Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

[Coito ergo sum]

The "teen" is certainly allowed to stand his ground.

However, stand your ground does not mean you can attack someone who is following you. Stand your ground means that you are already in a situation where it would be reasonable to engage in self-defense. Stand your ground means that you do not have to run away, even if it is a reasonable option to run away.

In other words, were Martin accused of assaulting Zimmerman, he could show that he acted in self-defense and he would not be required to run away even if it was reasonable.

In the present case, Zimmerman has been charged and has raised the issue of self-defense. If what Zimmerman says is true, then stand your ground doesn't come into play, because there was nowhere for him to run anyway, as he was down on his back with Martin on top of him being pummeled.

What you and others are doing is adding facts and also bringing in irrelevancies. Basically, I gather from your recitations that you think Zimmerman "started it" by either being there in his truck lurking, or following Martin through the community, and "being armed." The fact is, none of that is an attack or an assault on Martin, so that stuff does not create in Martin a right to self-defense. I.e. - even if I credit you with all your assertions as true - that Zimmerman was armed in his truck, saw Martin, and got out and followed him, none of that is illegal at all. He can go where he wants, just as Martin could.

So, why does Zimmerman have some credible claim of self defense here? Not because Martin was merely in the neighborhood hanging around or whatever -- but, because he claims Martin attacked him, AND there is investigatory and forensic evidence that corroborates his claim. Will it be enough to create reasonable doubt? Maybe, maybe not. We shall see.

But, all this talk about Zimmerman not having any authority from the police or the homeowners association -- the fact that he was armed - the fact that he called out to Martin asking what he was doing there -- the fact that he followed Martin after Martin ran off -- none of that is "wrong" and none of it would justify Martin in attacking Zimmerman. If it did -- if we lived in a world where that was true, then people would have the right to attack anyone who approached them. They don't.

[Tero]

The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend.[167] She then heard Martin say, "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing before the phone went dead. She immediately attempted to call him back, but was unable to reach him.

What an idiot. I hope he testifies just to prove what an idiot we all think he was. An obviously armed stranger comes up to a black teen, who may feel like he is a little out of place, or at least knows of prejudice.

This is not how you open dialog ("What are you doing around here?" ). If there is a crime in progress you take the gun out and yell out in a commanding voice. But there was no crime!

[Seth]

The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend.[167] She then heard Martin say, "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing before the phone went dead. She immediately attempted to call him back, but was unable to reach him.

What an idiot. I hope he testifies just to prove what an idiot we all think he was. An obviously armed stranger comes up to a black teen, who may feel like he is a little out of place, or at least knows of prejudice.

This is not how you open dialog ("What are you doing around here?" ). If there is a crime in progress you take the gun out and yell out in a commanding voice. But there was no crime!

It's a private, closed, gated community and Martin was not a known resident. Zimmerman, and anybody else living in the complex, has full authority to approach anyone they don't recognize and ask "what are you doing around here."

That's not an attack, it's a perfectly reasonable thing for a resident of a gated community to do.

[Tero]

Untrained security dude approaches a person, who must at first assumption be assumed a resident or guest. He is not burgling. You say in a threatening voice: What are YOU doing here?

Very professional. Not likely to defuse the situation. If it were me I would answer: And who the hell are you?

See? He wasn't doing a good job.

[Tyrannical]

Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman punching him before he was shot and killed. That is one of the few facts we know to be true because it was proved with forensic evidence as seen on TV's Dexter.

[Coito ergo sum]

Untrained security dude approaches a person, who must at first assumption be assumed a resident or guest. He is not burgling. You say in a threatening voice: What are YOU doing here?

Very professional. Not likely to defuse the situation. If it were me I would answer: And who the hell are you?

See? He wasn't doing a good job.

Notice that you did not say that you would attack him, and start banging his head on the ground.

[Coito ergo sum]

The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend.[167] She then heard Martin say, "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing before the phone went dead. She immediately attempted to call him back, but was unable to reach him.

What an idiot. I hope he testifies just to prove what an idiot we all think he was. An obviously armed stranger comes up to a black teen, who may feel like he is a little out of place, or at least knows of prejudice.

This is not how you open dialog ("What are you doing around here?" ). If there is a crime in progress you take the gun out and yell out in a commanding voice. But there was no crime!

It's a private, closed, gated community and Martin was not a known resident. Zimmerman, and anybody else living in the complex, has full authority to approach anyone they don't recognize and ask "what are you doing around here."

That's not an attack, it's a perfectly reasonable thing for a resident of a gated community to do.

Actually, it's broader than that, anyone, even those not living in the complex, have "full authority" to approach anyone else in public and ask "what are you doing around here?"

[Tero]

I'm not a 16 year old teenager. I try to avoid urban teenagers. My 100 dollars in my pocket is too much a temptation for them.

So these people in the gated community could all walk around with concealed weapons interrogating each other? Sounds like a plan. Then at least we would have a few armed patriots shooting each other as burglars. Less patriots around to shoot me.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm not a 16 year old teenager. I try to avoid urban teenagers. My 100 dollars in my pocket is too much a temptation for them.

So these people in the gated community could all walk around with concealed weapons interrogating each other? Sounds like a plan. Then at least we would have a few armed patriots shooting each other as burglars. Less patriots around to shoot me.

If by interrogate, you mean that when out in public people can say stuff to each other, even stuff with question marks at the end -- well, sure. Why wouldn't they? LOL What sort of country would it be if people couldn't ask each other questions on the street without some sort of advance permission?

People with concealed carry permits can, in fact, walk around with concealed weapons. Yes.

What does all your nonsense mean? Look - even if Zimmerman acted stupidly, that doesn't mean he loses his right of self defense. And, if you holler at someone out and about in a community "what are you doing here?" that doesn't mean they can attack you and you have no right of self defense.

[Tero]

Well we don't know what was said. We know Z had a gun in his pocket. It affected the way he communicated. Two guards, both armed, can approach a suspect, get the info and calm down the sitution without guns. One male, untrained, cannot.

Without a gun then and now, Z would still be in his truck looking for evil doers in his gated community.

[Coito ergo sum]

Well we don't know what was said.

Oh, I thought you stated above what was said. But, i'll agree to this -- we do not know.

We know Z had a gun in his pocket.

Legally owned and carried.

It affected the way he communicated.

You know that? Or, you are speculating that it did?

Two guards, both armed, can approach a suspect, get the info and calm down the sitution without guns. One male, untrained, cannot.

Another thing you know? Well, alas, even if true, this point is wholly irrelevant.

Without a gun then and now, Z would still be in his truck looking for evil doers in his gated community.

And, this is relevant....how?

[Tero]

Because the gun led to the confrontation. You come out of the truck with baseball bat in hand, the suspect will run off, most of the time.

[Coito ergo sum]

Because the gun led to the confrontation. You come out of the truck with baseball bat in hand, the suspect will run off, most of the time.

uhhh wut...?

"The gun led to the confrontation?"

Are you making the following argument:

1. Zimmerman had a gun.
2. having the gun caused him to be more confrontational with Martin
3. That justified Martin attacking him
4. therefore Zimmerman could not avail himself of self-defense with the gun.

Is that what you're arguing?

If not, please lay out how the "gun led to the confrontation?" And, how does that deprive Zimmerman of self-defense?

[Tero]

Absolutely. Gun on your belt makes you the alpha male. He had a visible holster:

Within eight minutes, Mr. Martin was dead from a gunshot wound to the chest, his body crumpled on a stretch of grass behind a row of town houses. When the first officer arrived at 7:17, Mr. Zimmerman was waiting not far from the body. He raised his hands in surrender before relinquishing his 9-millimeter pistol from the holster in his waistband.


Google for source.

[Seth]

Untrained security dude approaches a person, who must at first assumption be assumed a resident or guest. He is not burgling. You say in a threatening voice: What are YOU doing here?

Very professional. Not likely to defuse the situation. If it were me I would answer: And who the hell are you?

See? He wasn't doing a good job.

Doesn't matter how good a job he was doing, and you'd be perfectly justified in answering that way. What you would NOT be justified in doing is to attack him for a perceived slight.

If such a person approached me I'd say "I'm going about my lawful occasions" and then I'd walk away. If he wants to call the police that's up to him, and he can follow me as much as he likes as long as he doesn't physically attack me.

And that's what the record shows Zimmerman did. He approached Martin, asked him what he was doing and Martin ran off. Zimmerman went back to his truck only to find Martin attacking him from behind. On the ground, on his back with Martin on top of him smashing his head on the concrete, Zimmerman justifiably felt that his life was in danger so he shot his attacker, just as I would have done.

If that's how it happened, and a jury will decide that, then Zimmerman will not be convicted of a crime.