patrick.net

Also, having a German last name doesn't mean you are some white aryan with a swastika on your chest with a hard-on for black guys.

This is true. What is also true is that Florida has just made it legal to carry a concealed weapon, stalk and start fights with unarmed people and kill them when they appear to be winning the fight.

rooemoore says

This is true. What is also true is that Florida has just made it legal to carry a concealed weapon, stalk and start fights with unarmed people and kill them when they appear to be winning the fight.

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap.

dodgerfanjohn says

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap.

What is bullcrap about it? Where is he incorrect?

Regardless of whether you think that's how the Zimmerman incident went down, it does seem to be the correct legal interpretation.

tatupu70 says

dodgerfanjohn says

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap.

What is bullcrap about it? Where is he incorrect?

Regardless of whether you think that's how the Zimmerman incident went down, it does seem to be the correct legal interpretation.

"What is also true is that Florida has just made it legal to carry a concealed weapon, stalk and start fights with unarmed people and kill them when they appear to be winning the fight."

Its already legal to: 1. CCW. 2. Follow someone.

3.) Theres no evidence that GZ started a fight.

4.) Theres no evidence that GZ knew TM was unarmed.

5.) There is zero evidence that GZ shot TM because TM was winning a fight. If TM was winning a fight, and simply walked away after hitting GZ a few times, there never would have even been an arrest.

Like I said. Emotional BS. I don't understand the constant lies and misrepresentations in order to substantiate an opinion that GZ should have been guilty.

dodgerfanjohn says

Like I said. Emotional BS. I don't understand the constant lies and
misrepresentations in order to substantiate an opinion that GZ should have been
guilty.

Did you read my post?

tatupu70 says

Regardless of whether you think that's how the Zimmerman incident went down,
it does seem to be the correct legal interpretation.

So, again. Where is he wrong?

dodgerfanjohn says

5.) There is zero evidence that GZ shot TM because TM was winning a fight. If
TM was winning a fight, and simply walked away after hitting GZ a few times,
there never would have even been an arrest.

Do you know how many times he hit him?

dodgerfanjohn says

rooemoore says

This is true. What is also true is that Florida has just made it legal to carry a concealed weapon, stalk and start fights with unarmed people and kill them when they appear to be winning the fight.

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap.

No, what she wrote is 100% true. Zimmerman got off because he killed his victim, thereby making it impossible for the victim to say what happened. Meanwhile, a woman who fired warning shots, so as to hurt no one, at her husband who was trying to beat her got 20 years in prison. Same state. Same laws.

That's fucked up.

The legal message is, in Florida, if you pull out a gun, you'd better kill everyone in sight or you will go to prison for decades.

Oh, and just remember. It's exactly tragedies like this that motivate people to demand gun control laws.

tatupu70 says

dodgerfanjohn says

5.) There is zero evidence that GZ shot TM because TM was winning a fight. If

TM was winning a fight, and simply walked away after hitting GZ a few times,

there never would have even been an arrest.

Do you know how many times he hit him?

No I don't. I only have the word of GZ and the pictures of GZ's injuries to go on. Simply judging by the pictures, GZ was hit more than 4 times, and also had his head bashed into the pavement repeatedly. I've actually witnessed one person bash another persons head into concrete while on top of the person 3 times. To sustain the injuries Zimmerman sustained, IMO TM would have had to smash GZ's head VERY HARD into the pavement 5 or more times. More likely 10+ times. I'm surprised GZ still had consciousness to grab his gun and shoot Trayvon.

Dan8267 says

dodgerfanjohn says

rooemoore says

This is true. What is also true is that Florida has just made it legal to carry a concealed weapon, stalk and start fights with unarmed people and kill them when they appear to be winning the fight.

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap.

No, what she wrote is 100% true. Zimmerman got off because he killed his victim, thereby making it impossible for the victim to say what happened. Meanwhile, a woman who fired warning shots, so as to hurt no one, at her husband who was trying to beat her got 20 years in prison. Same state. Same laws.

That's fucked up.

The legal message is, in Florida, if you pull out a gun, you'd better kill everyone in sight or you will go to prison for decades.

Son, its time to get back on your meds. Dr ordered it, you need to follow orders.

tatupu70 says

dodgerfanjohn says

Like I said. Emotional BS. I don't understand the constant lies and

misrepresentations in order to substantiate an opinion that GZ should have been

guilty.

Did you read my post?

tatupu70 says

Regardless of whether you think that's how the Zimmerman incident went down,

it does seem to be the correct legal interpretation.

So, again. Where is he wrong?

I can only repeat my prior post.

dodgerfanjohn says

Son, its time to get back on your meds. Dr ordered it, you need to follow orders

dodgerfanjohn says

Like I said. Emotional BS. I don't understand the constant lies and
misrepresentations in order to substantiate an opinion

dodgerfanjohn says

What you just wrote is emotional bullcrap

dodgerfanjohn says

I can only repeat my prior post.

