Posted on 03/21/2012 6:55:13 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
It's not easy to make Al Sharpton appear relatively restrained in a racially-charged case such as the one involving the death of Trayvon Martin. But Joe Scarborough has managed to pull off the dubious feat. On today's Morning Joe, Scarborough flatly branded the reported shooter, George Zimmerman, a "murderer." It was no slip of the tongue. A couple minutes later, Scarborough declared that Zimmerman had "murdered" Martin.
Sharpton himself never used such language, generally describing Zimmerman as the "shooter," and even imagining, without endorsing, a scenario in which Zimmerman might have been acting in self defense.
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
The Eye witness accounts, 911 tapes (including the snippet you say has an epithet in it that I don't hear), and what has been released about Zimmerman's account don't jibe with the MSM story at all.
I guess it depends on who you WANT to believe more... I'm still siding with the guy cleared by local police that had several defensive wounds.
I disagree that this is a matter of what one WANTS(sic) to believe.
There is nothing at all to indicate that Martin was doing anything other than walking back from buying candy.
It is known that Martin was unarmed.
It is known that during the time frame that he was being followed by Zimmerman he was talking on the phone to his friend, who says that he knew he was being followed.
It is known that Zimmerman has a history of seeing monsters under the bed and of confronting individuals on the street. His suspiscions are based on his prejudices (coons/punks remark - 'they' get away with it remark). His 'account' (where did you read it?) would be self-serving at best, and based on his history and actions, not to be accepted at face value.
The entire question is simple...given what we know about Zimmerman's history and actions...along with the utter lack of any hint (beyond Zimmerman's call) of any nefarious action by the kid he shot to death...what is there to make you WANT to believe that Martin assaulted Zimmerman? What was his motive?
As I wrote earlier...if any one of my kids were accosted by any stranger, especially one who was as hyped as Zimmerman clearly was (his voice, word choice, actions) I would expect them to defend themselves as if their life depended on it --- which, as in this case, Martin's did.
The housing complex had had 5 burglaries in 8 months. Numerous residents have nothing but praise for the work of Zimmerman, who is NOT “self-appointed” watch captain as is being claimed by so many; he was appointed by the community. If you don’t believe me, I’ll be happy to direct you to interviews of the neighbors and of Zimmerman’s fellow neighborhood watch patrol members. Zimmerman had helped catch and convict at least one of the burglars who have been plaguing the community. Why are you joining with the rest of the lynch mob before getting the facts?
It’s possible that it’s the case that Zimmerman is a murderer, and there is also a lot of Anti-White, Anti-Second Amendment Hysteria associated with the case.
Why do you argue that it’s ok for Zimmerman to kill Nartin simply because there were previous burglaries?
.
While the Zimmerman ‘white’ on black killing is covered 24/7 on the MSM with an outpouring of rage and charges of a racial hate crime, where is the concern- where is the rage about the home invasion, torture, beating, rape and murder of the elderly white couple by ‘African Americans’ in Oklahoma just the other day?
The 90 year old war veteran husband was beaten, his jaw broken, shot in the face with a BB gun and now barely clings to life.
The 85 year old partially blind wife was raped and beaten to death.
Where is the 24/7 MSM coverage
Where is the outrage?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2861754/posts?page=46.
Police chief answers Trayvon Martin FAQ
He was not on duty for the neighborhood watch at the time, and the 911 dispatcher's statement that he doesn't need to follow Trayvon was not a direct, legally actionable order.
.
While the Zimmerman ‘white’ on black killing is covered 24/7 on the MSM with an outpouring of rage and charges of a racial hate crime, where is the concern- where is the rage about the home invasion, torture, beating, rape and murder of the elderly white couple by ‘African Americans’ in Oklahoma just the other day?
The 90 year old war veteran husband was beaten, his jaw broken, shot in the face with a BB gun and now barely clings to life.
The 85 year old partially blind wife was raped and beaten to death.
Where is the 24/7 MSM coverage
Where is the outrage?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2861754/posts?page=46.
We’ve all heard the tapes by now I think. Unless there is more to the story, which I doubt, this shooter was overzealous and should never have been in the position of armed neighborhood watch guy.
However, that being said, this is one sad case. They are now marching and rioting in New York over this.
It seems like a serious over-reaction because of an isolated case. Am I wrong?
Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the Sanford Police Department.
The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer, when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.
When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony.
I suggest you open the link in post #107. You don't have your facts right.
Would you shoot him then?
