in GZ's case, btw.

As per above, the state has no evidence regarding who started it. GZ doesn't have to prove any such thing anyway, in Florida, just that he was in reasonable fear of his life or serious injury. If you consider this a "difference", it's a legal irrelevant one, hence not what I asked for.
Click to expand...

Golly, this is a fun thread.
 
vendur said:
Golly, that's a useful and informative reply.
Click to expand...

Your thread managed to snag one respondent who rather agreed with you and was willing to engage. ONE. You obviously have absolutely no interest in having a productive discussion about this. I guess your only reason for posting was to further some racist agenda you seem to have. I'll just let you continue talking to yourself.
 
MaggieD said:
Your thread managed to snag one respondent who rather agreed with you and was willing to engage. ONE. You obviously have absolutely no interest in having a productive discussion about this. I guess your only reason for posting was to further some racist agenda you seem to have. I'll just let you continue talking to yourself.
Click to expand...

What is there to discuss?

Anyone with an IQ over 10 knows the cases are nearly factually synonymous. You utterly failed to demonstrate otherwise, and are now crying about about it.
 
There are similarities involved, but since the shooter was in his car the Castle Doctrine of the Justifiable Use of Force law comes into play. Zimm won't have that luxury but will have a self defense argument on his side.
 
spanky said:
There are similarities involved, but since the shooter was in his car the Castle Doctrine of the Justifiable Use of Force law comes into play. Zimm won't have that luxury but will have a self defense argument on his side.
Click to expand...

Once again, SYG does apply in Z's case
 
spanky said:
There are similarities involved, but since the shooter was in his car the Castle Doctrine of the Justifiable Use of Force law comes into play. .
Click to expand...

That might be relevant in a different state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom