Posted on 03/20/2012 7:08:27 PM PDT by marktwain
Edited on 03/20/2012 7:21:16 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
SANFORD, Fla.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bostonherald.com ...
[Holder’s getting involved. And a 17 year old isn’t a “child”.]
Yep. Wasn’t there a 12 or 14 year old tried for murder as an adult in FL recently?
...it is easy to walk by a house and see whats in there at night with the lights on, and no one to see you do it.
***********************
Who, in their right mind, would leave front windows uncovered at night with the interior lights on so that anyone outside could view what was going on in the house?
And how about the Knoxvill massacre where a young couple were kidnapped, raped, tortured for days then murdered by black thugs?
http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-knoxville-horror-crime-race-the-media-and-anti-racism
It was covered up by MSM. No outrage. No protests.
Authorities refused to lable it a hate crime.
“How could the magazine be full? If the trigger was pulled and the round fired, the slide would have cycled another round into the chamber. Thus, the magazine would have one less round and the chamber would be loaded again.”
They did say it was a Keltec, not one of the most reliable brands on the market. They don’t even make good trotline weights.
Save your money.
Thank you!
When you shoot, the empty casing is ejected and a new round is inserted into place. At that point the mag is minus one round and not full. If one were to fire the weapon and then load one round into the mag then it might appear full.
The perp is 28. His victim is a minor ~ 17.
You keep referring to pointing a gun at someone. There is nothing in the 911 tapes that suggest he was pointing a gun. There is nothing to suggest he was being aggressive. There is evidence that he went to confront, but like trailerpark said, if confrontation is defined by “what are you doing” then why bother with a watch. You butress your arguement with facts not in evidence, unless a 911 tape can provide video as well as audio. The only place that he pointed a gun at him is in your head.
“In any case, a law that permits someone to start a fight and then kill the person they attacked if the fight doesn’t go their way is insane and needs to be changed.”
“What evidence is there that Zimmerman started a fight. His head wounds?”
This is the crux of the matter. Up until the fight started, both parties did nothing wrong or illegal.
George Zimmerman says he was attacked. He has wounds and all the physical evidence says that he was.
Trayvon Martin’s parents say that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon. They were not there. Their evidence seems to be that Trayvon was black and 17, so he could not be the one who started the fight.
Everyone agrees that a fight occured.
If the pattern of leftist race baiting coverage of crime stands, we will not find out the truth from the media about this case. We will find out a lot of lies aimed at making a total monster of a “racist.” They make any one of their race targets look like their critical race theory stereotype.
The truth will come out in the trial through telephone recordings and testimony.
FRiend, I think the most likely scenario is Zimmerman is a low IQ nutball. But I have have personally seen the criminal element do the poor innocent me routine so I don’t totally discount that the kid was possibly up to no good. Regardless, it was not a good idea to chase him down and cap him based on only wild suspicions.
So what? The kid’s still dead, isn’t he? Zimmerman killed him. Who cares how many trigger pulls it took?
You are arguing that Martin was the threat to Zimmerman...in spite of the fact that Zimmerman is on tape stating that he was following the kid...that he continued to follow him after he was told not to...that he is on tape complaining that "they always get away" (who are 'they'...more 17 year old black kids?)...and that it was Zimmerman who had the gun.
Do I have it right?
I am absolutely sure that the kid's race has nothing to do with your truly idiotic premise.
______________________________________
:Racing from the store"????
Please provide proof the Martin was "Racing from the store". Because, frankly, I think you made it up to fit whatever scenario you need to meet your needs on this.
‘You are probably correct, but is there a law in Florida against being a “wannabe stud hero”?’
I think when you stalk someone...(the dispatcher told him not to follow the kid) and the kid is walking away from you (the kid is frightened, talking on phone to his girlfriend)...there ought to be a law against a neighborhood watch guy doing that.
This death was totally uncalled for.
“He was right to maintain surveilance, and you may be a nut case.”
The kid was a real danger, wasn’t he? Zimmerman knew that for sure, so he stalks the kid, then kills him. Brilliant.
You don’t like what I say...so I’m nuts. Glad you aren’t MY neighborhood ‘watch’ guy.
I don't question his right to defend himself either, but chasing someone around in a car and then getting out to confront them isn't 'defending' yourself. The legislator that created the 'stand your ground' law in Florida was on the radio this morning, and he said the law isn't intended to protect someone who pursues someone else and initiates a confrontation.
Florida's Republican legislature isn't about to remove this law from the books, but Zimmerman's actions are going to make it a lot harder for people in other states to get a 'stand your ground' law on their books.
Meanwhile, two state legislators who sponsored Florida’s “stand your ground” deadly-force law in 2005 called for George Zimmerman to be arrested for shooting Martin. “They got the goods on him. They need to prosecute whoever shot the kid,” one of the lawmakers, Republican former Sen. Durell Peaden told the Miami Herald. “He has no protection under my law.” His co-sponsor, current Rep. Dennis Baxley (R), told the paper: “There’s nothing in this statute that authorizes you to pursue and confront people, particularly if law enforcement has told you to stay put. I don’t see why this statute is being challenged in this case. That is to prevent you from being attacked by other people.”
And that is the left's purpose in making such a big stink about this event. They don't like that people should have the ability to defend themselves against thugs and such, so they've taken a case where someone (allegedly) went beyond the law and twist it into an attack on the law itself.
Thugs hate armed citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.