RobertNashville

"What say you? is a question already answered below...  

I seem to remember reading something in an old book about that sort of thing...something to do with planks, splinters and eyes.  ;)

We have some great attorney's on TGO that contribute a lot to the forum but I don't know of any of them who is following every minute of the trial as it's been happening even moment by moment during testimony...he's also done in depth analysis of major elements of the case (such as the title of this thread) and posted it here. Andrew has done that and much more and oh my god, he's mentioned the second edition of his excellent book on self-defense...how awful.  :rolleyes:   The complaints of Andrew not being a "vendor" on TGO might hold a little more substance were it not that Andrew seems to believe that George Zimmerman is not guilty of a crime and those who seem upset about Andrew mentioning his book have been staunchly pro-Martin from the very beginning.  :shrug:

Apparently there are some among us who can't tell the difference between someone taking their time to post large amounts of information who also happens to have a new edition of a book for sale and those who come here simply to sell their product. I find it rather difficult to believe that David and all the mods aren't already aware of this thread and Andrew's book - if they have a problem with it I'm sure they would have taken action by now.

Thanks for keeping us informed, Andrew...it's appreciated; at least by most of us. ;)

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened. Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.   If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

Stupid is as stupid does I suppose. Dog catcher is quite a stretch...head of the garbage department maybe but I wouldn't even bet on that.

That may be a perfectly workable solution and if the zombie hordes ever attack I may want to try this but other than that I I just don't think I want to take an FN-FAL magazine that I've worked over with a Dremel tool and then stick it in a $3,000+ rifle just to save a few bucks on the cost of magazines. ;)

I bought four or five a few weeks ago; there weren't inexpensive but not really any more expensive than they have been (especially for FDE)...I probably should buy a few more though. ;)

Massad mentioned the Colonel many times during the weekend. It was very evident that he had a great deal of respect for the Colonel and equally obvious that there were points they did not agree on.   Part of that was that Colonel Cooper was coming from an background of the military and that showed through in some of his teaching and opinions.  But what works excellently well on a battlefield doesn't necessarily mean it's the right thing for the armed citizen (or LEO) on the street and that's part of what caused their difference of opinions on some things.

Looks like the kid got exactly what he was looking for...making an ass of himself and getting attention.  With this kind of attitude and thought processes I wouldn't be surprised of this punk isn't up for a Darwin Award at some point.   'Ol Leonard would be proud.

  Zoning and use laws are much more important than whether someone mows his grass or not and the potential harm to others when such rules are not followed is most definitely an injury, real and quantifiable; your refusal to acknowledge that notwithstanding.   You can throw around words like tyranny all you want but you are sounding ridiculous; when people chose to live in communities in close proximity to each other there must be rules...those who don't want to submit to those rules need to seek to change them or live somewhere else and neither those rules nor their choice impact anyone else in any way.   Your duplicity is showing...you cry about tyranny but if you could you would tell the people of Turtle Creek, PA how they should live because you don't like their choices.   :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:     If you don't like zoning laws your problem is withe the Constitution and with the Supreme Court; the issue was addressed in 1926.

  Apparently some folks are watching a different trail than I have been...the prosecution's own witnesses have, in some cases, confirmed Zimmerman's recounting of events and none of them have offered anything to disprove Zimmerman's account and we haven't even gotten to the defense's case yet!   Of course, nothing will ever be enough for some people...if they either want/believe Zimmerman is guilty there isn't anything that's going to change their minds.

Maybe I'm just noticing more or maybe it's getting reported more but there seems to be an increase in the past few years of police/LEO shooting dogs at things like traffic stops, serving warrants, etc. Sometimes this is clearly understandable but many times they are shooting dogs that couldn't possibly present a risk to anyone (other than irritating their eardrums)...that just isn't right.

  Calling something like zoning laws "tyranny" doesn't make it so any more than calling a horse an ox makes it an ox.   What I call tyrannical (and laughable) are people who think they know better how people in Turtle Creek Pennsylvania should live than the people who actually live there...it seems very close to telling people how they should live all the while claiming that only tyrants tell people how they should live.   :rofl:

  The quote was "suggesting you are having chest pains"; "suggesting" seeming to indicate that you aren't actually having chest pains, just "suggesting" that you are (most people call that lying).  The scene of a SD shooting is not the place to play little gamse with the truth...if you really are having chest pains or experiencing some other medical emergency then fine...ask to go to the hospital; if you aren't then don't or be prepared to be found out to be a liar.

