That Gun Totting Evil White Man that shot that poor black teen.

[Ravi]

The once righteous indignation jumps the track when challenged by law, evidence and testimony.

Where is the evidence and why wasn't a investigation conducted? That's the problem here.

The City Manager has released a statement.

Was investigated. Witness, Physical Evidence at the time = No arrest.

Perhaps the forensics will defy the physical. Ya think ?

Yes, I read his excuse. He based it on this:

According to Florida Statute 776.032 :776.032

Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—(1)

A person who uses force as permitted in s.776.012, s.776.013, or s.776.031is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action forthe use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a lawenforcement officer, as defined in s.943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance withany applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known thatthe person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminalprosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting thedefendant.

In reality, they didn't know if it was justifiable use of force or not. And as far as anyone can tell, the entire matter was dropped that evening with no follow up investigation. They might not have been able to make an arrest but they most certainly could have had an investigation.

 

[Si modo]

The once righteous indignation jumps the track when challenged by law, evidence and testimony.

Where is the evidence and why wasn't a investigation conducted? That's the problem here.

Still the most important question.

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

 

[Ravi]

If we were to accept your theory, we would have to believe that the intent of FL's law is to grant Zimmerman special privileges whereby he could chase down every resident of the community as they enter and confront them in a hostile manner and shoot them with immunity from prosecution if they were to react with an intention to defend themselves, where his rights to self defense were paramount over those of other people, and where he enjoyed police powers that extend beyond those granted to actual police officers. The whole thing is an absolutely ludicrous proposition.

Private property rights gave him the right to question and pursue unknowns.

Just like your property.

The shooting part came after an attack as the evidence and witness testimony has shown thus far.

Which is why he is free and the City Manager confirms the evidence and testimony didnt rise to arrest while maintaining the integrety of evidence until presented to the grand jury.

It was just decided yesterday to involve the grand jury.

 

[Ravi]

Where is the evidence and why wasn't a investigation conducted? That's the problem here.

Still the most important question.

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

 

[Peach]

If we were to accept your theory, we would have to believe that the intent of FL's law is to grant Zimmerman special privileges whereby he could chase down every resident of the community as they enter and confront them in a hostile manner and shoot them with immunity from prosecution if they were to react with an intention to defend themselves, where his rights to self defense were paramount over those of other people, and where he enjoyed police powers that extend beyond those granted to actual police officers. The whole thing is an absolutely ludicrous proposition.

Private property rights gave him the right to question and pursue unknowns.

Just like your property.

The shooting part came after an attack as the evidence and witness testimony has shown thus far.

Which is why he is free and the City Manager confirms the evidence and testimony didnt rise to arrest while maintaining the integrety of evidence until presented to the grand jury.

It was just decided yesterday to involve the grand jury.

And forensic evidence on Zimmerman is ZIP. Has the weapon been recovered?

 

[Si modo]

Still the most important question.

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

Yeah, apparently. This is a really bad law, IMO.

I doubt the legislators envisioned this, but dammit, they should have. That's their job.

 

[Claudette]

Zimmerman was in the wrong here, totally. He may be covered by some Florida statutes but he was definietly wrong. He used piss poor judgment and that young man is dead.

According to the guys I work with he should be prosecuted for Culpable Negligence.

Will see what happens.

 

[Ravi]

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

Yeah, apparently. This is a really bad law, IMO.

I doubt the legislators envisioned this, but dammit, they should have. That's their job.

Well, I certainly bitched about it when it was up for passage.

If one has a reasonable suspicion they are in danger they may shoot to kill. The sad fact is that "reasonable suspicion" is very subjective. Enough people fear black teens in hoodies....or white guys with skinheads....or what have you....

 

[Ravi]

Private property rights gave him the right to question and pursue unknowns.

Just like your property.

The shooting part came after an attack as the evidence and witness testimony has shown thus far.

Which is why he is free and the City Manager confirms the evidence and testimony didnt rise to arrest while maintaining the integrety of evidence until presented to the grand jury.

It was just decided yesterday to involve the grand jury.

And forensic evidence on Zimmerman is ZIP. Has the weapon been recovered?

From what I understand, he was sent home with his weapon that night.

 

[Si modo]

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

Yeah, apparently. This is a really bad law, IMO.

I doubt the legislators envisioned this, but dammit, they should have. That's their job.

Well, I certainly bitched about it when it was up for passage.

If one has a reasonable suspicion they are in danger they may shoot to kill. The sad fact is that "reasonable suspicion" is very subjective. Enough people fear black teens in hoodies....or white guys with skinheads....or what have you....

Right. This law would make me consider developing agoraphobia if I lived in Florida. It can be dangerous out on the streets for those just going about their business.

 

[Peach]

Still the most important question.

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

The "fear" must be of "deadly force" I believe; an investigation into a shooting usually involves taking the firearm into police custody, tests on the person firing the weapon, etc. Not done here I gather.

 

[Si modo]

I'm thinking that (1) because it is reported that Zimmerman had wounds on him (a media report): According to the Sanford police report, George Zimmerman, 28, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, is found armed with a handgun, standing over Martin. He has a bloody nose and a wound in the back of his head.;

And, (2), because of the statute: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So, if someone shoots another in Florida and the shooter is allowed to be in the place where the shooting occured, as long as there is evidence that the shooter was attacked, the shooter isn't illegal. And, of course the shooter will say they believed they needed to shoot.

Bad law, I say.

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

The "fear" must be of "deadly force" I believe; an investigation into a shooting usually involves taking the firearm into police custody, tests on the person firing the weapon, etc. Not done here I gather.

Well, I quoted the statute itself and it does not say the user of deadly force has to fear deadly force. It's right there ^^^.

 

[Sallow]

It's even worse. No injury need be present, just the "fear" of the person doing the homicide is justification enough under this law.

The "fear" must be of "deadly force" I believe; an investigation into a shooting usually involves taking the firearm into police custody, tests on the person firing the weapon, etc. Not done here I gather.

Well, I quoted the statute itself and it does not say the user of deadly force has to fear deadly force. It's right there ^^^.

One of the authors of the law said that it's application was not relevant in this case. I sort of disagree with that..since it's an extremely poorly written and dangerous law.

 

[Si modo]

The "fear" must be of "deadly force" I believe; an investigation into a shooting usually involves taking the firearm into police custody, tests on the person firing the weapon, etc. Not done here I gather.

Well, I quoted the statute itself and it does not say the user of deadly force has to fear deadly force. It's right there ^^^.

One of the authors of the law said that it's application was not relevant in this case. I sort of disagree with that..since it's an extremely poorly written and dangerous law.

It really is. If I knew about this law, I would hesitate to be in public. I have opinions and I don't hesitate to voice them.

 

[Sallow]

Any man that defends himself with a gunespecially if the shooter is 'white' and the dead man a black.



He only seems to be the aggressor if you ignore the bleeding wounds Zimmerman had to the back of his head where MArtin hit him, and the bleeding wounds he had to his face where Martin then stood over him and beat and kicked him on the ground.




He *followed* Martin, apparently stopped after the dispatcher said to, and then got blindsided by this 17 year old young adult. (it is amazing how libtards like to call late teenagers 'young adults' but they magically become 'children' when it suits to use them as victims).



You werent there and you dont know jack shit except for what the MSM spoon feeds you.



BINGO!

The repeal of 'stand your ground' laws are the real point here.

Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

Take my guns bitch.

Um..aside from your blather..the Germane points here are:

-Zimmerman was chasing Martin.
-Martin's girlfriend's interview conflicts with Zimmerman's in that she heard him confront Martin.
-Martin had the very same right to defend himself.
-Zimmerman is not a trained LEO. He wasn't registered as Neighborhood watch either.
-Zimmerman has shown that he has the capacity to take human life.

So which side of the family does this criminality come from?

His white side or hispanic side?

Is this bull shit worth starting a nationwide race-riot?

Is this justification of any black asshole in the country to begin showing their ass in public?

Trust me, it's already started.

Does it feel good to foment racial unrest, giving Obama the turmoil he wanted this Summer?

The police failed at due diligence. That's really the only issue.

I don't know where the rest of the conflation comes from.

 

[Sallow]

Well, I quoted the statute itself and it does not say the user of deadly force has to fear deadly force. It's right there ^^^.

One of the authors of the law said that it's application was not relevant in this case. I sort of disagree with that..since it's an extremely poorly written and dangerous law.

It really is. If I knew about this law, I would hesitate to be in public. I have opinions and I don't hesitate to voice them.

Seems we agree.

 

[Ravi]

What, y'all mean you don't want to vacation in Florida this year?

 

[Peach]

Um..aside from your blather..the Germane points here are:

-Zimmerman was chasing Martin.
-Martin's girlfriend's interview conflicts with Zimmerman's in that she heard him confront Martin.
-Martin had the very same right to defend himself.
-Zimmerman is not a trained LEO. He wasn't registered as Neighborhood watch either.
-Zimmerman has shown that he has the capacity to take human life.

So which side of the family does this criminality come from?

His white side or hispanic side?

Is this bull shit worth starting a nationwide race-riot?

Is this justification of any black asshole in the country to begin showing their ass in public?

Trust me, it's already started.

Does it feel good to foment racial unrest, giving Obama the turmoil he wanted this Summer?

The police failed at due diligence. That's really the only issue.

I don't know where the rest of the conflation comes from.

Agreed, the police did -0-.

 

[Si modo]

What, y'all mean you don't want to vacation in Florida this year?

Now that I know this law, I won't be getting snarky with anyone in Florida (especially TSA agents), that's for sure.

 

[Valerie]

What, y'all mean you don't want to vacation in Florida this year?

Good point!