Trayvon Martin

[jonesin]

sorry you had it rough growing up but your past still does not justify the loss of life no matter how fed up you are with all the injustice

you forgot to highlight, IF YOU ATTACK ME
you guys can say/think/do what you want but if a person is attacked how do they know that the attacker is going to stop the beating before they are dead?
its easy to look back in hind sight and say "what if" but in reality when tm actually circled around and confronted gz and then attacked it probably went down extremely fast. why tm didn't just talk to gz or walk away we will never know, but in my humble opinion, i'm not going to wait and see if the attacker is going to stop the unprovoked beating before i am dead.
its a total different situation than when a couple of guy disagree and start fighting, but alone in the dark and attacked?
i dont agree with all your coments about the band aids either, I accidentally hit myself in the head with a fence pole driver when it caught the edge of the post and only had a trickle of blood but it dropped me to my knees and i saw stars, i think you are grasping at straws, a witness said tm was on top and beating him, seems simple to understand

 

[lenny]

Now you are agreeing with the jury & understand why there was a not guilty verdict. This by law was an act of Self Defense all the way & GZ had zero self defense skills & probably why he carried a gun in the 1st place. All the what ifs don't have any legal bearing on murder 2 with option for man slaughter it all comes down to TM wailing blows on GZ & GZ using his weapon in his moment of desparation. Now was the entire altercation stupid & unnecessary?.... Yes .....but it it did happen & was tried in a court of law with a not guilty verdict it is a done deal & I get it. Bottom line don't get in fights call the cops stay out of trouble lots of wackos with guns out there & lots of good people with guns out there as well. No one knows the stranger with the a gun so don't take the risk lots of other options.

you make a good point Pete but there is a problem I have with it. Because of a mans lack defense skills he assumes he will die, he takes action and kills a guy? Taking a life supercedes a fear factor. Didn't GZ put himself in a situation that could develop into any form of violence, yet he took the most extreme action available because he could? I say because GZ took the initiative he ought to respond in a way that reflects to the level of threat. Killing is an option but only if his life was threatened yet we see that by facts as not the case. IMO GZ acted prematurely as he was not prepared mentally of physically for the responsibility he put himself into. Now add a deadly weapon to the mix and we have just that, a dead person, all the elements in place for a tragedy. A 17 yr, old 6-2" 180 guy is not much of a threat IMO, most people who who are in a position of authority ought to be able to toss that kid into the trees.

 

[jonesin]

you make a good point Pete but there is a problem I have with it. Because of a mans lack defense skills he assumes he will die, he takes action and kills a guy? Taking a life supercedes a fear factor. Didn't GZ put himself in a situation that could develop into any form of violence, yet he took the most extreme action available because he could? I say because GZ took the initiative he ought to respond in a way that reflects to the level of threat. Killing is an option but only if his life was threatened yet we see that by facts as not the case. IMO GZ acted prematurely as he was not prepared mentally of physically for the responsibility he put himself into. Now add a deadly weapon to the mix and we have just that, a dead person, all the elements in place for a tragedy. A 17 yr, old 6-2" 180 guy is not much of a threat IMO, most people who who are in a position of authority ought to be able to toss that kid into the trees.

i'm 6'-2 and 195 but i don't think most cops i see could toss me into the trees, does 15 pounds make that much difference? (I usually weigh in the 185 range but have been drinking to much beer in this hot weather and sitting around too much)

 

[durphee]

Jonesin,yeah im 6'2 and should be 195, im 215- need to drink a little less myself. Darn hot weather!

As far as the trial, its a shame any of it occurred. Im not going to speculate on what occurred, no one really knows. Its too bad GZ didn't wait for the proper authorities, but it didn't happen.

But, one important thing from a criminal trial, (im not a lawyer) but the court system doesn't hand out "innocent" verdicts, just guilty and not guilty. Which just means that there was not proof, or swaying of the jury, beyond a reasonable doubt. Not all info is allowed in court but I feel the system did what it was setup to do, come to a verdict based upon evidence presented. BTW, they say you get a jury of your peers,have you ever been called to jury duty an seen some of these people? Heck, im more scared of the people being called to jury duty then anything! IMO

 

[jccams]

your offended by my belief?,,,,,Are you sure you don't want to revise your word "offend" ?

