Bagism: Web Board
[Show Followups] [Post New Message]
 [Search Web Boards] [Web Boards Menu] [Letter Box Web Board]

Re: race riots if zimmerman acquitted?

Posted by **Johnny D** on Jun 30, 2013 at 1:05:20 PM:
In Reply to: Re: race riots if zimmerman acquitted? posted by **Old Flat Top** on Jun 29, 2013 at 9:38:52 PM:


**
**Repaet: Zimmernam LEFT HIS CAR!
*So?


SO???? That attitude leads to all others who JUST happens to stalk another with a loaded gun then. So??? Wow, ho dismissive of the obvious. LET the COPS do THAT JOB,,,for most are trained well enough and TRY to do the right thing, to avoid any killings. Most, I said. Not all, of course. Bad cops would maybe do what Zimmerman did. INPROPERLY approach and talk with someone in question. Etc, too,,,,but that may get a "SO" from you too?




**With a loaded gun!
*Within his rights.

Is it his right to stalk with such a gun? That seems not the rights or duties of civilians, to hunt suspicious people. He job was to watch...WATCH..,Not stalk by having the person know he is there. THAT job is for the cops to come on the scene, AFTER the WATCH detected a suspicious person. I can;t believe YOU, of all people, do not see yourself in the teens place..THE ONE BEING stalked by a suspicious character,,,for Zimmerman would not have a police car, or uniform to let the kid know WHO and WHY he is being questioned. A stalker is all one could assume when someone gets out of their car and heads toward them. PUT yourself as the kid being stalked,,and then questioned as such,,and with a loaded gun! YOU would then back his story as being proper? I don't think so.




*
**Of course he came across as a crazy type "anything",,fill in the blank.
**
*Because he's keeping an eye on a neighborhood where break ins have been happening? Really? That's nuts?
*Would you like me to give you some links to brutal murders committed by people breaking into homes? There's a shit load of them out there. Did you hear that Ramirez(The NightStalker)recently died?
*I'd be damned glad someone cared enough to keep an eye on my neighborhood.
*




WHAT???? WAS the kid breaking INTO a home? Was the kid doing anything criminal? Wow, flat,,,,assume away, and then stalk and then shot anyone that gives you grief and a punch or three, after being stalked in an area when crimes occur? NO one could talk a walk in any weather then in those areas. Are you serious? That is called a rush to judgement, and only based on a hoody and rain, dues to OTHER crimes BEFORE? I walk around here a lot in my area is such garb and weather. SOOOO?????? Surprised you are this careless in what RIGHTS people actually have. Do you not like black kids in hoodies or something? Do you think they are all out looking to break in somewhere? Zimmerman sure did, by his stalking actions,,,leaving his car. SCARY,,,which led to an actual crime,,,SHOOTING someone who was JUS seen walking in the rain. Beware people, if you walk in the rain with a hoody if near OFT then! :)
*
*
**HE is the one who acted suspicions,,leaving his car and stalking the kid!
**
*I will grant you that one. In Martins eyes I'm sure it was suspicious. I will fully grant you that but it hardly excuses Martin violently attacking Zimmerman on account of it which is the only testimony given by an actual EYEWITNESS of what happened next. I realize you, because of your opinion, can easily discount that fact but the law doesn't allow you to.
*
*


The law is filled with time consuming BS, due to the jobs of all lawyers and judges. MONEY!!!!

BUT, the real point is as you see my point about the stalking,,,you then quickly blame the fight on Martin. ???? Think this only for a second. NO stalking,,,NO fight. NO fight, No shooting. No shooting, and the cops would have maybe approached a suspicious character. A watch=person is called that for a very good reason. For a watcher is not trained in anything else but how to WATCH! Approaching, proper apprehension is needed, proper fighting if needed, and shooting? THAT is not the JOB or duty of any gun carrier. Zimmerman STARTED the whole MESS. HE SHOT. HE assumed a kid was a crook TO BE,,,or was one. Why else would he stalk as he did? I put myself in both people's shoes. And I came to the most obvious conclusion. Zimmerman CAUSED the confrontation by approaching Martin. ALL else is as result of Zimmerman's improper action. If unlawful, then self defense cant be found,,,or shouldn't. If lawful, he still caused the fight by getting in the FREE space of Martin, who was UP to that point, JUST WALKING AROUND!!!!! NOT committing ANY crime? And HE is dead for HIS actions?