Your previous post illustrates specific details to the Zimmerman case. I thought I was pretty clear that I was talking more generally about the Florida law. As such, you gave no reasons why rooe is wrong. I'm beginning to think you cannot.

dodgerfanjohn says

Son, its time to get back on your meds. Dr ordered it, you need to follow orders.

With that great analysis, how could you possibly be wrong?

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

Let's all get conceal carry permits and start stalking and trash talking bankers when they vacation in Miami.

Actually, this might work.

For example: I was minding my own business about to putt on the 7th green. Several minutes later, the two pink and lime green polo shirted banksters playing behind me started yelling. One actually went ahead and hit his ball right at me. It came within 50 yards -- I feared for my life! The other one started to line up his shot. Panicking, I quickly pulled my AP4 LR-308 out of the golf bag. Luckily, the second bankster - the fat one - slipped while swinging and missed the ball entirely. As he clumsily recovered his balance I was able to lock my sight on his sweaty forehead. A moment later, the threat was neutralized.

Now the lime green one dropped his club and ran towards his golf cart. Fearing he intended to use it as a weapon - to run me over - I quickly aimed at the slow moving target and disposed of the second threat.

The worst part is, these bastards screwed up my mojo and I missed the putt!

tatupu70 says

dodgerfanjohn says

I can only repeat my prior post.

Your previous post illustrates specific details to the Zimmerman case. I thought I was pretty clear that I was talking more generally about the Florida law. As such, you gave no reasons why rooe is wrong. I'm beginning to think you cannot.

Cite the law and code.

dodgerfanjohn says

Cite the law and code.

Exactly, the law and code were tested by this case and that resulted in precedent being set. I think it is a dangerous precedent and that Florida is fucked up. You may think it's swell.

Point is, that precedent has been set. How can you argue with that?

rooemoore says

Point is, that precedent has been set. How can you argue with that?

His religion won't allow him to admit that there is anything potentially bad about the outcome of the Zimmerman case.

This case has proved that racism is alive an well in America, shockingly more so than I had thought. Forget about whether or not Zimmerman was racist. Just look at the reactions of the public. A third of white America praised Zimmerman as a hero and scorned Martin as a thug, while almost all of black America scored Zimmerman as a racist murderer and Martin as a victim.

Regardless of what the truth is, you don't get that kind of clear racial divide unless race is the lens through which the public is viewing the trial.

On the bright side, at least the other two-thirds of white America isn't so xenophobic. Still, public reaction to this case illustrates exactly why we still need the Voting Rights Act.

That's not even how legal precedence works.

For there to be legal precedence generally some ruling has to be appealed ad then published.

Lol@citing people vs. Zimmerman in a legal document.

Even then, how the heck would that apply to any other trial?

Sorry, that was snarky.

Better if an criminal attorney chimes in here, but that's not at all how legal precedence works.

You wouldn't be able to cite a jury's decision as legal precedence.

dodgerfanjohn says

That's not even how legal precedence works.

Case law precedent. It is often used when a similar case comes before the court.

When I looked at this case I ignored the racial (and emotional) aspects(as best I could). I didn't play the game of reversing the roles or defining profiling, etc. I just thought is it in the public's best interest for one citizen to be able to kill another under the known factual circumstances of this case. My opinion is that it does not. I think GZ should be in jail for some form of manslaughter. But FL has some fucked up laws so he walks.

This trial isn't case law.

Case law is the set of existing rulings which have made new interpretations of law and, therefore, can be cited as precedent. In most countries, including most European countries, the term is applied to any set of rulings on law which is guided by previous rulings, for example, previous decisions of a government agency - that is, precedential case law can arise from either a judicial ruling or a ruling of an adjudication within an executive branch agency. Trials and hearings that do not result in written decisions of a court of record do not create precedent for future court decisions.[3]

That's from Wikipedia entry on "precedent".

This trial decision won't be "published".

Everybody who is upset about this outcome should engage in changing the law in Florida instead of advocating for someone going to prison for murder who killed someone in self-defense.

dodgerfanjohn says

This trial isn't case law.

Not going to comment on Zimmerman - I haven't cared about it in the slightest so I am not going to opinine on something I know very little about.

That said, dodgerfanjohn is correct re: precedent. While it is true that caselaw is a very important part of what the law "says", it usually only comes from appellate courts or above.

When it comes to a trial court, the outcome will have no bearing on the actual laws of the land unless the case is appealed, and even then, it somewhat depends on whether the trial case was affirmed, overturned, remanded (with additional instructions), etc.

Bottom line here, the Zimmerman trial had no bearing on Florida law whatsoever.

What it's really all about IMHO is a conflict between the society we say we have and the ugly facts on the ground.

We say everyone has equal rights under the law, but the statistical reality that blacks murder whites at about 10x the rate that whites murder blacks is an ugly fact that does not fit nicely with equal rights. And the difference in interracial rape stats is even much worse. White people are afraid of black people (especially young black men) with very good reason, everyone knows it, and no public official ever dares to say it.

So Trayvon had a theoretical right to wander a white neighborhood at night, but it was a lousy choice for a young black man, based on our current violent crime stats.