I guess what is offensive is that an intelligent person can believe something with nothing to back it up. So what you are saying, since you don't know me from Jack, is that I am an irresponsible CPL holder(because you believe the majority of us are), that upsets me and by definition is offensive, so no I don't want to revise the word.



1.Cause to feel upset, annoyed, or resentful.
2.Be displeasing to: "the smell of smoke offended him".

Synonyms
insult - hurt - outrage - affront

 

[lenny]

you forgot to highlight, IF YOU ATTACK ME
you guys can say/think/do what you want but if a person is attacked how do they know that the attacker is going to stop the beating before they are dead?
its easy to look back in hind sight and say "what if" but in reality when tm actually circled around and confronted gz and then attacked it probably went down extremely fast. why tm didn't just talk to gz or walk away we will never know, but in my humble opinion, i'm not going to wait and see if the attacker is going to stop the unprovoked beating before i am dead.
its a total different situation than when a couple of guy disagree and start fighting, but alone in the dark and attacked?
i dont agree with all your coments about the band aids either, I accidentally hit myself in the head with a fence pole driver when it caught the edge of the post and only had a trickle of blood but it dropped me to my knees and i saw stars, i think you are grasping at straws, a witness said tm was on top and beating him, seems simple to understand

because that's how 99.9% of fights end up. It is so rare that a fight ends up in a death that it's negligible. Even in a drunken state bar brawl you rarely see deaths but it is increased by a small degree. I see no difference about how this started weather it be a disagreement or confrontation. Most people have an instinct to not kill. I have a hard time believing TM was on the edge just waiting for his opportunity to get into a fight and than kill a guy. As far as you not agreeing with me on his injuries, they are public knowledge and I have not altered the facts in any way. GZ was treated and released with not a stitch. You can see in the videos that while he was cuffed and walking around his head is hardly noticeable. I cannot get the slightest bump on me head without sustaining some swelling and we have close photos of the back of his head and it's not bad at all.

Would you agree that a gun carrying person ought to be even more aware of threats and even more capable of using restraint as he is capable of taking ones life? It seems backwards here that just because he had the right to carry a weapon doesn't mean he will make the right decision to kill, meaning the threat deemed deadly force?

Your point of not waiting to see the results of a confrontation where deadly force could take place is weak at best. It's a sever attempt to justify use of deadly force which is not reasonable. It allows people who carry an open interpretation of the level of threat to use deadly force prematurely without experience or ample education.

 

[lenny]

you forgot to highlight, IF YOU ATTACK ME
you guys can say/think/do what you want but if a person is attacked how do they know that the attacker is going to stop the beating before they are dead?
its easy to look back in hind sight and say "what if" but in reality when tm actually circled around and confronted gz and then attacked it probably went down extremely fast. why tm didn't just talk to gz or walk away we will never know, but in my humble opinion, i'm not going to wait and see if the attacker is going to stop the unprovoked beating before i am dead.
its a total different situation than when a couple of guy disagree and start fighting, but alone in the dark and attacked?
i dont agree with all your coments about the band aids either, I accidentally hit myself in the head with a fence pole driver when it caught the edge of the post and only had a trickle of blood but it dropped me to my knees and i saw stars, i think you are grasping at straws, a witness said tm was on top and beating him, seems simple to understand

so if we take push your logic to it's end we come to the conclusion than all beatings, all meaning that we don't know if you'll die or not, could be justified use of deadly force. That defies logic and is scary.

 

[whitedust]

you make a good point Pete but there is a problem I have with it. Because of a mans lack defense skills he assumes he will die, he takes action and kills a guy? Taking a life supercedes a fear factor. Didn't GZ put himself in a situation that could develop into any form of violence, yet he took the most extreme action available because he could? I say because GZ took the initiative he ought to respond in a way that reflects to the level of threat. Killing is an option but only if his life was threatened yet we see that by facts as not the case. IMO GZ acted prematurely as he was not prepared mentally of physically for the responsibility he put himself into. Now add a deadly weapon to the mix and we have just that, a dead person, all the elements in place for a tragedy. A 17 yr, old 6-2" 180 guy is not much of a threat IMO, most people who who are in a position of authority ought to be able to toss that kid into the trees.

Lenny I too have plenty of problems with GZ & TM judgement & actions that rainey night & so does dcsnomo & a lot of others but not guilty of murder 2 or manslaughter. You are a fan of MMA & when a man on top is in the beat down position the ref stops the fight when heads are bouncing off the mat from blows to head. In this case GZ head was bouncing off the sidewalk while TM was beating GZ MMA style & breaking his nose. Throwing punches maybe elbows sounds like GZ lights could have gone out if it continued so he shot TM. GZ had zero defense skills & was nothing more than a punching bag for TM. One has to think what was going on in GZ mind not your or my thoughts but what did GZ think at that moment he shot. GZ thought he was about to die & might have had TM kept beating him in the head thus the not guilty verdict.

 

[Skylar]

A 17 yr, old 6-2" 180 guy is not much of a threat IMO, most people who who are in a position of authority ought to be able to toss that kid into the trees.

Unless one is 5'5". I may be strong for my height, and I know I could carry a person that size like a sack of potatoes, but I don't think I could toss them into the trees. LOL.

 

[lenny]

I guess what is offensive is that an intelligent person can believe something with nothing to back it up. So what you are saying, since you don't know me from Jack, is that I am an irresponsible CPL holder(because you believe the majority of us are), that upsets me and by definition is offensive, so no I don't want to revise the word.



1.Cause to feel upset, annoyed, or resentful.
2.Be displeasing to: "the smell of smoke offended him".

Synonyms
insult - hurt - outrage - affront

well,,,you have taken the liberty you categorize yourself into the "irresponsible" camp because I am not saying you are irresponsible. You may be but I hope not, only you know that. As far as my percentage of responsible and irresponsible, I am willing to bet I am off on that percentage but none the less the fact that the option to kill is valid means there will be those who cannot handle the responsible. Just as all who drive vehicles, many are poor drivers and add to the risk. It's a risk in all aspects, probably less than I state but we are talking about the greatest responsibility known to man, carrying a deadly weapon and pretty much anyone who wants to carry can carry. Most people have no criminal record, or mentally ill disabilities and can carry if they choose to seek that out. With the great option of deadly force should come great responsible actions. I do not see this strong practice in GZ

 

[jonesin]

because that's how 99.9% of fights end up. It is so rare that a fight ends up in a death that it's negligible. Even in a drunken state bar brawl you rarely see deaths but it is increased by a small degree. I see no difference about how this started weather it be a disagreement or confrontation. Most people have an instinct to not kill. I have a hard time believing TM was on the edge just waiting for his opportunity to get into a fight and than kill a guy. As far as you not agreeing with me on his injuries, they are public knowledge and I have not altered the facts in any way. GZ was treated and released with not a stitch. You can see in the videos that while he was cuffed and walking around his head is hardly noticeable. I cannot get the slightest bump on me head without sustaining some swelling and we have close photos of the back of his head and it's not bad at all.

Would you agree that a gun carrying person ought to be even more aware of threats and even more capable of using restraint as he is capable of taking ones life? It seems backwards here that just because he had the right to carry a weapon doesn't mean he will make the right decision to kill, meaning the threat deemed deadly force?

Your point of not waiting to see the results of a confrontation where deadly force could take place is weak at best. It's a sever attempt to justify use of deadly force which is not reasonable. It allows people who carry an open interpretation of the level of threat to use deadly force prematurely without experience or ample education.

lenny
i definately do agree with you on the responsibilty of carrying and restaint, first and best choice is to walk away or run but if attacked all bets are off
i dont think my point is weak at all, you don't have to wait until deadly force is used against you to react, you don't even have to wait until they touch you if you are in fear for your life, but if you are attacked and being beaten no excuse is necessary

 

[lenny]

Lenny I too have plenty of problems with GZ & TM judgement & actions that rainey night & so does dcsnomo & a lot of others but not guilty of murder 2 or manslaughter. You are a fan of MMA & when a man on top is in the beat down position the ref stops the fight when heads are bouncing off the mat from blows to head. In this case GZ head was bouncing off the sidewalk while TM was beating GZ MMA style & breaking his nose. Throwing punches maybe elbows sounds like GZ lights could have gone out if it continued so he shot TM. GZ had zero defense skills & was nothing more than a punching bag for TM. One has to think what was going on in GZ mind not your or my thoughts but what did GZ think at that moment he shot. GZ thought he was about to die & might have had TM kept beating him in the head thus the not guilty verdict.

really, if that was the case why do we not see injuries to back it up? Keep in mind you are getting the facts from a live person that want's you to believe he was fighting for his life, without the injuries to back it up. The dead guy would say similar if he could still talk. If both were living we always have to make a hard decision because we know not what to believe. It take a jury to discern who is right or wrong, lying or truthful. I don't believe for a second that GZ really wanted to kill TM before all this but I do believe he acted irresponsible and deadly force was not justifiable. If he was examined and had severe injuries consistent with life threatening assault I would never say a word about this mess.

