Originally Posted by Derry girl
Today I was reading about an on-going case in the states about George Zimmerman, who shot an unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, (apparently) in self defence in a gated community.
Trayvon Martin's family and supporters have said Mr Zimmerman killed him in cold blood after suspecting the teenager was a criminal based on his race and the fact he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt.......The neighbourhood watchman's supporters have said he only opened fire after the teenager attacked him, broke his nose and banged his head against the pavement.
Zimmerman has now set up a website so people can give him donations to pay toward his living and legal expenses!
Zimmerman has not been charged because under Florida's "stand your ground" self-defence law individuals are granted scope to use force if they feel seriously in danger.... and now he's gone missing..on the run in my opinion!
stand your ground means there is zero obligation to retreat or break contact. It does not mean you can draw down on someone for just being there. There must be a reasonable perceived threat, such as a visible weapon, being attacked, or otherwise in imminent danger
Whats your opinion on this case? .. To be honest I find it very hard to be certain of whos in the wrong, Like you have Zimmerman saying Trayvon attacked him and then you have Trayvons family saying he was a good lad, would'nt get involved in disputes and was just in the wrong place at the wrong time..
I don't personally believe squat in the media. Every news entity has its own agenda, puts a wicked spin on the words, and are all driven by greed instead of principle. The family will always say the victim was wonderful and harmless, never minding that he may be a multiple strike goat molester or violent criminal or juvenile delinquent.
When it comes to this "stand your ground" law, personally I find this very disturbing. Coming from a country that people used to kill eachother because of their Religion, sometimes ethnic background, but 90% of the time religion, If we had that law in Ireland it would get heaviley abused....I was called catholic scum oneday because Iv redy/auburn hair and was wearing a green dress...I would end up afaird walking through certain areas incase people thought I was a threat, could just shoot me and nothing would be done?
Like wether you support Zimmerman or not the usual proceddings would be that he would be taken in for questioning to find out exactly what happened. From what I hear on the news the police just made sure Zimmerman was ok because he said straight away that it was self defence so they let him go on home...That dosent seem normal to me when a 17yr old lad is laying dead on the road.
Obviously, the cops saw sufficient evidence to corroborate Zimmermans story, which matched the initial inspection of the crime scene. It could also be that he got a lawyer involved from the start.
I'll not go to much into what I feel about people been allowed guns in their home because I know that its a fairly common thing in America and I don't want to rattle any cages but I do think that laws should be tighter on who can get a Licence and maybe it should be complusory for them to do a training course, My granda had a shot gun for hunting but he had to a 3month course and keep the gun in a locked trunk in the basement and keep the bullets in the attic and the garda would visit every few months to check that he still stored it like that.. and that was in the 40's!!... Does that happen in America??
Like was it really nessacary for Zimmerman to shoot Trayvon dead? If he really needed to shoot could he not have shot him in the arm or leg so that it would wounded him and Zimmerman could have phoned the police...
When involved in a fight of any type, fine motor skills go to pot, and you automatically revert to your most basic training received that's ingrained into your subconscious. There is little cognitive thought happening under extreme duress-it is all automatic "fight or flight" primal instincts.
Whats your thoughts on this?
As a firearms instructor, and former Urban Warfare Instructor in the Marines, I train my students firmly and properly to ingrain the methods into their subconscious mind.
To "shoot him in the arm or leg" is beyond preposterous, and is borderline ludacrous.
I was trained, and still train, to shoot center mass. That's the center of the chest for those not in the know.
We spent obnoxious amounts of time training to shoot 2 to the chest and 1 to the head.
Why? Two reasons. First, it incapacitates the attacker, and two, it eliminates the threat.
In any fight, it is win or lose, and losing is not an option.
In a fight for life, it is kill or be killed.
Did Zimmerman murder the kid?
I don't know.
I really don't much care either.
Truth be told, it raises more questions.
What was the kid doing in that area? It's a gated community. I'm pretty sure he wasn't selling cookies door to door.
What actions did the kid do to draw Zimmerman's attention?
What did he do to create the perceived threat?
Why didnt he comply with the instructions given?
Was he confrontational? Why?
All this will shake out in the trial, and I really hope that the truth comes out.
If the kid was wrong, he owns it.
If Zimmerman was wrong, he owns it, and does time in the slammer.
I think there will be some blame to be had on both sides.
I do hope that justice, and I do mean BLIND justice prevails.
There's entirely too much political grandstanding going on to ferret out any semblance of the truth at this point.