Abolish FReepathons.
Go monthly!!
Posted on 08/12/2013 8:13:09 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Of course, it was self-defense, but not by George Zimmerman.
Let's forget blackness, racism, neighborhood watches and location for a moment and simplify the story.
Let's say a person spots someone he has a perceived beef with; maybe this person doesn't like the way the other guy looks, or the way the other guy looked at someone else, or doesn't want him around his neighborhood, or this person is just out for trouble. Now this person follows the other guy slowly in his car for a while, ultimately getting out and confronting him. Maybe he even pushes the other guy or brandishes a weapon. The other guy is quite scared; he responds by trying to do what most of us would do, defend himself. Maybe this stalked guy is lucky in the skirmish and actually gets on top of this person for a time; that is, until the stalker pulls out his gun and shoots and kills the other guy.
Yes, this is a classic case of self-defense or, should I say, attempted self-defense, but not by George Zimmerman. It was by the other guy, who was just minding his own business, Trayvon Martin. In New York, we would call this chain of intentional actions murder.
Pete Nye
Clarksville
Go monthly!!
Another fact-free liberal opinion in this case.
It’s a letter to the editor by an idiot.
Or, it’s a letter to an idiot by an editor.
Sometimes, it is hard to tell the difference.
I guess the duty to retreat only applies to those with guns?
Lol.
Why are people still writing about this case without having learned any of the facts?
important too is the mindset...we know...we KNOW...that Martin was into street fighting, into drugs, suspended from school, not once but apparently several times, and he had drugs in his system that night...
while I 'm sure Z is no angel...he nonetheless was a law and order and justice sort of guy.
Ben Hogan: "The more I practice, the luckier I get..."
They got their "facts" downloaded to them via the TeeVee...
He forgot to say that Trayvon was a homophobe.
Because the only facts they were interested in learning was the alleged skin color of the participants.
Let’s suppose we suppose and imagine, while thinking about what might or might not have been. And what if we then suppose while imagining and thinking about slavery while we think about slavery and racism. That would be murder. Case closed.
This is “thinking” like a lump of stinky cheese.
Minding his own business? GZ reported that No Limits Nigga was acting strangely,as if he was on something.And,sure enough,the pathologist testified that he had a level of marijuana in his system that could affect his thinking and behavior.Add to that the evidence that he,a punk once found to be in possession of large quantity of women’s jewelry,was *lurking* in a complex that had had many break ins and the evidence *powerfully* suggests that he was doing *anything* but “minding his own business”.
If the United States doesn’t break up, demoKKKrats are going to need to be deprogrammed.
The North is still reminding us of the Civil War, that they won it. Of course it was also them who kept free blacks out.
Yes that concocted fantasy sounds like self defense. However, by evidence and witness testimony that is not even remotely close to what happened between TM and GZ. Anyone can spin what-if scenarios all day long. That doesn’t mean they have anything to do with reality.
Public mental and moral flatulence.
Sadly, not unexpected in a country that puts Obama in charge. Twice.
Jury saw otherwise, Pete.
Pete Nye definitely not the Science Guy...or the Factual Guy, either
Quite a vivid imagination there...
Travon was just defending himself, while he was sitting on George’s chest beating his head into the ground.
Right...
Mark
Why are people still writing about this case without having learned any of the facts?
Second class sore losers are entitled to know a few facts, but first class sore losers are required by law to know nothing, or at least, nothing that coincides with reality. That's just the way sore loser-ism works.
This is so... July.
2012.
1) In legal terms, self-defense is an affirmative defense to a charge of homicide (or battery). A homicide victim cannot assert self-defense, because they aren't being charged with a crime. It's moot.
2) Everyone has a right to self-defense.
actually, it is probably the screenplay...
Supposed they both were armed and they pull out their pistols and shoot each other dead.
Who is the charged with murder? Who had a right to self-defense? Was Justice done? Who the hell cares? It's moot.
They choose to ignore the facts. Such as those presented by Jenteal, but not in cursive.
Simple. The one that calls the police first is not the one “looking for trouble”.
Is Mr. Nye one of those folks that will need to be added to the exploding head watch once the Kruidbos lawsuit releases all of the contents of ex-Saint Trayvon’s phone?
Zimmerman spotted someone who looked suspicious. He happened to be % correct. Trayvon was a drug dealer and was caught with stolen jewelry at school.
Good job George!
“Maybe this stalked guy is lucky in the skirmish and actually gets on top of this person for a time
Ben Hogan: “The more I practice, the luckier I get...”
LOL
No matter how many times I cut this board, it’s still not long enough.
Hey Pete.
Someone needs to bash your head on concrete a few times...I volunteer.
Let us note that Mr Zimmerman had no way of knowing a) that Mr Martin was only 17; b) that Mr Martin was unarmed; c) that Mr Martin was staying as a guest with a resident. Thus 3 elements of the anti-Zimmerman arguments are invalidated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.