 

[whitedust]

really, if that was the case why do we not see injuries to back it up? Keep in mind you are getting the facts from a live person that want's you to believe he was fighting for his life, without the injuries to back it up. The dead guy would say similar if he could still talk. If both were living we always have to make a hard decision because we know not what to believe. It take a jury to discern who is right or wrong, lying or truthful. I don't believe for a second that GZ really wanted to kill TM before all this but I do believe he acted irresponsible and deadly force was not justifiable. If he was examined and had severe injuries consistent with life threatening assault I would never say a word about this mess.

How did GZ get on the ground? Easy question TM put him down either take down or a punch then TM takes full mount & starts the beat down a broken nose is no small injury with non stop blows continuing head bouncing off the sidewalk. GZ was in trouble & may have cried out for help maybe it was TM calling for help we don't know but the only injury TM had was the gun shot wound to the chest. Logic says TM had the upperhand in the fight & GZ was getting whooped big time self defense all the way with tragic results.

 

[jonesin]

so if we take push your logic to it's end we come to the conclusion than all beatings, all meaning that we don't know if you'll die or not, could be justified use of deadly force. That defies logic and is scary.

defies your logic maybe, but I believe its true
if someone gets jumped today in retaliation for the verdict and kills the attacker while fighting back, its justified, they don't have to wait and see if the attacker is really going to kill them, waiting just doesnt make sense

 

[polarisrider1]

Lenny, your "Underdog" outfit is in the mail. It will fit you well, Bud! I truly suspect you take the minority side of many topics because you like the discussion/debate aspect of a topic more so then the actual content. (at least your having fun with it).

 

[jonesin]

Lenny, your "Underdog" outfit is in the mail. It will fit you well, Bud! I truly suspect you take the minority side of many topics because you like the discussion/debate aspect of a topic more so then the actual content. (at least your having fun with it).

This topic realy suprised me, I don't remember disagreeing with lenny before, probably happened but i just dont remember unless it was on a similiar topic regarding CCP

 

[yamahauler]

Yes, absolutely!!!!!! Its called self defense. This isn't a movie where just get up and walk away after being beaten.

So, Lenny how many punches would you take before you say enoughs enough?
It only takes one punch then hit your head on way down and your disabled for life or worse.

Bottom line, TM was on top of GZ.
Doesn't matter who started what, who could of walked away, or what some 911 operator said or if he took one punch or twenty.

saber1 - A person has a conceal/carry permit to protect themselves and if something has happened where they need to exercise the right to use deadly force, then yes, it is ok to kill that something. All those people out there that thing that they are just going to kick someones a&% better being thinking twice because you will never know when you chose the wrong person to mess with. This isn't the good ole days anymore.

 

[eagle1]

Man i run a few errands and i missed a lot. lol

you don't have to wait until deadly force is used against you to react, you don't even have to wait until they touch you if you are in fear for your life, but if you are attacked and being beaten no excuse is necessary

ding, ding,ding


Lenny, You're better man than most if you're willing to take a punch from a complete stranger with greater ability than yourself and not knowing when they'll stop.

If GZ made any mistake it was letting TM into his personal space,close enough to attack.

 

[ss440]

It's simple unarmed man attacks armed man, gets upper hand. Armed man defends himself, unarmed man pays the ultimate price his own fault nobody else's. Tm was a thug that picked a fight with the wrong guy, everybody knows it including the jurors.

 

[russholio]

you know what,, you are correct and I seriously retract that statement and I do apologize. The more I think about that statement the more I see I am way off. I would rather put it this way. I believe there is a huge offset of irresponsible gun carrying people compared to responsible educated gun carrying people. Carrying a gun is a serious matter because it involves the possible death of a person. In the case with GZ and TM I see just that, poor responsibility from GZ.

Again, I am sorry for the stupid statement I made.

No apology necessary for me, Lenny. I know your posts are usually based on reason and logic and that you usually try to see all sides of an issue. This one seemed a bit uncharacteristic of you so I just wrote it off as frustration or something on your part. No harm, it happens to most of us from time to time. I still endorse you for POTUS!