What's the rate of white on white murders?
What's the rate of white on white rapes? Yes, I searched
Being the Racist that I am, I'm not thinking about these victims. I'm only concerned about "any" Black crime.
TM learned a lesson about exercising his rights. No one will catch him in public again.

GZ is innocent. GZ killed a child.

We say everyone has equal rights under the law, but the statistical reality that blacks murder whites at about 10x the rate that whites murder blacks is an ugly fact that does not fit nicely with equal rights.

I think it fits fine with equal rights. Even if black men murdered everyone at 100x the rate that other groups do, they should get the same trial as everyone else.

It fits poorly with the legal system, however, because Zimmerman gets the benefit of reasonable doubt - a benefit I would have extended to him were I on the jury - while a black man would not. Maybe I lack imagination, but I can't visualize a black defendant in this case getting acquitted and having this degree of Internet support.

17 is not a child for the perpetrator of an aggravated assault. 18 makes a young man eligible for military draft; i.e. 18-25 are the prime combat ages.

Did TM deserve to die? No. He deserved to be arrested for aggravated assault and battery, possibly attempted murder; his defense may be able to cite the drugs found in his body to make a case of temporary insanity defense. However, given GZ's predicament finding his own skull being bashed against the concrete pavement, self defense against eminent threat to life became quite clearly justified.

Reality says

17 is not a child for the perpetrator of an aggravated assault. 18 makes a young man eligible for military draft; i.e. 18-25 are the prime combat ages.

Did TM deserve to die? No. He deserved to be arrested for aggravated assault and battery, possibly attempted murder; his defense may be able to cite the drugs found in his body to make a case of temporary insanity defense. However, given GZ's predicament finding his own skull being bashed against the concrete pavement, self defense against eminent threat to life became quite clearly justified.

That is the killer's story. As they say, "dead men tell no tales." or in this case dead kids tell no tales. GZ was not even hospitalized-he had a few abrasions he sustained in the fight.

But the moral of the story-make sure you kill any witnesses-you will be free. Something the mob is quite the expert in.

So Trayvon had a theoretical right to wander a white neighborhood at night, but
it was a lousy choice for a young black man, based on our current violent crime
stats

While I am aware it is the south-he was not wandering in a strange neighborhood-just returning home to watch a game with dad.

lostand confused says

That is the killer's story. As they say, "dead men tell no tales." or in this case dead kids tell no tales. GZ was not even hospitalized-he had a few abrasions he sustained in the fight.

But the moral of the story-make sure you kill any witnesses-you will be free. Something the mob is quite the expert in.

There were witnesses who saw the beating. The cuts GZ had indicated severe pounding of the head on the pavement. There was no injury to TM except his knuckles that delivered the assault. They had weeks to examine TM's body; all they found were damages to internal organs and brain caused by possible chronic drug abuse, the type of drug called "Lean" that would have involved candies and soda (mixed with DXM), that TM was walking a mile in the rain that night to get. According to his social media communications, TM had been using "Lean" for years.

There was nothing "kid" about a 6 footer who had a history of drug abuse, burglary and suspension from school due to fights.

Your screen name suits you well.

lostand confused says

While I am aware it is the south-he was not wandering in a strange neighborhood-just returning home to watch a game with dad.

LOL. Did you ever walk a mile in the rain at night to get some candy and soda, so as to watch a game? You obviously don't know the mind and drive of a drug addict.

Reality says

all they found were damages to internal organs and brain due to possible chronic
drug abuse, the type of drug called "Lean" that would have involved candies and
soda (mixed with DXM)

Possible-so now possible is a fact? GZ was the one who trained in MMA. GZ was the one who did not require hospitaliztion. If someone pounded your head into a pavement, how long do you think your skull will last?

lostand confused says

Possible-so now possible is a fact?

"Possible" was a legalese for not pursuing the subject further, as the coroner was not putting TM on trial. In the vernacular context, that should be a "probably" to you. There is very little reason why a healthy 17yr old should have that kind of internal organ damage, except for chronic drug abuse.

GZ was the one who trained in MMA. GZ was the one who did not require hospitaliztion. If someone pounded your head into a pavement, how long do you think your skull will last?

TM also had MMA training. GZ was correct in recognizing that he'd better get the shot off, or he'd be dead soon.

Reality says

GZ was correct in recognizing that he'd better get the shot off, or he'd be dead
soon.

lol. nominated.

What basis do you have to make that statement?

Reality says

lostand confused says

While I am aware it is the south-he was not wandering in a strange neighborhood-just returning home to watch a game with dad.

LOL. Did you ever walk a mile in the rain at night to get some candy and soda, so as to watch a game? You obviously don't know the mind and drive of a drug addict.

Actually when I was a broke student in FL, with no car-I did walk in the rain. When I started, it didn't rain, but mid-way carrying my groceries in from the Winn-Dixie store-yeah I got caught in the rain. That is FL-it rians and pours and just like that it is gone.

Reality says

TM also had MMA training. GZ was correct in recognizing that he'd better get the
shot off, or he'd be dead soon

Source??