Leaderboard

Because Martin's use/posession was a recent/current activity that a). was the cause of him not currently being in school at the time; . was supposedly the reason why he was staying with relatives where he was at near Zimmerman's neighborhood; c). Was the topic of current/recent posts on his Facebook page; d). may have been a contributing factor to his actions on the night of his death. One was where he was supposed to be, the other wasn't. The one who was is not required to go home and cower in his basement for fear of asking the other what he's doing there walking through yards. The one who doesn't belong there needn't act like a thug and attack the one who lives there as he's walking back to his truck and standing down because he wanted to act all bad and impress his friends. It is absolutely logical to think that Martin instigated the events. Zimmerman had him under surveillance, Martin didn't like him, Martin ditched him, Zimmerman lost him and proceeded back to his vehicle, Martin followed and ambushed Zimmerman. This is what the facts and timeline of events bring out.

I consider having the back of your head forcibly slammed, possbily repeatedly, on concrete a life threatening situation.

The prosecutor is handling this case in a way that leads me to think that the case against Zimmerman is extremely weak. First: She does not take this case to grand jury, but instead charges him via an information. Most prosecutors I know love to get grand jury indictments for their cases, and it is quite easy to get an indictment, as well. This tells me that she thinks a grand jury would not find enough PC for charging Zimmerman. Charging via an information will probably lead to a PC hearing in front of one judge. I guess she hopes to get a sympathetic judge, so she can continue the case. Second: 2nd degree murder is a big time overcharge in this case, and I highly doubt Zimmerman would ever get convicted of that. Manslaughter? Maybe, but the recent evidence coming out is making that look unlikely. She may be hoping to charge high in hopes of getting Zimmerman to plea to a lesser charge. Honestly, this whole case smacks of political correctness. They are doing it to appease the liberal media and the race-baiters (Sharpton/Jackson).

Cops, Popo, Deputy, LEO what ever you call them they are doing a job that MOST of us would NOT want to do. Are there bad apples in the bunch? Sure but there are bad apples in every bunch. We cannot condemn the whole for the actions of a few. Punish the offenders and move on. I also agree with every post Dolomite has posted, the perp should not any anyway be able to sue the Dept. Sue the individual accused officers, but not the Dept. Just my 0.02, now I am going to go play dinosaurs with my 5 year old.

Another suggestion get another control panel for the alarm installed in the bed room.

No one ever has to lash out, for any reason. He didn't need to touch Zimmerman, at all, no matter what Zimmerman had said to him or how he may have looked at him, or whatever. Until someone touches a person and it becomes physical, there is no reason to lash out at the other person, otherwise that make the 'lasher' the guilty party.

The fact of the matter of this case is that Zimmerman was arrested to silence the mob that Sharpton and his types stirred up. The chief of police down there is on record saying that the evidence corroborates his claim of a self-defense shooting and that is why no arrest was made initially. Plain and simple this man wasn't arrested on the scene and shouldn't have been arrested afterwards at all.

The jury selection will decide this and I see this coming. He'll never get a fair trial becuse there has to be some minorites on it and they have their minds made up before the trial.

This isn't about the gun, I think. It's more likely Detroit wants to avoid paying a pension to a guy who's two years away from retiring.

Lets ban abortions and start castrations instead.

That went out of style not long after the clothing in your avatar. You silly old man. You cant use the word "responsibility" in conversation today.

Disappointing. I was looking forward to playing what is just about the only game no one can win

Interesting picture Nologic just sent me.

What Zimmerman, Martin medical reports tell us and the media didn't http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/16/what-zimmerman-martin-medical-reports-tell-us-and-media-didnt/ From the article - "The new medical reports on the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case tell us a lot. And it is not just for what they find, but also what they don’t find. First, the reports provide striking evidence that Zimmerman did not start the fight with Martin, and that Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense. Martin’s injuries were two-fold: broken skin on his knuckles and the fatal gunshot wound. Zimmerman’s injuries involved: a fractured nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury. It takes considerable force to break the skin on multiple knuckles. The large range of injuries on Zimmerman indicates that the Martin’s attack was prolonged. But here is what is missing: where are the injuries to Zimmerman’s hands? Where are the bruises on Martin’s face or other parts of his body? The evidence paints a picture where Martin was the only person landing blows. " "The broken skin on Martin’s knuckles and Zimmerman’s wounds obviously provide some justification for self-defense. But if Zimmerman is to have justifiably used self-defense, he can’t have provoked Martin’s attack. The affidavit filed by the prosecutor against Zimmerman was extremely weak and had many glaring omissions. It does not answer the most crucial question: Who attacked whom? All it states is: “Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.†“Confronted†does not mean “provoked†or “assaulted.†It may mean that Zimmerman merely followed Martin and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood. Surely Zimmerman had the right to investigate a strange person in his neighborhood. But, in any case, Zimmerman simply asking Martin why he was in the neighborhood doesn’t give Martin the right to start striking him or pounding his head into the concrete sidewalk. Simple words do not justify hitting someone. " Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/16/what-zimmerman-martin-medical-reports-tell-us-and-media-didnt/#ixzz1vFzSy83z

So the security guard at Walmart or Kroger is instigating the alleged shoplifter if he follows them around and keeps them under surveillance? (and before you refute that Zimmerman was not authorized in his own neighborhood or had no authority, see the next section below) Zimmerman was keeping Martin under surveillance because: 1. There had already been robberies/burglaries in the neighborhood 2. Zimmerman was on the neighborhood watch group (not self-appointed as some may wish/spin) 3. a. Martin was dressed similar to suspects in previous robberies/burglaries; b. Martin was acting suspiciously and walking close to buildings rather than on sidewalk or in the street 4. Zimmerman did call 9-11 and report the situation (not something you do if you are intent on killing someone) 5. Zimmerman replied to the 9-11 dispatch operator when asked for a description of the suspicious person (Martin) that he could not positively see the race of the individual (thereby dispelling any spin on his actions being racially motivated. So, you've decided that Casey Anthony was guilty even after a court let her off? Sounds like your mind is made up here as well, and interestingly most of the evidence released to the public thus far supports Zimmerman. Hmmmm...

Hey guys, I'm working on a portfolio of images about "firearm lifestyle" or "gun culture" haven't quite come up with a name for the body of work yet, but I figured I'd post it and let you guys see it! I went out yesterday and took some portraits of Jeff from Gunblast.com. Jeff was a really nice guy, and has some REALLY nice guns. Let me know what you think, I may approach some of you to participate in the project as well. Here's a link to my blog. -a

I don't want him to be guilty, I just think that it's logical that he instigated the incident. This is the part that makes him guilty of manslaughter because he entered into a scenario that he knew he may have have to use deadly force. If Martin had been committing a crime then I would think different. The reason I say it is logical that Z instigated it is because he had admitted to following him. The only way for Martin to have instigated it would to attack him unprovoked. Since there is no evidence that Martin has done this before or had the intent to conduct such an attack when he went out for snacks suggests to me that Z instigated the incident. Martin wasn't following Z when the 911 call was made, it was the other way around. In fact Z was out of breath which suggests he was running. I have no problem with someone protecting their neighborhood from criminals, but no one has any evidence that Martin was committing a crime. Z did not witness him commit a crime. How/why did these two come face to face then? It just doesn't seem logical that Martin just got a wild hair and decided to beat the crap out of the next person he saw. Does this mean I would convict him based on what I know or my logic? No, that's why we have courts. But I still will have an opinion on this because I'm not sitting on a jury. If he did nothing wrong he has nothing to worry about. Casey Anthony got away with killing her kid just a few miles up the road where Zimmerman will be tried. Just another thing to add, before I heard the 911 tape I thought there was more to it. I figured Martin was up to no good and a citizen tried to stop him and had to defend himself. After hearing the 911 tape I don't believe that anymore. Walking home isn't a crime. Running away from someone following you isn't a crime. Cutting through yards to flee someone following suggests to me his rational fear of Zimmerman. Until someone can point out to me why a young man walking home from the store is a crime worthy of armed pursuit I will hold this opinion.

This.

Herein lies the (your) confusion. What, do we have to go back several weeks and rehash all of this stuff all over again?!?! It wasn't as plain and simple and innocent as Martin simply out for a stroll and Zimmerman saying to himself "I'm gonna get me a black kid/guy". 1. There had already been robberies/burglaries in the neighborhood 2. Zimmerman was on the neighborhood watch group (not self-appointed as some may wish/spin) 3. a. Martin was dressed similar to suspects in previous robberies/burglaries; b. Martin was acting suspiciously and walking close to buildings rather than on sidewalk or in the street 4. Zimmerman did call 9-11 and report the situation (not something you do if you are intent on killing someone) 5. Zimmerman replied to the 9-11 dispatch operator when asked for a description of the suspicious person (Martin) that he could not positively see the race of the individual (thereby dispelling any spin on his actions being racially motivated. All of this has been established as fact up to this point. Just based on these known facts, it is virtually impossible to spin it to make Zimmerman a racist vigilante out to kill himself a black person. Those who have an agenda and those who have not closely followed the case act as if Zimmerman, the police and whoever else are just now making up a lot of this stuff, months after the incident, when in fact all of this was known at the time and only days after the incident. All of these things support what Zimmerman said happened. If he was just saying this now, two months later, that might be cause for suspicion of what actually went on, but these things were known from close to the time of the incident before this incident was known beyond it's local region and before it became a national story. And as more evidence and witnesses come out, it ALL seems to support Zimmerman. So I don't see any racist bigots here, not Zimmerman, and not those who believe his story based on the facts. (edited for punctuation that caused an unintended emoticon)

I agree with you. But GZ is not charged with manslaughter, he is charged with murder 2. I think getting out of his car and getting near the suspect was dumb on many levels. I would be a lot more neutral if the charges WERE manslaughter. I do not think GZ is an angel nor can I defend his actions (because they make no logical sense). But I do have an axe to grind with the president, media, race baiters, and more with their BS, from the kid picture of TM to forcing GZ into hiding with death threats. GZ's life has already been examined in the press and dragged thru the mud. Its TM's turn now.

Zimmerman will walk, and, if his attorney is smart, counter-sue the race baiters for $50 million. This type of crap has to come to a quick halt.

Any o you guys call me Francis, I'll kill you.

Another reason not to allow him to sue is it is the citizens who pay for it and they did not beat the kid. Or if they allow the kid to sue he can only bring a personal suit against the officers and not their employer. Dolomite

Lighten up, Francis

True, none of are. But, from everything that we have heard Martin was minding his own business until zimmerman injected himself into the last few minutes of Martins life. That is the big issue that I have with this situation. After having a lot of time to think about this issue and stepping back from that other thread I have decided that had I been on the ground in zimmermans position I would have also shot Martin simply based on my current age and level of fitness. However, I will maintain that Zimmerman is still liable because he started the ball rolling.

Hippy lettuce doesn't make anyone violent or more prone to violent behavior. All it shows is that he wasn't the innocent little boy some have attempted to portray.

Yeah, this being a senator for one day and getting retirement for life b.s. needs to end. For ALL politicians. They are supposed to serve us, to represent us, not to be a special elite class of royalty. And they always seem to come home richer than when they went into public service.

Zimmerman will walk. Take that to the bank.

They were definitely just wanting to avoid having to pay retirement pension. You know the politicians are still going to get their retirement pay for all the hard "work" they've done for the city, but not the guy who actually does the work.

Yep... the first person to take a swing commited a crime. It may be the ONLY real crime in the case, if the shooting was really self defense.

Near daily examples? That is completely laughable. Remember, only the bad stuff gets reported by the media, and posted on the gun boards (sadly, TGO is seeing more and more of this constant cop-bashing). Most people could care less about the good stuff police do everyday. It is a thankless job. Are there bad cops out there? Yes. Just like there bad doctors, bad lawyers, and even bad gun owners. I bet you get upset when the media uses the actions a bad gun owner to portray all guns and gun owners as bad, but you seem to want to do the same thing when it comes to law enforcement. It's called hypocrisy.

You have to remember that it is a cop-bashers job to only post the negative actions or a few in law enforcement, and to not acknowledge the good deeds that the rest of them do everyday. Whether it is in our area or not, they use whatever they can find in an attempt to make all LE look bad.

Pot in his system only made him LESS likely to do anything violent. I'm thinking that if he was really buzzed, the bag of Skittles would have been empty.

I think Zimmerman will eventually walk. I believe he is an aggressive person that actively sought out people during his neighborhood watch duties. He called 911, 46 times, prior to Treyvon. But all that said I don't think he's guilty of 2nd degree murder, or even manslaughter. I also heard that the original investigation from the Sanford police recommended a manslaughter charge and the DA didn't think there was enough evidence to convict. Then steps in the "Special Ed" prosecutor who throws out 2nd degree.

Good, I F'in hate Memphis anyway. Funny how it's justified to tax the citizens for commuting to work where they earn money that they are taxed on, only to "ease the burden" on the local government for it's programs that the tax payers already pay for. Nothing but horesh*t.

Well, it was pretty dumb that he didn't immediately call the police to turn the firearm in, but hardly anything to fire a person over.

Zombies, the greatest metaphor ever devised......and if you have to ask, maybe it's best you not know.

Buy wwb to practice with. Buy a couple of boxes of the defensive round of your choice. Shoot one box of the self defense rounds to check function and POI vs. POA. Move on with life. Don't overthink this.

We have yet to figure out how to make people immortal, and for good reason. 100 bucks says if that were ever figured out it would be outlawed except for politicians.

No I think he would be crying and sick we have not headed his warning. Where are we headed.

Oh, it's "legal". It's just not constitutional. One more kink in the system that needs fixin'. I don't remember what the limits are on seizing cash, but they're low. I've gotten into arguments with other officers about the laws on seizing peoples' cash. If they get locked up and you seize the cash along with a pound of dope, fine. If you find a wad of cash and there's no proof of illegal activity, you leave it the **** alone! Legal or not, it's what is right.

Well... I got it! I picked up a OD Green with ALL the goodies and a Blackhawk paddle holster for $900.00. Everyone I've spoken to said I might as well have worn a ski mask to get it. (implying I stole it. haha, how witty) That being said, I have to say that I REALLY love this gun. Ammo is scarce, and the damn thing puts off a foot and a half fireball when you fire it, but DAMN! Accurate, loud, and lighter than a nerf gun! And those bullets are pretty wicked. Anyway, I appreciate all of the awesome feedback! I have to say, this forum is my new favorite place to completely give in to total firearm addiction. <--- unrelated. but still pretty damn funny. Kool-Aid man FTW! lol