Steve_S Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted July 16, 2013 I was a WalMart manger for a couple of years, I saw our AP people pepper sprayed, punched, kicked and almost run over. So, yes if you are following a criminal, you should assume it is a dangerous situation How many 17 year old boys broke one of your employee's noses and smashed their head repeatedly into concrete, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) The one voice we don't hear is Martin's. People seem to feel very free to accuse him of just about everything, to malign his name and to rubbish his memory. He remains silent in the tomb. <<<Edited to remove profanity and a racial slur.>>> I realize that you were just posting a statement that was made by one of the witnesses in this trial, but please refrain from repeating things that are profane and/or racist language. Per ToS (which can be found here: http://www.worthychristianforums.com/index.php?app=forums&module=extras§ion=boardrules): The use of profanity will not be tolerated. This includes sexually explicit, vulgar, or other profane language or usernames as well as any any signs or symbols that suggests such. Do not post sexually explicit, vulgar or offensive website addresses (URL's) to the forum. (Eph. 4: 29) Edited July 16, 2013 by Steve_S Removed Profanity/Racial slur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Junior Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 105 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 25 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/06/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/08/1952 Share Posted July 16, 2013 Those states that have "Stand Your Ground Laws", like Florida, have, basically, legallized murder, when done properly, as George Zimmerman has done.We can all "thank" the National Rifle Association for having had these laws passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted July 16, 2013 Those states that have "Stand Your Ground Laws", like Florida, have, basically, legallized murder, when done properly, as George Zimmerman has done. We can all "thank" the National Rifle Association for having had these laws passed. Zimmerman wasn't acquitted under stand your ground, he was acquitted using a basic claim of self defense. They chose to forego the stand your ground hearing (which is heard by a judge) in lieu of a more classic self defense argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDavis Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,740 Content Per Day: 0.44 Reputation: 183 Days Won: 7 Joined: 07/02/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1964 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 but a vigilante is not a good thing to have around. One can be observant, vigilant and care about safety without killing someone. JD, you can be a good logical person, but unfortunately, you stepped outside of logic here. What I mean is this - can you prove Zimmerman was being a vigilante? Following someone in order to observe his behavior and trace his steps is not taking the law into his hands.. Unless one can provide sufficient evidence that Zimmerman has the intention of tackling Martin or tying him down or hitting him or even shooting him, then you can't accuse him of being a vigilante. I do not believe that Zimmerman had any intention of shooting anyone. I believe that he viewed himself more highly than he should have and that he put himself in a situation that he found out very quickly he was not capable of handling. The result of this was a dead human. And while I agree with the court verdict based on the evidence, one can be legally innocent but not morally so. There is no evidence he was told to carry a gun, that is his own story. According to testimony from the police, Zimmerman was asked to be part of a citizens patrol program but wanted to part in it. Why is that? When a person is placed in a life or death situation, that person is number one, and has every right to advance his right to live over the other. Anyone who has a license to carry a gun is in essence "told" it is OK to carry one. People should not needlessly place themselves in life and death situations. The outcome is rarely a good one, as we have seen. Unless you think it is good that Martin is dead Do you really believe that tracking someone's whereabouts is placing oneself in a dangerous life or death situation? Why? Do you admit that Martin was dangerous, then? Yes, I think that tracking the whereabouts of a criminal is placing oneself in danger, don't you? What do you expect the criminal to do when he sees you tracking him? ask you nicely to stop? Clearly Martin was dangerous, he was kicking the butt of adult male. or maybe it was just Zimmerman's lack of ability that makes Martin seem dangerous. So, you think Martin was a criminal? Not an innocent child? I think he was neither. But clearly Martin thought he was a criminal or he would not have been following him. If you follow someone you view to be a criminal, you better be prepared for all situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDavis Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,740 Content Per Day: 0.44 Reputation: 183 Days Won: 7 Joined: 07/02/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1964 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 I was a WalMart manger for a couple of years, I saw our AP people pepper sprayed, punched, kicked and almost run over. So, yes if you are following a criminal, you should assume it is a dangerous situation How many 17 year old boys broke one of your employee's noses and smashed their head repeatedly into concrete, though? My AP guys were clearly better trained than Zimmerman, none of them would have been punked by a 17 year old boy. And none of them would have ever shot that 17 year old either. This is one of the problems with guns, they give people a sense of bravery and bravado they would not normally possess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,262 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,989 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted July 16, 2013 The one voice we don't hear is Martin's. People seem to feel very free to accuse him of just about everything, to malign his name and to rubbish his memory. He remains silent in the tomb. Only because the judge would not allow Travon's record to be used as evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted July 16, 2013 but a vigilante is not a good thing to have around. One can be observant, vigilant and care about safety without killing someone. JD, you can be a good logical person, but unfortunately, you stepped outside of logic here. What I mean is this - can you prove Zimmerman was being a vigilante? Following someone in order to observe his behavior and trace his steps is not taking the law into his hands.. Unless one can provide sufficient evidence that Zimmerman has the intention of tackling Martin or tying him down or hitting him or even shooting him, then you can't accuse him of being a vigilante. I do not believe that Zimmerman had any intention of shooting anyone. I believe that he viewed himself more highly than he should have and that he put himself in a situation that he found out very quickly he was not capable of handling. The result of this was a dead human. And while I agree with the court verdict based on the evidence, one can be legally innocent but not morally so. There is no evidence he was told to carry a gun, that is his own story. According to testimony from the police, Zimmerman was asked to be part of a citizens patrol program but wanted to part in it. Why is that? When a person is placed in a life or death situation, that person is number one, and has every right to advance his right to live over the other. Anyone who has a license to carry a gun is in essence "told" it is OK to carry one. People should not needlessly place themselves in life and death situations. The outcome is rarely a good one, as we have seen. Unless you think it is good that Martin is dead Do you really believe that tracking someone's whereabouts is placing oneself in a dangerous life or death situation? Why? Do you admit that Martin was dangerous, then? Yes, I think that tracking the whereabouts of a criminal is placing oneself in danger, don't you? What do you expect the criminal to do when he sees you tracking him? ask you nicely to stop? Clearly Martin was dangerous, he was kicking the butt of adult male. or maybe it was just Zimmerman's lack of ability that makes Martin seem dangerous. So, you think Martin was a criminal? Not an innocent child? I think he was neither. But clearly Martin thought he was a criminal or he would not have been following him. If you follow someone you view to be a criminal, you better be prepared for all situations. No, Zimmerman didn't think he was a criminal. He was checking the suspiciousness of Martin's behaviour out. Many people do it, and he is one of them. My father was a highly observant person, and worked in security for many years and would have done the exact same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDavis Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,740 Content Per Day: 0.44 Reputation: 183 Days Won: 7 Joined: 07/02/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1964 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 but a vigilante is not a good thing to have around. One can be observant, vigilant and care about safety without killing someone. JD, you can be a good logical person, but unfortunately, you stepped outside of logic here. What I mean is this - can you prove Zimmerman was being a vigilante? Following someone in order to observe his behavior and trace his steps is not taking the law into his hands.. Unless one can provide sufficient evidence that Zimmerman has the intention of tackling Martin or tying him down or hitting him or even shooting him, then you can't accuse him of being a vigilante. I do not believe that Zimmerman had any intention of shooting anyone. I believe that he viewed himself more highly than he should have and that he put himself in a situation that he found out very quickly he was not capable of handling. The result of this was a dead human. And while I agree with the court verdict based on the evidence, one can be legally innocent but not morally so. There is no evidence he was told to carry a gun, that is his own story. According to testimony from the police, Zimmerman was asked to be part of a citizens patrol program but wanted to part in it. Why is that? When a person is placed in a life or death situation, that person is number one, and has every right to advance his right to live over the other. Anyone who has a license to carry a gun is in essence "told" it is OK to carry one. People should not needlessly place themselves in life and death situations. The outcome is rarely a good one, as we have seen. Unless you think it is good that Martin is dead Do you really believe that tracking someone's whereabouts is placing oneself in a dangerous life or death situation? Why? Do you admit that Martin was dangerous, then? Yes, I think that tracking the whereabouts of a criminal is placing oneself in danger, don't you? What do you expect the criminal to do when he sees you tracking him? ask you nicely to stop? Clearly Martin was dangerous, he was kicking the butt of adult male. or maybe it was just Zimmerman's lack of ability that makes Martin seem dangerous. So, you think Martin was a criminal? Not an innocent child? I think he was neither. But clearly Martin thought he was a criminal or he would not have been following him. If you follow someone you view to be a criminal, you better be prepared for all situations. No, Zimmerman didn't think he was a criminal. He was checking the suspiciousness of Martin's behaviour out. Many people do it, and he is one of them. My father was a highly observant person, and worked in security for many years and would have done the exact same thing. So he was following Martin because he felt Martin was just a kid walking to his girl friends house? I don't think so. Zimmerman thought he was suspicious, suspicious in the way of a criminal. that is why he followed him. If you father would do so, I hope for his sake he is better able to handle himself than Zimmerman was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted July 16, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted July 16, 2013 So he was following Martin because he felt Martin was just a kid walking to his girl friends house? I don't think so. Zimmerman thought he was suspicious, suspicious in the way of a criminal. that is why he followed him. If you father would do so, I hope for his sake he is better able to handle himself than Zimmerman was. No, he was following Martin for the reasons I have already stated....suspicious behaviour. You don't let suspicious people get out of eyesight. You help the police by keeping track of their whereabouts. It doesn't mean you dog them, but it does mean you keep your distance---which he was doing. My father refused to take a job where a gun was required. He would have called the police and stayed a safe distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts