I don't know....seems there are alot of people that would love to be a member of a lynch mob.
Even though they were not there when it went down, and only have the info handed out my the "media".
I just hope that whoever ends up on the jury in this case, makes their decisions based ONLY on the facts provided in the trial, and not on their own racial agenda. Or the fear that if they don't pin the guilt on someone, that they might be targeted by the same "lynch mob".

I guess i'm a member of the "minority". I can't decide either way guilt or innocence, as i am not allowed to see all the real evidence in this case.

Is Zimmerman guilty of a crime? I don't truely know. And i won't pass judgement just so i can be a member of the mob.
Maybe he is guilty of a crime. If so, then i hope justice is done. If not, then i hope justice is done as well.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 

You can't follow someone around, then get out of your vehicle and shoot them after they punched you. You frickin confronted them!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I don't think his attentions were to kill the kid, I don't believe that at all. I believe he wanted to find the people robbing the neighborhood and was overzealous in his actions.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Edit, realized I didn't even answer your question.

The adult said on the 911 call that the individual is in his late teens, has something wrong with him maybe on drugs ... is told he is not needed to follow the individual, yet he does anyway even after saying he looks suspicious. Why? He obviously knows there's a danger because he brings his gun. You can't admit all those things, follow someone around, leave your vehicle WITH A GUN and then claim self defense. It just doesn't make sense.

He doesn't leave his vehicle if he doesn't have that gun, I believe this firmly.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

You can believe whatever you want to believe.. But I know this.. If you are a card carrying, licensed and registered gun owner, you are trained and taught to NEVER LEAVE HOME WITHOUT IT. The reasoning is so you are comfortable with a gun on your hip/pit (wherever you choose to holster it). Zimmerman brought his gun not because of the 'danger' that Trayvon may have posed to him, but because he also brings his gun grocery shopping and to the movie theater (I don't know a single hand gun owner who doesn't keep his weapon on his body at all times).

I guarantee you your line of thinking is helped along by Hollywood when we see our 'hero/heroine' grab his weapon out from his dash, check that it's loaded and primed and then leaves their car. This never happens IRL with LEGIT gun owners.

Originally Posted by: Formo 

Get off your gun toting kick. I'm not saying he's wrong for carrying his gun, I am saying the gun gave him "power" that without, he most likely would not have left his vehicle to confront the suspicious individual whom be thought was to be on drugs or at least had "something wrong with him".

I wish for once, just once, you'd quit taking things out of context and twisting my words around. You're a bright person, like debating with you but when you continue to do this, it's as progressive as talking to a brick wall.

I ignore your last comment because you have absolutely no clue how or what I'm thinking at all and any such portrayal by yourself is grossly disrespectful and I appreciate you never doing such again.



Here's a question for you. What should be the consequence for what happened? The kid lost his life because he was profiled (NOT racially). What consequence should the adult receive in your opinion?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I wasn't debating anything with you. I was informing you on the facts of gun ownership. Ignore it as you will, though.

Originally Posted by: Formo 

A woman in Florida was being strangled by her husband and she tried escaping. She ran to her car in the garage, but forgot her keys. She grabbed her gun and went back in the home to get them. The husband said he was going to kill her. Woman fired off the gun. She's not serving 20 years in prison. The woman claimed 'stand your ground' law as her defense and a judge in the case rejected the request, saying her decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety.

I mention this because if she can't use stand your ground, neither can George Zimmerman. As I've been trying to say, if he was in fear of his life, why did he leave his vehicle and pursue on foot?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool