Unarmed teen shooting: the debate rages on...

[Clinton Huxley]

If Zimerman had had any inkling of the forum thread he would inspire, he probably wouldn't have fired.

[Coito ergo sum]

You don't need to conclude that Martin did, in fact, attack Zimmerman

You're reporting falls information again. It's not been proven how exactly the interaction evolved. What you say is NOT a fact.

Do you understand English? I wrote "you DON'T need to conclude that Martin did, in fact, attack Zimmerman."

Don't - as in, it's not a necessary conclusion. BECAUSE we don't have evidence of who attacked first.

And, the fact that you KNOW it has not been proven how the interaction evolved, yet you still have no doubt that Zimmerman did not act in self-defense, shows exactly where you're coming from. You don't know AND you don't care. Zimmerman is guilty, and that's that.

[FBM]

If Zimerman had had any inkling of the forum thread he would inspire, he probably wouldn't have fired.

I would take a sound thrashing if it would put an end to it.

[Coito ergo sum]

. It's enough to see someone behaving oddly,

the only one that perceived martin behaving oddly was zimmerman. So, zimmerman says it's true, it must be. We can't get any info from the dead guy, can we.

No, it's not true just because Zimmerman says it. The fact only is that Zimmerman said it a the time while on the phone with the dispatcher. That is the extent of what we know.

The question becomes, are his statements to the dispatcher believable?

Assume he's lying: does it make sense that he would be purposefully inventing a story of a suspicious Martin and then report it as dry, milquetoast behavior: the guy is walking around strangely in the rain, looking at houses? I mean -- wouldn't a guy lying to set up the nigger in the neighborhood have him doing something a bit more damning? Like approaching houses? Windows? After all, with a purpose to kill, it would be a lot better for Zimmerman if the behavior was clearly and unequivocally criminal....wouldn't it?

However, it is not, as you say, necessarily true. Zimmerman might have been making it up. We don't know for sure. By the same token, we don't know he's lying either, right?

[Tero]

Coito, yes you have the right to defend your home against an invader. You can even shoot your spouse if you mistake them for an invader. But I do not need vigilantes or cops shooting anyone at my house. Once the burglar leaves they can arrest them or even shoot IF they are threatened.

None of these apply here. A car is following M and he looks around. He is suspicious of Z. Z sees him acting weird.

[Coito ergo sum]

Coito, yes you have the right to defend your home against an invader. You can even shoot your spouse if you mistake them for an invader. But I do not need vigilantes or cops shooting anyone at my house. Once the burglar leaves they can arrest them or even shoot IF they are threatened.

None of these apply here. A car is following M and he looks around. He is suspicious of Z. Z sees him acting weird.

My scenario was designed to illustrate that sometimes property is worth defending by deadly force. The statement that property "never" is worth another person (especially a scumbag burglar's) life is what I was addressing there.

You don't even know that Zimmerman shot him as a vigilante.

It's reasonably possible that Zimmerman was calling the police to investigate, and that he was keeping an eye on Zimmerman to identify him for the police.

What applies here is that someone who lives in the neighborhood is allowed to report suspicious behavior to the police. It's certainly possible that someone who is suspected might become peeved, and react badly to be suspected. That doesn't mean the suspicion is misplaced, necessarily.

[Tero]

There is a point where suspicion becomes an intrusion. M had no interest in Z, only Z could initiate an interaction.

You can suspect me all you like and call 911. When the cops come, I will know who I am dealing with: cops. Mall cops: same thing.

[Coito ergo sum]

There is a point where suspicion becomes an intrusion. M had no interest in Z, only Z could initiate an interaction.

You can suspect me all you like and call 911. When the cops come, I will know who I am dealing with: cops. Mall cops: same thing.

Apparently, M developed an interest in Z from the mere fact of Z sitting in his car. Recall that Z was calling 911 from inside his vehicle, and reported M was staring at him and began to come towards Z. Then stopped. Then started to run off. Then Z exited his vehicle.

M certainly could initiate an interaction. There is no reason why he couldn't.

[Clinton Huxley]

How many Zimmermans could you fit on the head of a pin?

[maiforpeace]

If Zimerman had had any inkling of the forum thread he would inspire, he probably wouldn't have fired.

The only thing that keeps me interested at this point is my sick fascination wondering how long the participants, namely CES and Kiki will last. Kiki, just give in, haven't you learned anything around here?

[Coito ergo sum]

It's really creepy to just show up on forum threads in which one has no interest, and make general negative comments about the fact that others have in interest in the topic.

[Clinton Huxley]

If Zimerman had had any inkling of the forum thread he would inspire, he probably wouldn't have fired.

The only thing that keeps me interested at this point is my sick fascination wondering how long the participants, namely CES and Kiki will last. Kiki, just give in, haven't you learned anything around here?

CES is the Duracell bunny of futile argumentation....and just pretty creepy too....

[Coito ergo sum]

Troll on, MacDuff.

[Clinton Huxley]

Troll on, MacDuff.

My concern is really for your health, old chap.

[Warren Dew]

It's just stuff. Stuff is never equal to the life of any person.

What a pity. All those nameless medieval peasants who created the beautiful cathedrals of Europe toiled in vain because the only lasting memories of them are just stuff.