"Trayvon Martin was a teenager who was returning from a trip to the store to buy candy..."
LoL.
yes. but it's disingenuous to ignore that his criminal past and the adult nature of his prior crimes. saying he was just a teenager getting candy makes it appear that Zimmerman was more of a sociopath than he actually turned out to be. Not a lot more, but to a meaningful degree.Is that not true?
yes. but it's disingenuous to ignore that his criminal past and the adult nature of his prior crimes. saying he was just a teenager getting candy makes it appear that Zimmerman was more of a sociopath than he actually turned out to be
neither does the fact that he went out to get candy. Including that detail intends to paint him as a harmless juvenile.None of that matters unless Zimmerman was aware of his past or he was involved in those activities at that time.
To my understanding, at best, trayvon went to get some candy, was tailed by neighborhood watch gone rogue, trayvon freaked out at being followed, trayvon attacked the stranger tailing him, Zimmerman shot him.
None of his past seems to play a part of any of that.
Should all headlines carry victim’s criminal history? “Man with 2 DUI’s assaulted”.yes. but it's disingenuous to ignore that his criminal past and the adult nature of his prior crimes. saying he was just a teenager getting candy makes it appear that Zimmerman was more of a sociopath than he actually turned out to be. Not a lot more, but to a meaningful degree.
he was slinging drugs, getting in fights, and musing about buying a gun in the weeks and months before his confrontation Zimmerman.
Zimmerman seems like quite a POS but:
I can follow you around on a public street as much as I want and should not have to worry about being assaulted. Zimmerman had every bit as much a right to be on that street as Trayvon. One of them made a horrible decision to physically assault the other one and paid for his poor decision. No one should have to be afraid of being assaulted just for walking down the street at nightNone of that matters unless Zimmerman was aware of his past or he was involved in those activities at that time.
To my understanding, at best, trayvon went to get some candy, was tailed by neighborhood watch gone rogue, trayvon freaked out at being followed, trayvon attacked the stranger tailing him, Zimmerman shot him.
None of his past seems to play a part of any of that.
when the cops kill someone, the headlines sure do.Should all headlines carry victim’s criminal history? “Man with 2 DUI’s assaulted”.
You shouldn’t be able to initiate a confrontation, escalate it to a fight and then shoot someone because you are losing the fight.when the cops kill someone, the headlines sure do.
but it shouldn't matter. Just like whether he was going to buy candy or weed shouldn't matter.
Trayvon continued an assault beyond where it was legally-defensible, and died because of it.
Trayvon took mount and ground and pounded a guy. That was it. It's what plenty of us are trained is one of the right things to do in self defense. The problem is anytime we fight we risk it getting out of control. The street is never fair. At issue in the trial wasn't whether Trayvon's technique for subduing his opponent was legally defensible, but whether Zimmerman acted in accordance with Florida's stand your ground law, which gives a broad amount of breadth for using lethal force. To me it's a tragic case that unfortunately was so clumsily handled by local police when interacting with media that it became deeply politicized. But even still, a kid died because someone decided to kill him. The state decided that was permissable. This action by Zimmerman is frankly ghoulish and abhorrent.when the cops kill someone, the headlines sure do.
but it shouldn't matter. Just like whether he was going to buy candy or weed shouldn't matter.
Trayvon continued an assault beyond where it was legally-defensible, and died because of it.
i don't know that Zimmerman initiated the fight. Regardless, his actions have been adjudicated and he was not found to be criminally liable.You shouldn’t be able to initiate a confrontation, escalate it to a fight and then shoot someone because you are losing the fight.
Take your beating like the asshole you are and don’t kill anyone.
Zimmerman case had nothing to do with Stand Your GroundTrayvon took mount and ground and pounded a guy. That was it. It's what plenty of us are trained is one of the right things to do in self defense. The problem is anytime we fight we risk it getting out of control. The street is never fair. At issue in the trial wasn't whether Trayvon's technique for subduing his opponent was legally defensible, but whether Zimmerman acted in accordance with Florida's stand your ground law, which gives a broad amount of breadth for using lethal force. To me it's a tragic case that unfortunately was so clumsily handled by local police when interacting with media that it became deeply politicized. But even still, a kid died because someone decided to kill him. The state decided that was permissable. This action by Zimmerman is frankly ghoulish and abhorrent.
In your opinion who started this all?i don't know that Zimmerman initiated the fight. Regardless, his actions have been adjudicated and he was not found to be criminally liable.
It takes two to tango. One is dead, one had his life ruined.
The lesson here is
This is a really, really stupid commentif his accusation regarding the prosecutor and the family is accurate, their behavior is even more ghoulish and abhorrent.
I don't think that's actually 'knowable' - and I don't think it's really relevant. Both parties have a responsibility to forego violence, and each has a right defend their life with deadly force.In your opinion who started this all?