Formo
13 years ago

ok, let me simplify this entire issue with one simple question...

if zimmermann had listened to law enforcement he was speaking to on his phone who told him they were on their way & that he didn't need to continue following the kid, would the kid be dead?

pretty damn simple, right?

i don't wanna hear squat about this kids past or even the zimmermann dude's past, who's black, who's white, who's hispanic, & i sure as hell don't care what jesse jackson or al sharpton think either.

any person walking down the street doing nothing to you or your personal property does not deserve to be shot - PERIOD!!
it amazes me that some of you actually think this is all good, cool, & fine. WTF?!? i don't give two shits what the damn florida law says either - if nothing else, this guy was absolutely stalking & harassing this kid. convict his ass on that bare minimum.

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



A 911 operator isn't a law enforcement officer. And here's the transcript of the call:

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html 

He was following him BEFORE the operator tells him that there's no need for it. And at that point, Zimmerman acknowledges it and sounds as if he lost the kid at that point.

Again, the kid wasn't shot because he was walking down the street. You are reading into this too much. He was shot because he was on top of Zimmerman (evidence proves this). What's at question here is what caused the altercation.

BTW, he was a Neighborhood Watch person. Which means he 'patrols' his streets looking for suspicious behavior and then calls them in. He felt the kid (not from the neighborhood, which had some break-ins recently, looking at the houses) was a bit suspicious.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Zero2Cool
13 years ago
I'm cool with everything, until he gets out of his vehicle. Right there, he loses all right to claim self defense.

Edit, after reading the transcript, even more convinced the adult is in the wrong and had no business at all getting out of his vehicle. The dispatcher said they didn't need him to follow him. Yet, somehow after getting off the phone the adult and kid are together in a scuffle and the kid dies?

The adult did the right thing in reporting a suspicious person. I don't think anyone will question that. The problem I have is the adult was told it was not needed for him to follow the kid. Yet, the adult ends up getting punched in the face and kills the kid.
UserPostedImage
Formo
13 years ago

I think this comment is skipping the chain of events. If they are both walking along and the kid pops the adult in the nose, yes, I agree with the right to self defense on the part of the adult.

The kid is walking. The adult is following him in his vehicle. At this point, I ask myself, why does one follow someone and why? When are those intentions ever for the good?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Zimmerman is a Neighborhood Watch volunteer. It's what they do. What he did there was NOT illegal. And I'm willing to bet that most Neighborhood Watch volunteers do the same thing.

If I'm that kid (and I've been in a similar situation, once on foot, once in my car) I am in fear of my own personal safety.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



No doubt. But you kinda put yourself in that situation when you are out and about at night.

We do know that if the adult never leaves his vehicle, there is no altercation, would you agree? The adult had essentially two weapons, his car and gun. The kid has what to defend himself? Skittles? Ice Tea? True, the adult has NO CLUE what the kid has ... which makes me ask the next question ... why get out of your vehicle at all when you've already contacted the authorities?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



It sounded to me like he was already out of his car following the kid when told by the 911 operator that there was no need for him to follow him. I agree, he should have at least stayed in his SUV and followed him that way.

I'm simply not buying the adult claiming self defense when HE initiated the contact by following the kid and also getting out of his vehicle.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



He wasn't just following a kid, though. He was following a suspicious person. Again, we agree on the getting out of the car bit, though.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Formo
13 years ago

I'm cool with everything, until he gets out of his vehicle. Right there, he loses all right to claim self defense.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I disagree. He doesn't lose is right to claim self-defense. What if he just asked the kid "Hey, what are you doing out here?" and gets popped in the nose and attacked (remember the evidence)? I'm not saying that happened, I'm saying the line you draw isn't sufficient.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
4PackGirl
13 years ago
a 911 operator said it - she's in direct contact with law enforcement - stop arguing semantics.

i don't give a rat's ass if he's the king of the damn block - he had NO right to shoot another person. he was an overzealous wannabe who took the law into his own hands, acted a fool, & killed someone. how is that ok? if a law enforcement officer had done this, how would you feel then? would an officer have been justified in killing this kid or would you be all up in arms because we live in a 'police state'?

i live in an avid hunting community, my neighborhood is comprised of old men & their wives with alot of guns.
we watch each others houses, look out for each other, & make sure nobody suspicious is around. WITHOUT GUNS!!!
it's one thing to look out for each other, it's quite another to actively stalk/harass someone while you are carrying a weapon & then taking it upon yourself, even with law enforcement coming, to shoot another human being.

an innocent young man is dead...for no reason other than pure & complete stupidity.

