George Zimmerman Arrested On Domestic Violence And Weapons Charge

[laughing dog]

Well, that's too bad because it means you missed this part:

It is also possible that Zimmy tried to physically stop Martin from "getting away" before the police arrived, despite having nothing but suspicion of drug possession and intention to burglarize. What I think happened between the two possibilities is really much less important than the lessons learned from the case, which should not exclude actions Martin could have taken.

The bolded is again blaming the innocent victim. Think of it in terms of telling a woman she shouldn't wear short skirts if she wants to avoid being raped. There is simply no possible way for a woman to account for every possible permutation of thought processes of every potential rapist so that sort of "advice" to be helpful. What it does, instead, is shift blame to the woman who is raped while wearing a short skirt. That is what you are doing, repeatedly, to Trayvon Martin.

RavenSky's point is spot on.

That's a good one - but it's only spot on if you negate the possibility that Martin responded violently to being followed and verbally confronted. You don't seem to get any reservation for that possibility. Even if Zimmy attempted the bonehead detainment, there are things someone who is being followed can do. How is acknowledging those things "victim blaming?" More strawmen.

It is still victim blaming because - in your continued speculation that Trayvon "responded violently to being followed and verbally confronted", you are denying Trayvon his legal right to stand his ground in his own self-defense

That depends on what Martin was thinking about Zimmerman, which has already been stated on this thread. Your mind-reading does not pass for facts.

That is pretty cheeky coming from someone who literally pulls "what ifs" out of the air as facts.

 

[Arctish]

Well, that's too bad because it means you missed this part:

It is also possible that Zimmy tried to physically stop Martin from "getting away" before the police arrived, despite having nothing but suspicion of drug possession and intention to burglarize. What I think happened between the two possibilities is really much less important than the lessons learned from the case, which should not exclude actions Martin could have taken.

The bolded is again blaming the innocent victim. Think of it in terms of telling a woman she shouldn't wear short skirts if she wants to avoid being raped. There is simply no possible way for a woman to account for every possible permutation of thought processes of every potential rapist so that sort of "advice" to be helpful. What it does, instead, is shift blame to the woman who is raped while wearing a short skirt. That is what you are doing, repeatedly, to Trayvon Martin.

RavenSky's point is spot on.

That's a good one - but it's only spot on if you negate the possibility that Martin responded violently to being followed and verbally confronted. You don't seem to get any reservation for that possibility. Even if Zimmy attempted the bonehead detainment, there are things someone who is being followed can do. How is acknowledging those things "victim blaming?" More strawmen.

As I've said before, I have been followed on a couple of occasions. When I hear people say what Martin should have done, I imagine doing those things myself the night a creepy ass stranger followed me along a dark pathway in a park. And those suggestions don't make any sense at all.

I should have gone straight home even though I suspected he was following me? I should have respectfully answered the questions posed by my pursuer as he came within arm's reach? I should have calmly accepted that he wouldn't tell me why he was following me? I should have known he was most likely a neighbor just checking out a pedestrian, and even though I might see he had a gun I should not have thought he was a danger to me? Bullshit! I should have avoided him if I could and whooped his ass if I had no other means of escape. And that's why I was looking for a nice big tree branch I could use to defend myself.

Even if our encounter turned into a fight that night, and even if I cracked that guy's skull open or was shot dead by him, what should not have happened is me being blamed for a confrontation I did not create and did my best to avoid. Even if I made some boneheaded mistakes myself, that would not have shifted responsibility for the confrontation onto me.

That goes for Martin, too. He tried to avoid Zimmerman. It didn't work. Even if he then threw the first punch (a very big "if") he was still the victim that night. He had a legitimate fear for his life and safety, and the right to Stand his Ground. No matter how many "Martin attacked first" scenarios people paint, there's still the matter of how it was that an armed Zimmerman came to be within arm's reach of the fleeing teenager he got out of his car to pursue, and what Zimmerman's actions would look like to an unarmed pedestrian being pursued in the dark and the rain.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Your analysis doesn't account for the fact that Martin was wearing a hoodie and was therefore evil.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think Z's actions were premeditated. I believe his thoughts were to 'not let them get away', and his thoughts began and ended there. No thought or contemplation as to what that would mean, or entail.

Agreed. I think Zimmerman was simply trying to keep Martin in view and didn't think of what might go wrong. Zimmerman is a major league idiot.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't think Z's actions were premeditated. I believe his thoughts were to 'not let them get away', and his thoughts began and ended there. No thought or contemplation as to what that would mean, or entail.

Agreed. I think Zimmerman was simply trying to keep Martin in view and didn't think of what might go wrong. Zimmerman is a major league idiot.

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

 

[Mageth]

Agreed. I think Zimmerman was simply trying to keep Martin in view and didn't think of what might go wrong. Zimmerman is a major league idiot.

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

Major league violent idiot with a gun.

 

[bilby]

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

Major league violent idiot with a gun.

In the civilised world, we call this an "American".

 

[ksen]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Major league violent idiot with a gun.

In the civilised world, we call this an "American".

Yee Haw!!!! *bang* *bang*

Reminds me of the Aardman movie Flushed Away, with the two traveling American rats, one wearing a t-shirt that reads "I love steak."

 

[fromderinside]

Major league violent idiot with a gun.

In the civilised world, we call this an "American".

You must really be jealous in order to throw countrymen like Heath Ledger, Cate Blanchett, Hugh Jackman, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe (throw him in although he's a Kiwi), Naomi Watts, and Simon Baker, to be under the bus with those "American"s.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Agreed. I think Zimmerman was simply trying to keep Martin in view and didn't think of what might go wrong. Zimmerman is a major league idiot.

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

I still think Martin jumped him when he couldn't lose him.

 

[bilby]

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

I still think Martin jumped him when he couldn't lose him.

'Jumped him' implies an ambush of some kind. If you can't lose a person who is following you, then you cannot possibly 'jump him'; it is logically impossible.

You might as well suggest that Martin shot himself when he realised that he didn't have a gun.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The term you meant to use was violent idiot.

I still think Martin jumped him when he couldn't lose him.

You think lots of things. You have concocted a myriad of Usenet Grade Zimmerman Fan Fiction to help propagate that Martin was responsible for his own death. You do so because you have, repeatedly defended the use of violent force, assuming if violent force was used, it had to of been justified.

Did Martin smash an iPad. Did Martin break the wine bottle? Was Martin looking at potential assault charges on multiple occasions?

 

[Jayjay]

He may have created the incident, but it wasn't by leaving his car and checking out where the suspected burglar may have gone which isn't an unreasonable thing to do.

that is exactly how he created the "incident" in which he killed an innocent teenager, and most certainly was a highly unreasonable thing for Zimmerman to exit his vehicle to check out where the suspected burglar may have gone.

That's an exaggeration. It was not be advised by neighbourhood watch guideline, but simply having a look around the corner is hardly equivalent to murder, and it would have been pertinent to allow the police to know if the suspected burglar had left the neighbourhood or not. There are bigger mistakes he did that night than leaving his car.

Beyond making the 911 call itself, there was absoluetly nothing reasonable about George Zimmerman's actions that night, and because of his stupid, aggressive, unreasonable actions, an innocent teenager is dead, as in forever.

This isn't a video game where "dead" just means you lose a few points and reset the game. Dead means an innocent young life is gone and a forever grieving family is left to deal with the pain of that loss for the rest of their lives. And it was senseless... as senseless as George Zimmerman proves himself to be over and over and over.

The way some of you go on and on minimizing what George Zimmerman did, and shifting blame onto Trayvon Martin, I really think you forget that Trayvon Martin was a real living human being with parents and brothers and friends that loved him. Trayvon Martin was an INNOCENT teenager. How can you justify and minimize and excuse what Zimmerman did? Zimmerman and only Zimmerman is responsible for Trayvon's death.

You are right that Zimmerman killed a person, which is permanent and can never be undone. That's bad enough as it is! There is no need to try to blame Zimmerman for things that he in all likelihood didn't do (such as chase Martin to cut him off), or try to imagine the worst possible things that he might have done (such as breaking into Trayvon Martin's dad's house just to shoot him). Sticking with facts does not "minimize" what Zimmerman did, nor justify it.

 

[Jayjay]

Zimmerman had every right to check if Martin was leaving through the back entrance. And since he had called the cops, it was a reasonable thing to do also..that way he could tell them if Martin left the area. Observing and reporting to the police is not a crime.

. This right here. This is what Rhea and other keep telling you. This is where you are doing it again.

No, there is no inalienable right to follow other people, not even if you think they are burglars up to no good. In fact, in most municipalities, following other people without their permission is called stalking and it is against the law.

And no, it was not a reasonable thing to do either. You keep repeating that as if you will magically make it true, but you won't. It is NOT reasonable, and both the dispatcher and neighborhood watch training (he claimed he was the neighborhood watch captain) said not to.

And Zimmerman stopped following when told to do so*. As for Florida's laws, "stalking" seems to have a specific definition of repeated behaviour that doesn't fit this scene, but clearly, even the neighbourhood watch guideline that you refer to encourages to be watchful and provide the police with as much details as possible. Moving to a vantage point where he could see whether the "burglar" leaves the neighbourhood or not, without actually putting himself in his path is a reasonable thing to do. Besides the beighbourhood watch instructions do not explicitly say that one must not ever move by foot, or that one should seek shelter from a car if one happens to be on foot.

