Trayvon Martin

[RobinFinderson]

If Zimmerman's account is to be believed, then Martin went for his gun. How did Martin know that Zimmerman had a gun?

[byu71]

If Zimmerman's account is to be believed, then Martin went for his gun. How did Martin know that Zimmerman had a gun?

Maybe Zimmerman initially said, halt, I have a gun.

Why all the supposition and need to fix a total judgement at this point.

I am open to the possibility Zimmerman is a cold hearted racist murderer. You seem to have a problem thinking he might not be.

Perhaps I am judging you and some others on the board unfairly with your seemingly need to have this guy convicted immediately.

[Jacob]

I am open to the possibility Zimmerman is a cold hearted racist murderer. You seem to have a problem thinking he might not be.

Robin claims he doesn't think Zimmerman is a racist murderer. Just a racist killer. Don't put words in his mouth.

[RobinFinderson]

Maybe Zimmerman initially said, halt, I have a gun.

If that were the case, and it came out in court, he would lose his self-defense defense.

[creekster]

If that were the case, and it came out in court, he would lose his self-defense defense.

Really? Why?

[UtahDan]

This is all pretty simple to me. You shouldn't be able to use deadly force on an unarmed individual when you instigate a confrontation in any way. The facts are pretty clear that Martin was afraid and trying to get away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed him when he shouldn't have been doing so (regardless of what the 911 operator said, trailing someone like he did was inappropriate. Colly Wolly has noted that anyone with a permit to carry should know this). He was the instigator here, the "but for" cause of whatever confrontation took place. I don't care who did what to get the fight going, I don't care if Martin was high or had a history of violence, I don't care if he was on top of Zimmerman, beating the hell out of him. Zimmerman shot and killed a boy with no weapon after he put the two of them in that situation. If it doesn't outrage you that someone could instigate a confrontation with an unarmed teenager then shoot him to death when things didn't go the way he'd like then you have some serious issues.

I need to catch up on the latest here, but I was talking through the self-defense using deadly force angle of this with someone today. In order for it to work Zimmerman has to demonstrate that he reasonably (not subjectively) believed that he was threatened with imminent death or serious bodily injury. A threat here is not a verbal threat or even an aggressive move necessarily. It is a pointed gun, a raised knife, a baseball bat about to be swung or a severe beating. Now I seem to recall that under the right circumstances it can be one punch but that is a little fuzzy to me. Anyway, the question I would like answered is what did the unarmed kid do make Zimmerman apprehend death or serious injury.

It is a question of the scope of the privilege to batter another. If you slap me in the face, that does not trigger my privilege to use deadly force. Broken record, but again, only if you do something that objectively looks like imminent death or serious injury.

What I am wondering is whether Zimmerman exceeded the scope of his privilege, such that a murder charge is mitigated to manslaughter. But like I say I don't know the latest.

[RobinFinderson]

Really? Why?

Astonishing. You can't understand why strange adults can't approach children/teenagers who are not breaking any law and tell them to 'halt' by threat of deadly force? Incredible.

[Paperback Writer]

Nauvoo Whistling Brigade be damned.

What do you consider "instigating a confrontation?" Following someone you believe is suspicious until they're out of your neighborhood? Asking someone what business they have there? Threatening someone that you're going to call the police if they don't leave? And if you do any of these things and you're attacked for it you're not allowed to defend yourself simply because the attacker is unarmed? I think you're nuts with this defense.

I'd just comment further that the Sanford Police Dept. conducted an investigation, interviewed Zimmerman and eye-witnessess in the neighborhood. And made a decision not to arrest Zimmerman. And the judgment by many appears to be that the Police got it wrong.

I've done similar as Zimmerman in my neighborhood but don't carry a handgun and have never forced an altercation. Any exchanges are usually pleasant. Walking with a large German Shepard probably mitigates anyone attacking me.

[creekster]

Astonishing. You can't understand why strange adults can't approach children/teenagers who are not breaking any law and tell them to 'halt' by threat of deadly force? Incredible.

Huh? You asserted that if he annonced he had a gun he would lose his self defense position in court. I wnat to know why you assume this single fact means forfetiure of that defense.

[Jacob]

It is a pointed gun, a raised knife, a baseball bat about to be swung or a severe beating. Now I seem to recall that under the right circumstances it can be one punch but that is a little fuzzy to me. Anyway, the question I would like answered is what did the unarmed kid do make Zimmerman apprehend death or serious injury.

It is a question of the scope of the privilege to batter another. If you slap me in the face, that does not trigger my privilege to use deadly force. Broken record, but again, only if you do something that objectively looks like imminent death or serious injury.

What I am wondering is whether Zimmerman exceeded the scope of his privilege, such that a murder charge is mitigated to manslaughter. But like I say I don't know the latest.

By all accounts, Zimmerman suffered a severe beating.

[byu71]

Huh? You asserted that if he annonced he had a gun he would lose his self defense position in court. I wnat to know why you assume this single fact means forfetiure of that defense.

A discussion with Robin brings back memories of ex-ute. If he can't defend his comment he moves on like he was really talking about something else. Note he was moved on to waving guns at children.

[RobinFinderson]

Huh? You asserted that if he annonced he had a gun he would lose his self defense position in court. I wnat to know why you assume this single fact means forfetiure of that defense.

I 'annonced' that if byu71's scenario is what happened:

Maybe Zimmerman initially said, halt, I have a gun.

Then Zimmerman would lose his claim to self defense.

Give this a try, creek -- go to your local High School with a concealed gun, and say to a teenager, "Halt, I have a gun." Then wait around for a few minutes and see what happens.

[creekster]

I 'annonced' that if byu71's scenario is what happened:



Then Zimmerman would lose his claim to self defense.

Give this a try, creek -- go to your local High School with a concealed gun, and say to a teenager, "Halt, I have a gun." Then wait around for a few minutes and see what happens.

Maybe I am missing it, but your 'response ' makes no sense to me. You asserted the announcement alone would lead to forfeiture of the self defense position in court. I want to know why you think this is true. That's all. Its not a big deal, so if you want to ignore or move on, go ahead.

[Jacob]

I 'annonced' that if byu71's scenario is what happened:



Then Zimmerman would lose his claim to self defense.

Give this a try, creek -- go to your local High School with a concealed gun, and say to a teenager, "Halt, I have a gun." Then wait around for a few minutes and see what happens.

In most states, it is illegal to carry a gun into a school. So that's a bad idea.

But in my state, it is legal to carry an unconcealed weapon. IOW, there is no reason to announce you are carrying as the fact is plainly evident. And neither displaying the weapon, nor announcing the mere fact that you have it would have much bearing on whether you were entitled to assert the a defense of justified killing in a court of law.

[RobinFinderson]

Maybe I am missing it, but your 'response ' makes no sense to me. You asserted the announcement alone would lead to forfeiture of the self defense position in court. I want to know why you think this is true. That's all. Its not a big deal, so if you want to ignore or move on, go ahead.

Because, if you attempt to stop someone by threat of deadly force, that is the start of a kidnapping. You can't start to kidnap a child/teen, and then kill the child/teen when he fights back, and claim self defense.