It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by VoidRonin
You wanna tell me how it was Righteous for him to defend himself from punches with a bullet through Trayvon's heart? Doesn't make much sense to me. Zimmerman could've easily subdued Trayvon with his hands if he had to.
Originally posted by WP4YT
Originally posted by VoidRonin
I'm sorry but if someone is on top of you slamming your head into the concrete curb, that is attempted murder. You have every right to defend yourself by shooting the person trying to kill you. The jury obviously felt the same way. If your mother was being attacked and someone was trying to kill her, even if the person that was trying to kill her was 17 years old, would you tell her to just sit there and take it?
Justice has been served today.
The moral of the story here is that if you are going to go around attacking people, expect that there's a possibility they may try to defend themselves and you may wind up dead.
Yes, I feel sorry for Treyvan's parents, they did lose their son. But it was his own actions that caused this. They should only be upset at their son for not living a safer lifestyle, and no one else. Would they feel the same way about their son if he had attacked a police officer and was killed rather than by Zimmerman? Should only police officers be able to kill an attacker?
Yes, George did follow Treyvan around. But George broke no laws by doing that. If I was going through a neighborhood late at night and the neighborhood watch captain was following me and on his cell phone, I know my reaction wouldn't be to attack him. Any normal, level-headed person would say hello, ask what they are doing, explain that they are not causing trouble and that there's nothing to worry about. The trouble is: Treyvan WAS up to no good. Or he just plain had no common sense.
edit on Sat Jul 13 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: fixed code
Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
If I was Zimmerman I leave my mark with suing Obama for making the case into something personal and also a racial issue.
Originally posted by PLASIFISK
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PLASIFISK
Apparently not, at least not in the jury's mind.
How so. He claimed self defense.
It was self defense.
That's why he was found not guilty, in addition to not enough evidence to prove otherwise.
With that being said........ Follow, confront, fight, kill is legal!
Yes or no?
Originally posted by luciddream
Now psychopaths can pull a "zimmerman" and get away with it if caught!
Another loops in the messed up justice system.
reply to post by 1curiousmama
I agree with you. So many posts focus on the fact that Martin was 17 - as if NO 17 year old on the face of this planet has been in a fight/attempted murder/ actually murdered another human being. The evidence and witness statements all indicated that Zimmerman was defending himself - just because Z had a gun and was able to use it does not mean that he is guilty of anything like murder. What if he would have had a knife and stabbed Martin and he bled to death? What if he would have pushed him off of him and Martin fell back on the concrete just right and was killed? What difference does it make that it was a gun that helped him? it is called self defense. If I was being beaten and I had a weapon and I feared for my life, you better believe that I would use whatever I could get my hands on to get the person off of me. Whether he was 57 or 17. Was Z supposed to ask for his driver's license to check his age before deciding to defend his own life?