In the western movies I saw when I was young it was common for the hero to win a fist fight with the villain. Invariably the villain would then pull a gun and try to shoot the unarmed hero. I don't ever remember thinking that pulling a gun after he lost the fight was heroic or brave.
I'd like to think that one-on-one I would have beaten the tar out of the 17 year old boy, rather than the converse. I probably wouldn't try to be the neighborhood watch guy unless I could handle myself. If I was going to confront a young man who I thought was up to no good, (and I actually encountered this in my gated community earlier this week), I would try to plan the meeting so that I either stayed in my car or I would have the gun out and visible when I questioned his business in my community. But I also know that these situations can escalate, and things don't usually go according to plan.
I haven't convicted Zimmerman, or called him a murderer. But the idea of shooting an unarmed teenager on a public street still bothers me. And I certainly think an investigation of some kind is in order. If the local police have conducted such an investigation and found that Zimmerman acted with just cause, some sort of statement should be made to that effect.
I personally think the 2nd Amendment gives me the right to own an armed Apache helicopter, if I could afford one. In theory, I should be able to have the same weapons as the government to prevent tyranny. But this liberty to bear arms carries responsibility for my actions. If I hurt someone with my weapons, through accident, carelessness, poor judgment, etc., I must bear the consequences for my actions.
One ought to be sort of careful of this terminology. IIRC in FL your handgun is not registered, as it would be in New York State. For a number of years I have held CCDW licenses in FL, PA, and DE -- in many of those years they were concurrent. In none of those states was the handgun licensed or on a permit. It was the fitness of the person to be licensed that was the prerequisite.
As a citizen employee, volunteer or hired, Zimmerman is merely a civilian with no arrest powers, whether carrying a gun open, concealed, or not carrying at all. It seems clear that his pretensions far overreached his community-appointed watcher status.
But he was not "carrying a registered gun," nor could it have been a part of his job description. His carrying could only have been as a private citizen for personal security of self, those in his own company, and/or for his own property -- not that of others.
With all due respect --
And I agree fully with your last statement. The police have already reviewed Zimmerman's actions and couldn't find anything to charge him with. That isn't good enough for some folks though...
Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida. He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a neighborhood to be “eyes and ears” for police and to watch out for their neighbors. They are not members of the Police Department, nor are they vigilantes. Training provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the situation.
Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the Sanford Police Department.
“I suggest you go to the following link so at least you have your facts right, Police chief answers Trayvon Martin FAQ”
Good link. I had not seen that one yet. Thank you for correcting me and bringing me up to date. That’s really all I was getting at: That the incident should be examined to see if it was justified.
When a fellow followed me through the gate of my subdivision earlier this week I armed myself and planned to question him from inside my truck. Turns out he was meeting a Realtor, so no big deal. But my plan was to have a number of options available in the event of a confrontation. Its hard for me to imagine that my incident would have turned into a gun fight unless the other fellow was also armed.
That is your opinion, but it is not what Zimmerman told the police. Again, here is the statement from the Sanford police on why Zimmerman was not arrested:
If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be considered in this investigation?
Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman, “Are you following him?” Zimmerman replied, “Yes.” The call taker stated, “You don’t need to do that.”
The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer, when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.
So are you disagreeing with Zimmerman's statement that he did not follow Martin and that Martin attacked Zimmerman as he was returning to his truck? The police indicated that, "When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony."
I really don't know how you can conclude that Zimmerman provoked the attack. Do you have information that the police don't have?
If you read the information at the link, you will see that Zimmerman claims that Martin attacked him as he was going back to his truck and that he did not follow Martin. If you listen to the 911 tapes, it is clear that Zimmerman did not know if Martin was armed or not and that he had his hands in his waistband as if was hiding something.
There is no doubt that a struggle ensued with both men wrestling on the ground. Zimmerman claims he used his weapon in self-defense. There was physical evidence that Zimmerman had suffered cuts on the back of his head and face and that his back was full of grass stains indicating that Martin was on top of him.
I can see nothing from the tapes that indicated that this incident was premeditated or racial. As Zimmerman's father wrote,
George is a Spanish speaking minority with many black family members and friends. He would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever. One black neighbor recently interviewed said she knew everything in the media was untrue and that she would trust George with her life. Another black neighbor said that George was the only one, black or white, who came and welcomed her to the community, offering any assistance he could provide. Recently, I met two black children George invited to a social event. I asked where they met George. They responded that he was their mentor. They said George visited them routinely, took them places, helped them, and taught them things and that they really loved George. The media portrayal of George as a racist could not be further from the truth.
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.