It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I can go to a park and stare at some mans young female child like im lusting after her. Lets not forget its not against the law to stare at someone. Ill keep staring at her till the father comes at me and ask me what my problem is!!! Ill tell him something that provokes a attack. Once he punches me ill pull out my gun and shoot him. I FEARED FOR MY LIFE!
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
If I decide to drink and then decide to get in my car, I have made two decisions and committed two actions. If I hit/run over a person and kill them, would I not be charged with manslaughter?
Zimmerman decided to open his car door. Zimmerman subsequently ignored a qualified law enforcement employee's direction and decided to follow TM. His two actions led to the eventual death of a human being.
To me, both examples are mutually interchangeable.
You see, Zimmerman chose to place himself voluntarily into a situation where he thought there would be a high probability of risk. Why else would he have a gun on him?
Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
Think about what the hell you just said.
There would be no need for him to even get up. He could just shoot you right there. BECAUSE. . . He feared for his daughter’s life. And as the law goes you are allowed to act before the target does if you THINK your life is in Danger. Now it could be argued that the daughter was Not him but that is a mere matter of semantics.
The Bottom line is that your @$$ would be a Toasted Cheese Sandwich before you ever got to pull your gun.
Originally posted by Willtell
It’s easy and simple.
Even if Trayvon started the fight (which I don’t concede because Zimmerman has been caught in lies) he is innocent because by the same “stand your ground law” he felt under attack by Zimmerman stalking him. Therefore he felt he had to defend himself by attacking his unknown stalker. Remember Zimmerman didn’t admit that he identified himself to Trayvon as a neighborhood watchman. So how was Trayvon to know who this guy stalking him was . . . he may have been a criminal or sex pervert or whatever.
So we know Trayvon had no idea who he was. If hypothetically Trayvon did attack Zimmerman it wasn’t out of ill intent it was out of fear and self defense. He died because of the illogical actions of Zimmerman not anything he did out of ill intent.
BUT we only have Zimmerman (a known self-serving liar) as a witness to his own actions and Trayvon’s)
That is at lease manslaughter even by the barbaric law of the jungle they call stand your ground!
So it is very likely that Zimmerman had the gun pulled on the kid and the kid panicked and went after Zimmerman. In that case Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at least.
Ask yourself this question. Why do people give Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt: thinking Trayvon was involved in criminal activity therefore he had the right to frighten and stalk Trayvon, but Trayvon out of fear of this creep stalking him didn’t have the right to self defense?
You see the double standard here?
While Trayvon as an individual being stalked had more proof to himself that Zimmerman was the person with criminal intent (since he was creepily following Trayvon)
In fact it was Trayvon who that night was brave and noble not Zimmerman who displayed himself a paranoid possible bigot profiling an innocent teenager, who at best lost a fight he started and resorted to killing an innocent kid.
Case Closed
Originally posted by DYepes
ok you all claiming that we can just go start fights and then murder and claim self-defense are morons. Its what the Brady campaign said after the law was passed, it does not happen that way. GZ is guilty of manslaughter and easily could have been proven that way, but those were not the charges filed.
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
His father was a magistrate no surprise the charges were dropped.
It’s easy and simple.
Even if Trayvon started the fight (which I don’t concede because Zimmerman has been caught in lies) he is innocent because by the same “stand your ground law” he felt under attack by Zimmerman stalking him.
Therefore he felt he had to defend himself by attacking his unknown stalker. Remember Zimmerman didn’t admit that he identified himself to Trayvon as a neighborhood watchman. So how was Trayvon to know who this guy stalking him was . . . he may have been a criminal or sex pervert or whatever.
Ask yourself this question. Why do people give Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt: thinking Trayvon was involved in criminal activity therefore he had the right to frighten and stalk Trayvon, but Trayvon out of fear of this creep stalking him didn’t have the right to self defense? You see the double standard here?
manslaughter