Zero2Cool
13 years ago

I disagree. He doesn't lose his right to claim self-defense. What if he just asked the kid "Hey, what are you doing out here?" and gets popped in the nose and attacked (remember the evidence)? I'm not saying that happened, I'm saying the line you draw isn't sufficient.

Originally Posted by: Formo 



He does lose his right to claim self defense the second he stepped out of his vehicle AFTER following the kid around. He is a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, not a trained officer. He became the aggressor the second he stepped out of the vehicle, thus, removing any claim of self defense.

Perception.
Adult sees the kid kid as a suspicious person.
Kid sees adult as a threat to his safety.

As I said, I know the adult was doing his "responsibility" by reporting a suspicious person, I'm cool with that. I'm even fine with him tailing the kid until police arrived. But you can't follow some kid around, suspicious person or not, with a car, then get out of the car, get punched and shoot them and claim self defense.


Try to keep this fact in mind ... if he does not get out of his car, he does NOT get popped in the nose! Remember the evidence?

Your obtuse attitude to human nature of self preservation is not sufficient. So there! 😛
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

a 911 operator said it - she's in direct contact with law enforcement - stop arguing semantics.

i don't give a rat's ass if he's the king of the damn block - he had NO right to shoot another person. he was an overzealous wannabe who took the law into his own hands, acted a fool, & killed someone. how is that ok? if a law enforcement officer had done this, how would you feel then? would an officer have been justified in killing this kid or would you be all up in arms because we live in a 'police state'?

i live in an avid hunting community, my neighborhood is comprised of old men & their wives with alot of guns.
we watch each others houses, look out for each other, & make sure nobody suspicious is around. WITHOUT GUNS!!!
it's one thing to look out for each other, it's quite another to actively stalk/harass someone while you are carrying a weapon & then taking it upon yourself, even with law enforcement coming, to shoot another human being.

an innocent young man is dead...for no reason other than pure & complete stupidity.

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



I bet if the adult wasn't carrying the gun, he doesn't get out of his vehicle at all.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago
Travon Martin was six three and about 140lbs.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/bestoftv/2012/03/27/ac-kth-trayvon-martin-witness.cnn 

The adult says he was returning to his vehicle after he lost him when the kid approached him and exchanged words and the kid punched him in the nose and hit him over and over.
UserPostedImage
Formo
13 years ago

a 911 operator said it - she's in direct contact with law enforcement - stop arguing semantics.

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



This is not semantics. This is actually pertinent information.

i don't give a rat's ass if he's the king of the damn block - he had NO right to shoot another person. he was an overzealous wannabe who took the law into his own hands, acted a fool, & killed someone. how is that ok? if a law enforcement officer had done this, how would you feel then? would an officer have been justified in killing this kid or would you be all up in arms because we live in a 'police state'?

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



I'm not defending Zimmerman so much as I am saying this is not the case of an innocent kid gets murdered because he's black. Which was and is exactly the main stream media has been trumpeting.

i live in an avid hunting community, my neighborhood is comprised of old men & their wives with alot of guns.
we watch each others houses, look out for each other, & make sure nobody suspicious is around. WITHOUT GUNS!!!
it's one thing to look out for each other, it's quite another to actively stalk/harass someone while you are carrying a weapon & then taking it upon yourself, even with law enforcement coming, to shoot another human being.

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



So, he shot the kid, in your eyes, because he was suspicious? Did you miss the part where the kid was mounted on Zimmerman bouncing his head off the ground?

an innocent young man is dead...for no reason other than pure & complete stupidity.

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



Agreed.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Formo
13 years ago

He does lose his right to claim self defense the second he stepped out of his vehicle AFTER following the kid around. He is a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, not a trained officer. He became the aggressor the second he stepped out of the vehicle, thus, removing any claim of self defense.

Perception.
Adult sees the kid kid as a suspicious person.
Kid sees adult as a threat to his safety.

As I said, I know the adult was doing his "responsibility" by reporting a suspicious person, I'm cool with that. I'm even fine with him tailing the kid until police arrived. But you can't follow some kid around, suspicious person or not, with a car, then get out of the car, get punched and shoot them and claim self defense.


Try to keep this fact in mind ... if he does not get out of his car, he does NOT get popped in the nose! Remember the evidence?

Your obtuse attitude to human nature of self preservation is not sufficient. So there! :P

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I'll remember this the next time someone steps out of their vehicle when arriving, unwanted, at my place of living. I'll be sure to point to your logic for my excuse of popping them in the nose.

You are painting with too broad of a brush.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Fan Shout
dfosterf (18-Aug) : We do have good depth at running back imo. Still so frustrating. Bitching about it is a futile excercise, which I plan to do anyway.
Mucky Tundra (17-Aug) : Whoops, I thought Zero was saying it was a surprise the Brewers lost and not Lloyd being hurt
Mucky Tundra (17-Aug) : Not a surprise; inevitable
Zero2Cool (17-Aug) : Brewers streak ends at 14
Zero2Cool (17-Aug) : SURPRISE
Mucky Tundra (17-Aug) : @mattschneidman Matt LaFleur on MarShawn Lloyd: “He’s gonna miss some time.”
Mucky Tundra (16-Aug) : CLIFFORD WITH THE TD WITH UNDER 2 TO GO!!!!!
Zero2Cool (16-Aug) : 90 MINUTES UNTIL FAKE KICKOFF!!
Martha Careful (16-Aug) : I think Ruven is a bot, but regardless should be stricken from the site.
Zero2Cool (14-Aug) : Packers RB Josh Jacobs ranked No. 33 in NFL 'Top 100'
dfosterf (13-Aug) : The LVN Musgrave collision- Andy Herman said Musgrave seemed to be the one most impacted injury-wise
dfosterf (13-Aug) : a lower back injury
dfosterf (13-Aug) : Doubs says he's "fine" after injury scare. Some reported it as z
Mucky Tundra (13-Aug) : With LVN that is; need to see what happens in the next practice
Mucky Tundra (13-Aug) : beast, reading about what happened, it sounded like one of those "two guys collide and are moving slow afterwards" type of deals
beast (12-Aug) : I believe Musgrave has been injured every single season since at least a Sophomore in highschool
packerfanoutwest (12-Aug) : Matt LaFleur: “Highly unlikely” Jordan Love plays more this preseason
dfosterf (12-Aug) : Doubs, Savion Williams, LVN, Musgrave all banged up to one degree or another, missing one here I forget
Zero2Cool (12-Aug) : RB Tyrion Davis-Price is signing with the Green Bay Packers.
Zero2Cool (12-Aug) : zero help, dominated. preseason
beast (12-Aug) : QB Jordan Love has surgery
beast (12-Aug) : Martha said Morgan had a lot of help, I didn't watch the OL so I can't say.
Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers LT Jordan Morgan did not allow a single pressure across 23 pass-blocking snaps vs. Jets last night, per PFF
Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : With buckeye and the reasonable couple, we're currently sitting at 10
buckeyepackfan (10-Aug) : Just posted to re-up on our FFL.
Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : If healthy after, then thats all I care. Well, no drops would be nice
wpr (10-Aug) : I made it through the 1st Q.
dfosterf (10-Aug) : Just gotta figure out how.
dfosterf (10-Aug) : Could have been a worse start, so there is that.
beast (10-Aug) : Yeah, someone tell the Packers football season has started, seems like they weren't ready for it
Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : Sooooooo many penalties
Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : It may only be preseason, but this game is a trip to the dentist
Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers do bad -- FREAK OUT!!!!!!
Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers do good -- eh only preseason
dfosterf (10-Aug) : Well that half was fun
Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Great, zayne is down
Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : 13 minutes away from kickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkoffff
Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : Had Celebration of Life for my uncle up north. wicked rain hope it dont come south
Mucky Tundra (9-Aug) : THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ARE PLAYING FOOTBALL TONIGHT!!!!!! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!!!!
Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : Woo-hoo
TheKanataThrilla (9-Aug) : NFL Network is broadcasting the game tonight, but not in Canada. Not sure why as no local television is showing the game.
beast (8-Aug) : But the Return from IR designations had to be applied by the 53 man cutdown.
beast (8-Aug) : It's a new rule, so it's not clear, but my understanding was that they could be IR'd at any time
Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : *had to be IRed at 53
Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : beast, I thought the designate return from IR players had to be IR at cutdowns to 53, not before
beast (8-Aug) : It's a brand new rule, either last season or this season, prior, all pre-season IRs were done for the season
beast (8-Aug) : But the Packers would have to use one for their return from IR spots on him, when they cut down to 53.
beast (8-Aug) : I think the NFL recently changed the IR rules, so maybe the season might not be over for OL Glover.
Zero2Cool (8-Aug) : Packers star Howton, first NFLPA prez, dies at 95 😔
dfosterf (8-Aug) : Apparently it is too complicated for several to follow your simple instructions, but I digress
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Aug / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

21-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

19-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Aug / Around The NFL / isaiah

18-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / beast

15-Aug / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

13-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

12-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

12-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.