“He can carry and confront ANYONE he likes ANY TIME HE LIKES- confrontation is NOT agaisnt hte law- Martin however CRIMINALLY ASSAULTED Zimmerman which Martin did NOT have a right to do”
This is an important point, and according to many conversations I’ve heard lately needs to be pounded into many heads. You can’t instigate violence on a whim, nor to implied threats or potential future threats. The old “freedom to swing my arm ends at your nose” rule applies. The exceptions are few, and are limited to: “fighting words” and obvious overt threats. They do not include following someone and informing on them to a non-emergency telephone service.
[[The exceptions are few, and are limited to: “fighting words” and obvious overt threats.]]
Or to brandishing a weapon, which there is absolutely NO evidence George did, and EVERY evidnce to show that he only did so AFTER he was in fear for his life after martin informed him he was goign to kill him and was ifnact tryign to do just that. Had george taken the gun out at the first confrontatiion, Martin would have been within his rights to strike george Had he folishly decided to do so- however, that is NOT what happened- And you’re right- this FACT of hte case should be pounded into the heads of he bleeding heart leftists who refuse to acknowledge that noone has a right to assault someoen else- Martin was the ONLY one hwo committed a criminal act in this case, and by all rights, geoerge should probaqbly be suing the martins for what hteir son did to him- but justice will NEVER prevail in htis case because hte left REFUSES to admit that Martin was the who committed the criminal act in this case, NOT zimmerman