(* Sometime within 12 seconds, based on the police call. Presumably when he was walking to top of the T. )

 

[Rhea]

That's an exaggeration. It was not be advised by neighbourhood watch guideline,

correction, it is PROHIBITED by neighborhood watch guidelines. Because....

It leads to situations just. like. this.

You are right that Zimmerman killed a person, which is permanent and can never be undone. That's bad enough as it is! There is no need to try to blame Zimmerman for things that he in all likelihood didn't do (such as chase Martin to cut him off), or try to imagine the worst possible things that he might have done (such as breaking into Trayvon Martin's dad's house just to shoot him). Sticking with facts does not "minimize" what Zimmerman did, nor justify it.

But folks here aren't sticking to facts. They are fabricating "suspect" and "purple drank" and "jumped him" and "doubled back" and "got angry" and "punched first." And not on the guy who was actively making the situation happen, but on the guy who was actively - factually- trying to avoid it. Not on the guy who has a record as long as my arm, but on the kid who got suspended once.

Can you believe it?

 

[Jayjay]

correction, it is PROHIBITED by neighborhood watch guidelines. Because....

It leads to situations just. like. this.

Actually, it is not prohibited. The closest the guideline comes is this:

10. Remember always that your responsibility is to report crime. Do not take any risks to prevent a crime or try to make an arrest. The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police department.

Zimmerman may have grossly violeted this rule when he met Martin again. But did he take a risk earlier when leaving his car, or when he went to RVC? I think that's debatable.

You are right that Zimmerman killed a person, which is permanent and can never be undone. That's bad enough as it is! There is no need to try to blame Zimmerman for things that he in all likelihood didn't do (such as chase Martin to cut him off), or try to imagine the worst possible things that he might have done (such as breaking into Trayvon Martin's dad's house just to shoot him). Sticking with facts does not "minimize" what Zimmerman did, nor justify it.

But folks here aren't sticking to facts. They are fabricating "suspect" and "purple drank" and "jumped him" and "doubled back" and "got angry" and "punched first." And not on the guy who was actively making the situation happen, but on the guy who was actively - factually- trying to avoid it. Not on the guy who has a record as long as my arm, but on the kid who got suspended once.

Can you believe it?

Each of those arguments stand or fall on their own merit. The "purple drank" story is ridiculous from the start, and the burglary "suspicion" at his school seems to be a fabrication because nobody has been able to produce the actual alleged documents. Zimmerman may have felt that Trayvon "jumped him" but that doesn't make it true. It does seem like Martin turned back, though that decision probably had nothing at all to do with his follower. And as for him "getting angry", lots of people from both sides of the argument agree that suddenly being face to face with a creeper who was ogling at you earlier from his car might reasonably startle a person.

All I'm saying is, that the same standard of common sense be applied to Zimmerman. He was taking meds for ADD apparently, and has had repeated problems with his impulse control and poor judgment. If you ask me that guy should never be allowed to carry a gun, let alone keep it after that incident.

 

[Jayjay]

It was suggested that Zimmerman should have stayed in his car, as if that was his crime. The context of the discussion is that Martin could have avoided the incident by going home, but that doesn't mean it was Martin's fault for failing to do so. Similarly, there is no doubt that Zimmerman could have avoided the incident by staying in his car, but it doesn't follow that it was his fault for leaving his car.

Zimmerman is responsible for his actions. There was no need for him to leave his vehicle and he was instructed to stay in the vehicle. He didn't.

He was already out of his vehicle when the dispatch told him that he ought not follow Martin. The neighbourhood watch handbook doesn't explicitly say that people must never leave their cars either (though it does not encourage it and clearly says observations should be done from safe locations).

 

[Jayjay]

I don't think Z's actions were premeditated. I believe his thoughts were to 'not let them get away', and his thoughts began and ended there. No thought or contemplation as to what that would mean, or entail.

Zimmy had a few minutes to think between hanging up the 911 call and meeting up with Martin. I believe it is very likely he was thinking about what to do when he found him.

I don't think he thought he'd meet him again. I think he was at RVC, and expected to see Martin emerge near the back entrance.

 

[Rhea]

The neighbourhood watch handbook doesn't explicitly say that people must never leave their cars either (though it does not encourage it and clearly says observations should be done from safe locations).

Do not take any risks to prevent a crime or make an arrest. Do not take any risks. Do not take any risks.

And following a guy down a dark alley is..... what (besides stupid and risky?)

He was wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.