Another Zimmerman?

[tpeichel]

in the scenario presented the guy didn't seem to be any any danger. rushing
at someone isn't an action with needs to be defended with deadly force. Maybe if the person had a weapon, but even if a guy plans to physically attack another that doesn't always give him the right to shoot.

yeah he shouldnt have went across the street....should have watched out the window liek i do my neighbors who fight all the time.

if he pulls a gun on me i say "hey we were just walking" if he says hes calling the police...then fine i just sit there or stand there. no need to get shot, but since he does have a gun drawn id say it is ok to fire at him. he has intent to shoot by pulling a gun out on someone therefore you have the right to shoot him due to self defense or in georges defense feeling as if you are going to die.


and i agree, dont put yourself into a situation that would cause someone to pull a gun out on you, yeah some people are nuts.

the thing with trayvon was he shouldnt have turned around to zim...should have kept walking...he cause the fight by hitting george according to testimony.....if he would have just went home he would be alive...even if george told him to come here...he should have ignored him............he probably got mad at him for following and went to confront him, got mad, hit him, scuffled, and george shot him out of self defense.

Ann Althouse was posting on her blog that she believed that Zimmerman's defense may have misunderstood Jeantel's testimony and that Robinson may have believed that Zimmerman was a child molester following him, so he jumped him rather than leading him home where his little brother was.

Probably nothing, but something the defense should have clarified as it would have been a possible explanation for who initiated the confrontation.

[habsheaven]

Ann Althouse was posting on her blog that she believed that Zimmerman's defense may have misunderstood Jeantel's testimony and that Robinson may have believed that Zimmerman was a child molester following him, so he jumped him rather than leading him home where his little brother was.

Probably nothing, but something the defense should have clarified as it would have been a possible explanation for who initiated the confrontation.

Why would the defense care one way or the other what Martin's (not sure why you keep calling him Robinson?) reason for jumping Zimmerman was? The prosecution may care, but they were going on the theory that Martin DIDN'T jump Zimmerman, so explaining why he might have would be problematic.

[jlzinck]

I didn't want to start another thread so I will just add to this.
This picture was also used on Monday or Tuesday on Yahoo with the title "The Next Zimmerman?"


So I opened the story and the old man was on trial for killing his neighbor who he accused of beaking into his house and stealing things. He confronted the CHILD (correct useage here) and shot him in front of his mother.

How would this be the next Zimmerman? If he had been found not guilty I would join in the protests.

He was found guilty as he should have been.

So veg please use the term race baiters where it should be. With the media and the likes of Al Sharpton

http://news.yahoo.com/wis-man-76-gui...185219975.html

[Wickabee]

You mean Master Race Baters

In the caucus?

[SLNoble13]

Here's an interesting question. Say you are out walking eith yiur friends and some guy thinks you are breaking into cars and he pulls a gun on you. Is it self defense if you shoot him when he has a gun drawn on you?

I am a firearms instructor for the state of North Carolina. We are taught and teach the definition of self defense and how the law sees it. You have to have 3 elements present to claim self-defense: ability, opportunity and jeopardy.

For your scenario: a guy pulls a gun on you while you are out walking wth your friends who thinks he saw you breaking into cars.

Ability - Does the guy have the ability to cause you serious bodily injury or death? YES
Opportunity - Is there a chance for you to get injured or die? YES
Jeopardy - Is your life in risk? YES

So, if you did pull out a gun and shoot this guy, you have have a claim of self defense that will be held up in court.

[Wickabee]

I am a firearms instructor for the state of North Carolina. We are taught and teach the definition of self defense and how the law sees it. You have to have 3 elements present to claim self-defense: ability, opportunity and jeopardy.

So if I'm sitting in a room with a dude who can kill me and Alex Trebek is on TV asking question I can shoot the guy?


Sorry, had to.

[SLNoble13]

So if I'm sitting in a room with a dude who can kill me and Alex Trebek is on TV asking question I can shoot the guy?


Sorry, had to.

LOL! Do you want me to answer your question?

[stlcardinalsfan]

It's not probably....that IS what happened....

ive been for george 100% since the beginning.
only reason i said probably is because we simply do not know for fact......though most likely that is what happned.

[Wickabee]

Ooh, I'll take ape tit for $400

[Star_Cards]

I am a firearms instructor for the state of North Carolina. We are taught and teach the definition of self defense and how the law sees it. You have to have 3 elements present to claim self-defense: ability, opportunity and jeopardy.

For your scenario: a guy pulls a gun on you while you are out walking wth your friends who thinks he saw you breaking into cars.

Ability - Does the guy have the ability to cause you serious bodily injury or death? YES
Opportunity - Is there a chance for you to get injured or die? YES
Jeopardy - Is your life in risk? YES

So, if you did pull out a gun and shoot this guy, you have have a claim of self defense that will be held up in court.

interesting. so I find it odd that a guy would feel the need to go out and pull a weapon on a people who he thought might be breaking into cars. In the original scenario the person rushing the gun owner is also defending himself, just with not the optimum weapon within the showdown.