Let's talk about Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, and how unbelievably fucked up this all is

Yeah the other day i was at the Dekalb Farmers Market around closing time and the security guy (I guess a cop, not 100% sure!) out front was packing a effing huge automatic rifle just patrolling the entrance/exit. The only thing that came close to that was when I was in Egypt and outside of the temples they have security with AK47s but then again those are priceless historical temples in deserts occupied by sometimes violent extremists.

yeah that was one of the things that really stressed me out in jerusalem, people in street clothes just standing around with uzis everywhere you went

are you sure that wasn't just an american patriot or something

maybe it was ... the neighborhood watch

but think how much less creepy it would be if you knew that every other person around that cop was also carrying a gun

I hope this was sarcasm.

;)

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/records-detail-george-zimmermans-medical-injuries/nN7Dh/

SEMINOLE COUNTY, Fla. —

Court records show George Zimmerman had a pair of black eyes, a nose fracture and two cuts to the back of his head after the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

...

According to an autopsy report, the only other injury Martin had aside from the fatal gunshot wound was broken skin on his knuckles.

daaaamn

so, yes, there was a fight. GZ was losing or lost it, then shot TM.

not great news for the prosecution :(

my prediction is that the judge and defense will tell the jurors over and over again "your job is bit to decide whether shooting tm was wrong but if it was breaking the letter of the law"

and then it will be an argument about the exact wording of feeling threatened that prosecution will lose

i don't know if it's even as difficult as that. seems that the defense just has to suggest that the incident takes place in two "acts" that should be considered independently: act 1) zimmerman's decision to follow and confront martin, and act 2) the subsequent struggle that led to zimmerman shooting martin.

even if zimmerman was "wrong" to follow and confront martin in act 1, he doesn't seem to have broken any major laws there. in act 2, if martin really did start beating zimmerman up for whatever reason, even if only because he was scared by zimmerman's behavior (and we'll never really know), then zimmerman was legally justified in shooting martin to defend himself.

^ not saying this is right or what should happen, just think that this is probably how the defense will handle it.

i wonder if they could even have the case dismissed on those grounds

depends on the order of events

a) fight breaks out, GZ pulls his gun during and shoots
b) fight breaks out, GZ pulls his gun, TM backs away, GZ shoots anyway
b) fight breaks out, fight basically ends, GZ gets up, pulls his gun and shoots

i mean, any number of scenarios fit the facts. b and c aren't really self-defense anymore (whether they still are legally, idk)

and the timeline if i'm remembering it right is 'fight,' 'zimmerman goes back to his truck to get gun,' shooting

ah yes, by his own admission?

eh i'm really sick of speculating about this myself

and the timeline if i'm remembering it right is 'fight,' 'zimmerman goes back to his truck to get gun,' shooting

that wasn't my understanding, but maybe i've missed something. i was under the impression that zimmerman's story is that he shot martin while martin was on top of and still attacking him.

yeah i agree w/ aero & DJP on this one. again, even with that account, we probably know less than the jury did

― dharunravir (k3vin k.), Sunday, May 13, 2012

based on my limited experience of jury service, we probably know more

Wouldn't the 'stand your ground' law apply to TM? Regardless of if he even started the fight or what, it seems like a law that says "You can defend yourself if threatened, to the point of fatally shooting the threat" would apply if you were being followed around by a gun-toting guy in a car and then pursued on foot.

yeah, i think you're right. martin probably had a legal right to defend himself against the threat seemingly posed by zimmerman. and if martin took advantage of that permission, then it gave zimmerman the legal right to defend himself against martin. "stand your ground" seems to provide a legal excuse for war in the streets.

this conversation is exactly why this law is so fucked up (that is, self-cancelling).

Ah, but does that law make it OK to hit people or only shoot them? These distinctions are very important!

if shooting is okay i find it tough to believe that less than lethal forms of self defense wouldn't be, but idk the stand your ground laws are some nonsense to begin with

IIRC, you can shoot anyone in defense who is attacking you with a blunt or sharp instrument, but it's against the law to defend yourself with anything but a gun.

Actually, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the the law is that fucking stupid.

I can imagine the myopic gun lobby shills that wrote the law were probably all "who cares about anything other than guns? If everyone carried a gun, you wouldn't need to punch, so problem solved!"

cue scene from raiders of the lost ark

what about when you're out of ammo

oh i guess switch to chainsaw

Then you throw the gun at them. Haven't you ever seen a gangster movie?

If chainsaws were outlawed, only outlaws would carry chainsaws.

I wouldn't be surprised if the gun lobby tried to make it illegal to throw away a gun, at someone or otherwise.

Even Superman knows that it's when they throw the gun that you're in the most danger.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGf1r8-Snss#t=59s

omg so fake that dudes head would have exploded like a watermelon getting hit if superman hit him IRL

IIRC, you can shoot anyone in defense who is attacking you with a blunt or sharp instrument, but it's against the law to defend yourself with anything but a gun.

Actually, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the the law is that fucking stupid.

― Bob Bop Perano (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, May 17, 2012 2:55 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Considering knives and squirt guns -- but not concealed firearms -- are banned for the GOP convention, I wouldn't be surprised either.

the leaks in this are insane, totally benefiting the defense

Trayvon was high

So legally, you must bring a gun to a knife fight?

Trayvon Martin: world's first violent pot smoker.

Man, case closed. I saw Reefer Madness. That mary jane turns you into a raving maniac.

the drug THC

the drug thx

americans need to figure out a special way to spell the word "drug" so that it has fangs and blood dripping from it

drugula

This isn't going to go the right way, is it?

there is no right way

My takeaway of this is that Captain Crime Watch reported the kid to the police, they told him they would handle it and to stand down but he decided to take more intiative. He followed the kid in his car and either he exited the vehicle to confront the kid or the kid confronted him about why he was being followed. The confrontation got physical, the kid was giving it to him good and in the midst of the melee he pulls out his gun shoots the kid. Does that jibe with the facts? Anything I'm missing.

really good summation All kinds of heinous things, thanks for the post.

What frustrates me is, if Z gets away with this law why don't women who kill their partners in self defense after years of beatings, threats etc? How many times must a woman go to the authorities and say "I am in fear of my fucking LIFE here" and be ignored til shes forced to take matters into her own hands, but when she does, it seems mostly she goes to jail as a result? But one white guy chases down one black kid ONCE, kills him because hes being attacked (if true) and thats ok? FFS.

That happens all the time, in Hollywood.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a9/Doublejeopardyposter.jpg/220px-Doublejeopardyposter.jpg