Based on what we know it seems like a completley appropriate use of SD but I can see lot's of potential pitfalls for the clerk.   Hopefully, the investigating officers and the DA will see it the clerk's way.

No, not anything close to the same thing at all.   When did Zimmerman lie about his injuries? When did he demand medical treatment that he didn't need in order to avoid making a statement?  When, for that matter did Zimmerman ever refuse to cooperate, even to his possible detriment, with either the responding officers or the investigating officers? The answer would be “he didn’t” or “never”.   The one overriding thing a suspect should NEVER do is lie to law enforcement. If you do lie, it may well not matter at all if you were justified in using deadly force or not.

If stating the trugh forces the comparrison, so be it.   I'm getting really tired of so-called "freedom loving" people liking the Constitutin when things go their way but throwing around words like "tyranny" when people use the Constitution in precisely the way it was designed.  I've see real tyranny...99.99% of the people in this country don't have a clue what tyranny actually is.

Do you have even a remote clue how insulting it is to insinuate that someone who has worn the uniform for eight years (active) and still does in a minor way is a “communist”.  If you’ve served you should understand that, if you haven’t then you’ll never understand which is a pity.   I’m not talking about “committees” and you damn well know it…frankly it’s pretty disingenuous of you to purposely mislead people by claiming that I am. Of course it's alwasy easier to throw insults around than to actually discuss an issue isn't it.   The VOTERS voting in what laws they want to have is not a “committee”; it’s called democracy…voting in representatives who then pass laws the community wants is called a representative democracy. If you don’t like that process then too bad because that IS the process set up by our Constitution.   A lot of people who throw around words like "tyranny" will concurrently proclaim how much they honor and respect and want to follow the Constitution but it seems that they only honor and respect the Constitution when things go the way THEY think things sould be done. :rolleyes:

The only truly good defense to something like this is preventing it by being aware...it's so darn easy to get complacient but the sad trut today is that we we when we allow that to happen we open ourselves up to being surprised.   It's pretty much universally true, especially when it comes to an armed encounter, that ACTION beats RE-ACTION...once somoene has a gun pointed at you it's almost a certainty that he is going to be able to pull the trugger before you can get your weapon out of a holster or wherever you keep it; espeically if you are in the "cage" of a vehicle.

  Gues what happens when you try that...you get tansported to the hospital where they determine that ther is nothing wrong with you. Now everyone knows you are a liar...guess what the investigaring officers and the DA are going to think?  Gues what will come out at trial?   It's important that a person be cautions of what he says and how he says it but there is one universal truth in this situation; when you do speak TELL THE TRUTH; criminals lie.

  What you want to call tyranny others call freedom of choice and freedom of association.   There is simply nothing tyrannical about a group of people who live in the same community agreeing to live under a set of rules of conduct...no one is forced to live in that community and there is always a process for changing the rules.   An entire community (city, county, etc), through their elected officials, deciding on certain codes of conduct is also not "tyranny"; it is exactly the representative democratic process the Constitution calls for.  Again; no one is require to live in any community if they don't like the rules...there is also a proscribed process to change rules that people don't like or think is unfair or believe is an infringement of their individual rights.   A citizen's right to use his property in the way he wishes ENDS when his actions affect another person negatively...recognizing that is not an acceptance of "tyranny", soft or otherwise. Rather, it's a recognition that NO ONE's RIGHTS exist in a vacuum.   I don't want to live next-door to someone who won't mow his grass...I don't want to live next-door to someone who decides to turn his residence into a storefront and have people coming and going at all hours of the night...I don't want to live next-door to someone who suddenly decides to raise livestock in his backyard so I CHOSE to live in a community with other people who also don't want to live next-door to people who do what I mentioned above so I/we chose to live in communities where such things are regulated as a matter of law and/or by dead restrictions and/or though homeowner associations. THAT is my right as a free citizen.   We have a Constitutionally proscribed democratic process for stopping rules or changing rules that actually are tyrannical but I am beginning to suspect that a lot of people use the word "tyranny" simply as a means to denigrate because that's a lot easier than doing the heavy lifting of actually changing rules that are truly tyrannical.

I think someone WHO JUST JOINED TODAY might do well to know somethng about a member here before they start speaking  :poop:  about him and insulting him.

I'm not sure which it is but it does seem that some people (and not just on this forum) who seem to feel this is all Zimmerman's fault because he got out of his vehicle...for those folks I doubt any evidence will ever convince them otherwise.