So anyway...this has been fun!
I think you know what my response will be and what my position is. And as explained to mspease I have not assumed any position of guilt or innocence for either party.
People have to be responsible for their decisions.
From a big picture perspective I ask the question "what was the chain of events that caused the altercation to happen, and who is responsible for that decision to put this chain of events in motion?"
The answer to that is clearly Zimmerman. Had he stayed in the car the altercation would not have happened.
Did Zimmerman make a "good" decision to pursue based upon the facts in the case? No, it was a bad decision. No crime, no threat, no danger, police on the way, kid had every right to be there. It was a hotheaded decision for a person under no threat to pursue a kid and do so with a loaded weapon.
Zimmerman made the bad decision.
Zimmerman acted on his bad decision.
Zimmerman caused the altercation by chasing Martin.
If he had stayed in the car Martin would have never had to make the bad decision to accost Zimmerman and get killed.
But if you look at all the things that went on and lay them out in a logical fashion the one thing that caused the altercation was Zimmerman's decision to get out of the car and chase Martin. That was the first rock to roll down the hill. Maybe he's guilty of manslaughter, maybe he's guilty of assault. Maybe he's guilty of being stupid.
But he killed a kid. Whether the kid was white, green, or black has absolutely no bearing on it. The kid committed no crime and had every right to be where he was. And when Zimmerman got out of the car he started a chain of events that ended up with the kid dead.
Walking down the street, minding his own business...dead.
