• 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.

What if Trayvon..............

Goshin said:
Depends on the circumstances. Simply saying "I have a gun" is not assault nor justification for attack by itself. Saying "I have a gun and I'm willing to use it" isn't necessarily assault unless it is accompanied by other threat behavior of a criminal nature.

To be assault, there must be a clear threat, that is an expression of intent or jeopardy behavior; there must be or be reasonably believed to be Ability to carry it out; there must be Opportunity to do so as well.

"I have a gun" is not usually going to be considered a clear threat, absent other factors.

Is there any evidence Z did any of this anyway?
Click to expand...

There isn't any audio recordings that I know of recording their conversation. I did hear Zimmermans call and he appears in a disgusted pissed mood but maybe he calmed down by the time the two met, I simply don't know.

My questioning is in regard to what one perceives as a dangerous threat to one. It will vary from person to person. Have had people tell me about a dangerous part of town that I have walked through and could not feel any danger at all. When younger have been in fights but never felt I was in danger of being killed, just getting my ass kicked. In another time have had been thrown into a scenario where a criminal had a gun and I could not see him but I was lit up in lights and I suddently felt the blood leave my legs.

This even goes back to the guy named Bernie who shot and killed the youths on the subway who asked for $5 from him. They did not have weapons but for him he felt threatened.

This is such a gray area of determining if one's perception of feeling in danger. You could say both men that night felt in danger at some point.
 
opendebate said:
I'll sleep better?? What's that suppose to mean?? I sleep just fine and frankly...that sounds like a threat. Another conservative go to when you get all read faced and fired up over issues. Something tells me you're a Limbaugh and O'Reily fan. Or aleast FAUX news.
Click to expand...

Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.
 
opendebate said:
you're an idiot
Click to expand...

LOL sure glad no one's calling anyone names here. I think I read a comment from <whistling> someone accusing those who can't maintain control of calling people names. <shrug>
 
Oceandan said:
LOL sure glad no one's calling anyone names here. I think I read a comment from <whistling> someone accusing those who can't maintain control of calling people names. <shrug>
Click to expand...

If you can't beat'em join'em finally came crashing in around my head.
 
Crosscheck said:
.

This even goes back to the guy named Bernie who shot and killed the youths on the subway who asked for $5 from him. They did not have weapons but for him he felt threatened.

This is such a gray area of determining if one's perception of feeling in danger. You could say both men that night felt in danger at some point.
Click to expand...
----------------
Goetz.....on the NYC subway.
I think the guys he shot had some primitive weapons.
Sharpened screwdrivers, maybe?
He was found not guilty on the serious charges, but convicted on illegal firearms possession.
Gray area is an understatement.
As you say, both GM and TM may have felt threatened at some point.
 
opendebate said:
How did he break the law? By defending himself against an armed man who was pursuing him, who was also instructed by the police NOT to get out of his car btw
Click to expand...

You are making up facts again. He jumped Zimmerman according to the evidence, he was the one on top, that is not defense, that is aggression.
 
radioman said:
-------------


This is true.
There does not appear to be enough evidence to convict George.
His version of the confrontation can't be countered by TM.
On the compassion issue, I think we should be sad for a young life lost.
Even if he was, in your analysis, a pothead.
It's the Christian thing to do, don't you agree?
Click to expand...

Never did I say I was not sorry he died, it is a tragedy. However, I'm not going to condemn Zimmerman either because Martin couldn't be civil.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Never did I say I was not sorry he died, it is a tragedy. However, I'm not going to condemn Zimmerman either because Martin couldn't be civil.
Click to expand...
Why is it a tragedy? Its the path the young man was taking by his own actions.
Fights, weed, guns, kicked out of school. Not the makings of a rocket scientist.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Why is it a tragedy? Its the path the young man was taking by his own actions.
Fights, weed, guns, kicked out of school. Not the makings of a rocket scientist.
Click to expand...

That is also a tragedy that he would waste his life.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You are making up facts again. He jumped Zimmerman according to the evidence, he was the one on top, that is not defense, that is aggression.
Click to expand...

Do you not recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact. Martin jumped Zimmerman and Zimmerman pursued Martin. Those are facts. The difference between your OPINION and mine is that you do not consider Zimmermans behavior the and aggressive act and I do. Try to stop name called and making false accusations and put your thinking cap on instead my friend.
 
What if....

Aliens did it!?!?!??!??!??

:roll:
 
opendebate said:
Do you not recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact. Martin jumped Zimmerman and Zimmerman pursued Martin. Those are facts. The difference between your OPINION and mine is that you do not consider Zimmermans behavior the and aggressive act and I do. Try to stop name called and making false accusations and put your thinking cap on instead my friend.
Click to expand...

Can you rephrase that into intelligible English please? Then perhaps I can respond.
 
opendebate said:
Do you not recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact. Martin jumped Zimmerman and Zimmerman pursued Martin. Those are facts. The difference between your OPINION and mine is that you do not consider Zimmermans behavior the and aggressive act and I do. Try to stop name called and making false accusations and put your thinking cap on instead my friend.
Click to expand...

Under the law in Florida, following someone is not an aggressive act. An aggressive act is punching someone.

Even following your wrong fantasies and assuming GZ was the aggressor, he is STILL covered by self-defense. The only thing he would have to add would be that he made every effort to escape after being put in fear for great bodily harm or death - which is peanuts considering he was being straddled in a helpless situation and screaming for help for 2/3 a minute while getting pounded on before using lethal force as his last resort. Classic self-defense, regardless the aggressor. I can cite Florida statute if you would like.
 
CycloneWanderer said:
Under the law in Florida, following someone is not an aggressive act. An aggressive act is punching someone.

Even following your wrong fantasies and assuming GZ was the aggressor, he is STILL covered by self-defense. The only thing he would have to add would be that he made every effort to escape after being put in fear for great bodily harm or death - which is peanuts considering he was being straddled in a helpless situation and screaming for help for 2/3 a minute while getting pounded on before using lethal force as his last resort. Classic self-defense, regardless the aggressor. I can cite Florida statute if you would like.
Click to expand...

Exactly
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Can you rephrase that into intelligible English please? Then perhaps I can respond.
Click to expand...

Resort to insults because YOU don't get it. That's a sign of intelligence. It's quite clear. I am sorry you are incapable of understanding.
 
opendebate said:
Resort to insults because YOU don't get it. That's a sign of intelligence. It's quite clear. I am sorry you are incapable of understanding.
Click to expand...

That wasn't an insult, I was being serious. Your grammar made the sentences useless.
 
CycloneWanderer said:
Under the law in Florida, following someone is not an aggressive act. An aggressive act is punching someone.

Even following your wrong fantasies and assuming GZ was the aggressor, he is STILL covered by self-defense. The only thing he would have to add would be that he made every effort to escape after being put in fear for great bodily harm or death - which is peanuts considering he was being straddled in a helpless situation and screaming for help for 2/3 a minute while getting pounded on before using lethal force as his last resort. Classic self-defense, regardless the aggressor. I can cite Florida statute if you would like.
Click to expand...

This is my opinion. I am not pretending to be an attorney. I am not discussing whether or not there is enough evidence to convict Z of what it appears to me happened that night. The law will make the decision. I am stating my opinion. I will not resort to name calling (anymore) even though conversatives seem to go there so easily. If you want to be rude respond to someone elses posts please.
 
opendebate said:
This is my opinion. I am not pretending to be an attorney. I am not discussing whether or not there is enough evidence to convict Z of what it appears to me happened that night. The law will make the decision. I am stating my opinion. I will not resort to name calling (anymore) even though conversatives seem to go there so easily. If you want to be rude respond to someone elses posts please.
Click to expand...

I think everyone is therefor in agreement: your opinion is wrong :2razz:
If you don't want someone to challenge your opinion, don't post it on a public internet forum. Just saying.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
That wasn't an insult, I was being serious. Your grammar made the sentences useless.
Click to expand...

This isn't a grade school and I am not really paying a lot of attention to my grammar. Don't try to discredit me because you don't like my opinion. You can understand my point.
 
CycloneWanderer said:
I think everyone is therefor in agreement: your opinion is wrong :2razz:
If you don't want someone to challenge your opinion, don't post it on a public internet forum. Just saying.
Click to expand...

I am posting to a forum that is CLEARLY dominated by conservatives. Obviously I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me. I just gave you guys credit for being capable of having a focused, adult, civil conversation with someone you disagree with. Clearly I was mistaken.
 
opendebate said:
This isn't a grade school and I am not really paying a lot of attention to my grammar. Don't try to discredit me because you don't like my opinion. You can understand my point.
Click to expand...

No I really don't understand your point. You are right, it isn't grade school so you should have some reasonable grammar by this point. That being said, you told me to put my thinking cap on, and said I made false accusations? How and when? How and when....
 
opendebate said:
I am posting to a forum that is CLEARLY dominated by conservatives. Obviously I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me. I just gave you guys credit for being capable of having a focused, adult, civil conversation with someone you disagree with. Clearly I was mistaken.
Click to expand...

Forgive my rudeness. It was not intended. The sarcasm is poorly communicated in my post now that I reread it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom