Obama: Gun Control for Travyon

reply to post by ValentineWiggin


by a 911 dispatcher(or what ever they call the non emergency operators) who was not a cop and had no authority to either tell or not tell him to do anything.

him getting out of his truck legal

him following travon legal

what was illegal was when travon decided to attack Zimmerman and thus lost his life

on the it was not his business he was neighborhood watch and called the authorities to report a suspicious person

get over it zimmerman didnt break the law travon did. self defense is legal in the usa especially Florida

Originally posted by ValentineWiggin

Originally posted by SpaDe_

Originally posted by cry93
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

 

You are assuming that Trayvon struck first based on GZ words.

My point is being followed is a menacing act. Had GZ stayed in his vehicle as advised Trayvon would still be alive today. Walking at night isn't a crime, either.


Oh, and I like how you aborted your racial diatribe here. Good job.

You could take this one step further and say that if Trayvon would have not gone into a neighborhood that he did not belong in he would still be alive. Let's face it Zimmerman was within his rights to follow Trayvon even if he wasn't neighborhood watch captain.

Following someone is not a menacing act either. If you have nothing to hide and your not doing anything wrong then why not just ask why the person is following. Instead Trayvon chose to confront and assault Zimmerman, and eyewitnesses corroborate his story.

How did he not belong?

More importantly, how is this different than "If you hadn't worn that slutty dress you would not have gotten raped"?

You should re read what I posted, it wasn't his attire that got him killed it was his actions. I don't even mention attire, so that analogy doesn't even fit this situation. If he did belong, then why did he not address the fact that he was being followed by simply saying something like, "Hey is there a reason your following me, I'm just on my way to (insert location here)".

I think people are giving way to much benefit of doubt to Trayvon based on the preteen pictures that keep floating around the media of a harmless looking young boy instead of the actual pictures of his current age and body type.

reply to post by ValentineWiggin


easy the "slutty"(dont really like phrasing it this way as no one deserves to be raped ever) girl as you put it didn't assault the guy before he raped her

now if he tried to rape her and she then assaulted him that would be legal or what we like to call self defense

and as Zimmerman was not trying to rape martin i don't see how rape is relevant to the case

he who starts the fight is almost always the one at fault and found guilty

Originally posted by cry93
Let us start over. Being followed is an aggressive act in and of itself. It is not illegal but most would respond with some type of equally aggressive action, especially if the follower is within strking distance.

Even if I accept this is true (I don't), do you really think breaking someone's nose, knocking them to the ground, straddling them, and striking their head against the sidewalk is "equally aggressive" with respect to following from a distance?

What do you consider an appropriate response when someone bumps into you in a crowd, evisceration with a rusty hook?

Originally posted by ValentineWiggin

Originally posted by HauntWok
So let's see, unarmed man, shot by armed man.

Let's not forget, someone is dead. Yes, he was found not guilty of murder or manslaughter. But the fact (and it is a fact) Zimmerman shot and killed Martin.

Some people may be proud of Zimmerman for what he did, some probably think he's a hero.

But maybe just maybe, humans can use words instead of violence to solve life's problems. Yes, guns don't kill people, but violence sure can.

I am a female who is logical. I am also a concrete thinker. Here is my thought process.

Told not to follow, followed.
Armed, Travyon unarmed.
Travyon is dead.
That is murder.
Nothing to see here carry on

First off, that same dispatcher told CZ to keep an eye out and report anything else.
Trayvon may have been unarmed, but he assaulted GZ bodily causing injury and fear of bodily harm.
Yes Trayvon is dead, but GC could just as easily be laying dead from a beating or having his head bashed in by a bigger, younger, meaner man (sorry, but 17 IS pretty much a man.)
Nothing about this case fits the legal description of murder.

So...stay in your logical little concrete world and chances are you will be right less than 50% of the time.

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by ValentineWiggin

 

by a 911 dispatcher(or what ever they call the non emergency operators) who was not a cop and had no authority to either tell or not tell him to do anything.

him getting out of his truck legal

him following travon legal

what was illegal was when travon decided to attack Zimmerman and thus lost his life

on the it was not his business he was neighborhood watch and called the authorities to report a suspicious person

get over it zimmerman didnt break the law travon did. self defense is legal in the usa especially Florida

So when I call a 911 dispatcher because my car is on fire and they tell me to get out and I decide to stay in it and suffer injuries.. its not my fault?

Originally posted by SpaDe_

Originally posted by ValentineWiggin

Originally posted by SpaDe_

Originally posted by cry93
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

 

You are assuming that Trayvon struck first based on GZ words.

My point is being followed is a menacing act. Had GZ stayed in his vehicle as advised Trayvon would still be alive today. Walking at night isn't a crime, either.


Oh, and I like how you aborted your racial diatribe here. Good job.

You could take this one step further and say that if Trayvon would have not gone into a neighborhood that he did not belong in he would still be alive. Let's face it Zimmerman was within his rights to follow Trayvon even if he wasn't neighborhood watch captain.

Following someone is not a menacing act either. If you have nothing to hide and your not doing anything wrong then why not just ask why the person is following. Instead Trayvon chose to confront and assault Zimmerman, and eyewitnesses corroborate his story.

How did he not belong?

More importantly, how is this different than "If you hadn't worn that slutty dress you would not have gotten raped"?

You should re read what I posted, it wasn't his attire that got him killed it was his actions. I don't even mention attire, so that analogy doesn't even fit this situation. If he did belong, then why did he not address the fact that he was being followed by simply saying something like, "Hey is there a reason your following me, I'm just on my way to (insert location here)".

I think people are giving way to much benefit of doubt to Trayvon based on the preteen pictures that keep floating around the media of a harmless looking young boy instead of the actual pictures of his current age and body type.

You have yet to tell me how he didn't belong.

Do you know that he didn't ask Zimmerman why he was following him? Hm?

to the people who think zimmerman did something wrong why was he cleared of all charges? was it cuz america is only wanted to kill black teenagers or is it because the state failed miserably to disprove self defense?was the jury all a bunch of racist women? why do you think he was voted not guilty if you have such a problem with the verdict?

the prosecutor was inept and tried to use emotion not facts or logic to sway the jury,thankfully they were much to smart to be hoodwinked by his attempted tricks

why cant you accept that this is how our justice system works innocent until proven guilty. he was proved to be not guilty there for he committed no crime

following not a crime(once) but assaulting some one for following you sure is illegal and rightfully so

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by ValentineWiggin

 

easy the "slutty"(dont really like phrasing it this way as no one deserves to be raped ever) girl as you put it didn't assault the guy before he raped her

now if he tried to rape her and she then assaulted him that would be legal or what we like to call self defense

and as Zimmerman was not trying to rape martin i don't see how rape is relevant to the case

he who starts the fight is almost always the one at fault and found guilty

I starred you because you have a good point. If a girl is being followed by someone and is in fear of her life/safety chances are she will lash out in several ways keys laced within fingers/mace/switch blade/ or self defense. There is no time to ask questions in such an event. He who starts fighting? How about he who chose to follow to begin with?

Posted earlier here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks

**Thread Closed**

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
to the people who think zimmerman did something wrong why was he cleared of all charges? was it cuz america is only wanted to kill black teenagers or is it because the state failed miserably to disprove self defense?was the jury all a bunch of racist women? why do you think he was voted not guilty if you have such a problem with the verdict?

That is the entire point of this thread.

So gun control proposed for the likes of Zimmerman (who had a gun legally) yet not a single peep about increasing punishment for those who obtain or use a gun illegally.

Typical!