**He is the one who SHOT the kid. NO one gets shot if the neighborhood watcher doesn't have a loaded gun
**
*I hope you can see the fallacy of such an argument.
*What if the other guy has one. A neighborhood watchman anticipates he might be confronted by an armed assailant.
*It's ideas like you're expressing that boils my clams. We will not give up our right to self defense.
*
*




What if the other guy has a gun???? Then, again,,,,EITHER WAY,,,,the APPROACHING and QUESTIONING is for the JOB of the police! WHY,,,because a WATCHER is not trained to act like a proper person in law enforcement, with the needed marked car and uniform. The WATCHER is just that,,,,A WATCHER,,,to then let the POLICE know of his approximate whereabouts, if not specific as to a street and what direction any suspicious person is heading. Any other action is then a cause and effect thing. Zimmerman CAUSED the RESULT by NOT just being a watcher, and taking the JOB of the police in his own hand-gun! What was the teen doing? Walking? Wow! Lets stalk him with a loaded gun and SEE what happens. NO,,,that should never happen. The death is ALL on Zimmerman, regardless of what Martin felt he had to do after BEING STALKED in the night! YOU are the kid,,,,being stalked,,,what do you do,,,what do you do,,,,Fight ot flight? Either one is adrenalin fueled. Think about it. YOU are stalked when just walking around. NOT cool.
*





,AND/OR, he does what he is supposed to do as YOU point out,,,to keep an EYE out for what he is doing and where he is.
**
*Which,according to all testimony given so far is exactly what he was doing.



NO,,,he stopped watching, and started stalking on foot, and even approaching? Watching means just that. To ONLY watch. And to avoid confrontation. Cause and Effect Flatty. Simple pimple!
*
**The call should go to 911 at the point of him thinking it is suspicious enough to GET OUT of HIS CAR to further PURSUE the kid!
**
*Which,again, is what happened(have you actually read any of the facts of the case?)
*



I meant INSTEAD of getting out of the car,,,TO ONLY call 911.


**That is not a watch,,,that is a stalk.
*Ok, now we're at the part where if Zimmerman threw the first punch then this will be meaningful. However, as is the case according to the testimony of the ONLY EYEWITNESS to the entire crime from the beginning,Martin attacked without anymore provocation than he was being watched.


JUST being watched? NO,,,He was Stalked,,,,followed! And with the kid knowing that. That is not just being watched. Martin, like you, would feel a sense of possibly having to defend himself, and maybe by first striking, if thinking HE was going to be attacked in any way. Preemptive strike. Before Zimmermans approach, there was NO chance of anyone hitting anyone first or second, for any reason! Ignore the first STEPS of Zimmerman, and you are ignoring the Cause of the Result. Being suspicious of anyone does not give you or me the right to stalk them and confront them. THAT is what the police are for. THEY should ONLY get the general info of where to go and who to question. The teen's parent might agree, don't you think? Their son was NOT committing any crime at the time. The only crime here is murder. A stalking, scary night time stalking on a kid by someone approaching him for SOME unknown reason at first ny the teen. Yet, you want to pin it ALL on him? "Careless Actions" by Zimmerman LED TO MARTIN'S DEATH. WRONGFUL DEATH COMES TO MIND TOO. Civil case to follow, of course.


*Nobody has a right to privacy in public. That's why it's called *public.

Their own personal fear of someone approaching then gives them the right to defend themselves. Martin WAS the one approached in the night, and not being recognized as a friend. Defensive rights are all Martin's.




*There had been breakins. Perps had gotten away. If this guy was a perp then this time he's not going to get away. If this is one of the guys that had been doing the breakins then he's going to be caught. That is not stalking. So long as you do not provoke or attempt to apprehend the suspect.
*
*

IF this guy was a perp????? THAT then sir, is for sure the job of the police to APPROACH and QUESTION,,,NOT for any civilian. We can and should ONLY Watch,,and if having common respect for the so-far INNOCENT, should ONLT call the pros foro the NEXT STEPS!!!! Not to make them yourself! Duh! :) For any assuming on Zimmerman's part would of course have him approach in a not so friendly manner. Maybe a scary one for the teen. Again,,,the defense stance was all Martin's,,,as HE was THE ONE being STALKED and APPROACHED by a suspicious character in the night!




*
**I would be greatly suspicious of anyone doing that to me, and would as I said, say the things I mentioned if sticking around to see why some nutjob was following me on foot, after doing that from the car!
**
*OK but would you proceed to beat the shit out of the guy?
*



Depends on the actual circumstance, and I guess whatever adrenilin was surging through my viens, FROM being stalked by some suspicious character! I might have run,,,I DON'T KNOW what I would do, for that is one of those things we can't rehearse in real action. we can only think we know what we MIGHT do. Even if thinking we KNOW what we would do. I simply do NOT know how I would actually respond under any such circumstance, I can tell yo of one time when I was 15. The other town's bullies came in a car and approached me in the softball field parking lot I was waking across to head home from a friends house. I heard of those guys beating up some others in my town over the past months. I remember what my sister;s boyfriend told me if that ever happened. TO quickly run to the biggest toughest looking one and kick em in the balls and hit his jaw with a right cross. I did JUST that,,SCARED as hell though. The adrenalin had me do it strongly, and not run. I then quickly turned to the other three guys and yelled Who's next",,,with what must have been a crazed look by me. Scared,,,but full of adrenalin to be NUTS at the time. They jumped in the car after dragging their friend in it and drove away. I was shaking all the way home, and my dad said, what happened? I told him. And him, being a golden gloves boxer long before, said, the kick wasn't necessary, that it could hurt him for life. One effective right cross is all that I should have done, if not able to get out of trouble. I think my sister's boyfriend's way was way more effective! Showed I had no quams with attacking the most tender part. I think THAT is what made the other kids leave so fast.





Me: *You are missing the obvious and first crucial step in the shooting. Martin WAS being stalked and of course would say something to some wise ass doing that. YOU would too. (not racial slurs I hope though).
**
OFT.*No, he wasn't being stalked he was being surveiled. You using the term stalked implies Zimmermans intent to do bodily harm or interfere with Martin which are facts not in evidence.
*



Stalking is for sure what was done in the eye and mind of anyone in Martin's shoes! For Zimmerman made it be know to Martin he was not just keeping tabs on him. Even with that,,,,YOU wouldn't question the watcher? (if not stalker in your mind at that time), in some defensive way?



**It's like sucker punching someone, (relating to getting out of the car and stalking someone), then killing him after a fight breaks out,,,,then claiming self defense! Are you kidding me?
**
*Are YOU kidding me? Martin smashed and broke his nose, knocked him to the ground,held him down and told him "Tonight you die!"


After being stalked,,,what would one expect a teen to do? Say,,Wazzup? He's lucky he didn't get my kick in the nuts! Because he JUST hit him in the nose and caused cuts in the back of his head, (which Zimmerman didn't feel bad enough to go to the hospital), he was able to SHOT and KILL the punch thrower.

Self defense was in Martin's rights,,being the one who was approached for what Martin would think for no good reason,,NOT being a friend of being approached in some nice, conversational way to maybe bum a cigarette or something. Martin OF COURSE would feel THREATENED,,and threatened enough to do what he did.


*I'd like to think Zimmerman might've gotten free without resorting to using his weapon but in the heat of the moment,knowing you're carrying a weapon, knowing the guy beating the living shit out of you is eventually going to see it(or very likely will)and since he said "Tonight you die" will probably use it against you. You have to make a choice. Him or me.
*It's called self defense. Zimmermans injuries are documented. Martin had only a gunshot wound and some scratches on his hands.
*The physical evidence totally complies with the story being told by Zimmerman. Martin had no injuries which would indicate Zimmerman had beaten him first. None.
*

First action is who's? Who approached and questioned Martin> A cop with a marked car and a uniform? NO,,,some guy in the dark. THAT is cause enough to have ANYONE assume either a fight or flight "reaction" to the first action,,,Zimmermans. His leaving the car and shooting Martin are facts of the case as well.

WHY did the teen deserve to be PUT in a situation to have him fight someone who he wasn't planning on being approached by? IN the night? His adrenalin had him stay and fight off what must have been a threat to his safety. Zimmernan choose to get out of his car! His careless choice of a non trained officer like action, had him way over his head.

The injury Martin received? A deadly one. He can;t live with that one. Most fist fights end up in someone getting the better of another. Many have happened without death. The death threat of words is always said. The death threat of a gun shot is a while other step of action. WHO approached Martin to have that happen? The police, as should be? NO,,,an assuming guy with a armed gun. Self defense! Haha....NO,,,he KNOWS what went down, and is MAYBE glad for it, except for the case and all. He got one more black teen out of his hood. Nice.... NOT.



*
**You are going to knock the dead teen as being his fault he is dead? What are you smoking Flat? Do NOT pass it to me, for sure! :)
**
*You're dangerous. Martin attacked!!! Martin threatened deadly force and proceeded to inflict it. You're blind.
*
*

Hahaha,,,,believe that, and then get stalked and approached and see what YOU do to the guy in the dark night, giving your space and mind a following and questioning? It;s either fight or flight. Adrenalin from a self defense mindset expected from Martin, FOR Martin did NOT hunt after Zimmerman. Zimmerman hunted down a black teen. Think about it. Is it so obvious, based on the facts of the case.


If I am dangerous, then you should then think everybody should approach anyone at night that is walking around an area of OTHER crimes, and make sure they know you are coming,,NOT JUST watching to THEN inform the police, to have THEM approach. That would then have me be more in your thinking of being a reasonable good guy?


Thank yo for the good discussions! Appreicate your way of just talking about the facts and issues,,,no matter what they are. I ONLY don't appreciate the "dangerous" label for me. But, I understand that in way what you might mean. I TRY to see everything in a circle sort of way, despite what I then present in type. I DO think about BOTH or ALL sides, always. I am also free to change my viewpoint with other info I don't know about yet. Right now,,,,I just see the first action of confrontation, which is getting out of the car to approach, NEVER a good thing to do. Bad things usually happen when strangers meet like that, especially when one has a mindset of one being a potential criminal that night. TOO much assumption to have one with a gun get involved with approaching the person in question. HIS cause, HIS shot fired. HIM not the one dead because of his assumption and first action to approach. That is HOW I SEE IT so far. I have considered your thoughts equally. I just don't agree with them now.

Thanks!!! For now,,,lets wait till we have other points. I think I repeated myself more than I even care to hear! :)

See ya around the boards,
John

Followup Messages:

top of page

 

Home Web Chat Web Boards Discography Library Quiz Art & Poetry Links Store

Image Map -- text links below

Home | Web Chat | Web Boards | Discography | Library | Quiz | Art & Poetry | Links | Store

Produced by Sam Choukri
Frequently Asked Questions
Last updated on Jul 1, 2013