Don't think this is how the "stand your ground law" works

[tnhawk]

As of 11:46 this am, the Grand Jury will not be looking at this case.

http://news.blogs.cn...tion/?hpt=hp_t1

Don't ya hate it when facts ruin a good story?

[RobertNashville]

So what? That's my opinion. Why does that bother you so much? Did daddy not come to your baseball games when you were a kid? Is that where this insecurity comes from that you can't handle people having a different opinion than yours? If my opinion is such an affront to you because it challenges yours then you need to talk to a shrink and figure out why that is.

Humm...the person who was complaining about all the alleged "personal attacks" going on decides to attack me personally by deriding my upbringing finishing by suggesting I need psychological help...what a stunning surprise.

It doesn't bother me that you hold a different opinion...it bothers me that a person is willing to hold such a resolute and unshakable opinion that is based on carefully chosen "facts" (at the exclusion of others) and filling in the blanks with innuendo and assertions...it's intellectually dishonest and yes, that bothers me.

Edited April 9, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Mr. Brooks]

I know you are joking, but there's no way it would fit the legal definition of stalking. Stalking requires repeated behavior, not a one-time event. Regardless whether it fits a legal definition, if you are walking down the road and some fella is following you then "stalking" might be the term that pops in yer head. If a hunter is stalking a deer or turkey, then if the hunter is any good it is a one-time event and wouldn't fit the legal definition.

If a fella is following me down the street the term that would pop in my head is "following", unless I'm doing me darnedest to vilify his actions. Maybe that's just me though.

[RobertNashville]

Don't ya hate it when facts ruin a good story?

Or a carefully crafted opinion.

[TMF]

Humm...the person who was complaining about all the alleged "personal attacks" going on decides to attack me personally by deriding my upbringing finishing by suggesting I need psychological help...what a stunning surprise.

It doesn't bother me that you hold a different opinion...it bothers me that a person is willing to hold such a resolute and unshakable opinion that is based on carefully chosen "facts" (at the exclusion of others) and filling in the blanks with innuendo and assertions...it's intellectually dishonest and yes, that bothers me.

Personal attacks? I'm just trying to help you out.

[E4 No More]

Personal attacks? I'm just trying to help you out.

Not that my dog is in this fight but I saw it as a bit of a personal attack. Just say'n.

[mikegideon]

Not that my dog is in this fight but I saw it as a bit of a personal attack. Just say'n.

They've been scrappin' for days. They need skittles. Everybody knows that just holding a bag of skittles will make you non-confrontational.

My apologies for calling them they. They are individuals.

[Mr. Brooks]

My apologies for calling them they. They are individuals.

[mikegideon]

Snippet from some CNN noise. Could she have had a slip of the tongue?

Corey said previously that she had never used a grand jury to decide on charges in a justifiable homicide case.

[E4 No More]

They've been scrappin' for days. They need skittles. Everybody knows that just holding a bag of skittles will make you non-confrontational.

My apologies for calling them they. They are individuals.

The scrappin' is pretty much why I've shied away from this thread. People that have far more access to the evidence and witness testimonies will make the decision no matter what we think. To argue about it seems a bit silly to me. Edited April 9, 2012 by SWJewellTN

[RobertNashville]

Personal attacks? I'm just trying to help you out.

No...suggesting I need psychological help...making stupid remarks about my "dad" is not "helping"; they are a personal attack on me and I'm sure quite intentionally so.

That you would chose to do so speaks volumes about your character.

Edited April 9, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Guest Lester Weevils]

If a fella is following me down the street the term that would pop in my head is "following", unless I'm doing me darnedest to vilify his actions. Maybe that's just me though.

Hi Mr Brooks

Semantics. If the guy behind just happens to be going the same direction, it would seem to better fit "following". If I'm walkin down the street and a fella behind appears to have more on his mind than just walking in the same direction, then it would get the spidey sense going. The "enhanced vigilance" toward the situation would not be vilifying the fella who may or may not intend me harm. But I'd start getting prepared to respond to the situation if need be.

Ferinstance if I cross over to the other side of the street and the guy behind just accidentally does the same, then the defcon would definitely get elevated. If I take off running and the guy comes looking for me, then its gonna begin to appear a lot more than some guy just accidentally going the same direction. No vilification to it. That is just how the situation would appear, given the evidence.

Edited April 9, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Mr. Brooks]

Like I said, maybe that's just me. If you feel the need to use inaccurate words to describe things that's your choice.

Edited April 9, 2012 by Mr. Brooks

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Like I said, maybe that's just me. If you feel the need to use inaccurate words to describe things that's your choice.

Thanks Mr. Brooks

The english language has lots of words for a reason, though I don't pretend to be infallible in their use.

'Following' does not seem exactly the correct word though it is a matter of taste and I don't pretend to have good taste. If you are sorely unhappy with 'stalking' then perhaps better descriptors than 'following' for the perceived situation, could include 'persuing', 'tailing', 'dogging' or 'shadowing'? Thesaurus would turn up many more possibles.

Various dictionary definitions. Perhaps the applicability of the term would depend on how stealthily the persuer is operating.

stalk·er

noun

1. A person who pursues game, prey, or a person stealthily.

v.intr.

1. To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.

2. To move threateningly or menacingly.

3. To track prey or quarry.

v.tr.

1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.

2. To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.

3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry.

Noun

1. stalking - a hunt for game carried on by following it stealthily or waiting in ambush

2. stalking - the act of following prey stealthily

[RobertNashville]

...'Following' does not seem exactly the correct word though it is a matter of taste and I don't pretend to have good taste. If you are sorely unhappy with 'stalking' then perhaps better descriptors than 'following' for the perceived situation, could include 'persuing', 'tailing', 'dogging' or 'shadowing'? Thesaurus would turn up many more possibles...

I've seen nothing to suggest that Zimmerman was doing anything close to stalking or even following; at lest not following in the active way some want to suggest was done.

I would suggest that it was more likely that Zimmerman was trying to see where Martin was going/went to - he did "lose him" if I recall correctly, even to the extent of apparently giving up and going back to his vehicle. Conjecture on my part but it's conjecture based on experience of seeing someone I though was "out of place/suspicious" and trying to keep an eye on where he was going while waiting for the police to arrive to check out the person.

[Smith]

I've seen nothing to suggest that Zimmerman was doing anything close to stalking or even following; at lest not following in the active way some want to suggest was done.

I would suggest that it was more likely that Zimmerman was trying to see where Martin was going/went to - he did "lose him" if I recall correctly, even to the extent of apparently giving up and going back to his vehicle. Conjecture on my part but it's conjecture based on experience of seeing someone I though was "out of place/suspicious" and trying to keep an eye on where he was going while waiting for the police to arrive to check out the person.

Stalker!

[mikegideon]

Enjoy...

http://therealgeorgezimmerman.com/

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I didn't know anyone was scamming on him, but I don't doubt it. Probably some liberal progressive kid living

in his parent's basement.

[kieefer]

I saw a People magazine on the stands today with a picture of the 13yr old Martin. Pretty sad.

Carry on.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yeh, they've been that crap for years. Just another liar trying to change things up for us.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/09/zimmerman-family-challenges-holder-on-new-black-panthers-says-no-arrests-based-solely-on-your-race/

Ironic, to say the least.

[mikegideon]

Looks like the Ocommie admin is being called out for showing their true colors. This could get a lot uglier before it gets better.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I hope it gets so ugly it causes a real crisis in the White House. The more I keep reading the more angry I get.

And it really has nothing to do with Zimmerman, but that story should be Eric Holder's downfall.

[mikegideon]

I hope it gets so ugly it causes a real crisis in the White House. The more I keep reading the more angry I get.

And it really has nothing to do with Zimmerman, but that story should be Eric Holder's downfall.

One wrong turn, and it could really hurt Obama. it SHOULD be Holder's downfall. Instead, it may be Obama's.

[East_TN_Patriot]

On an ironic side note, one of my students asked me to help with their "Justice for Trayvon" event planned for this week somewhere in Knoxville. I haven't drafted a response yet, nor have I read their ideas, but I definitely need to do that tomorrow. I'm curious to see if anything we have discussed in class has stuck.

Edited April 10, 2012 by East_TN_Patriot