It happens before you know it.Better pull out the rocking chair .Any day now...
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It happens before you know it.Better pull out the rocking chair .Any day now...
Pffft. Life doesn't even begin before one reaches 40. Little puppies....Late young? Early middle age? LOL!!! Sorry if you are still in your 20's there is no way in my mind to try and twist it to "getting on in years".
And if he is that fragile and aged why the heck is he running around playing rambo?
I have a 23 yo that is exactly his height and around the same weight.Sure he has a little extra around the middle but he's no weakling .
For all we know Zimmerman started it and it was Martin who was defending himself. Of course we will probably never know because Martin wasn't there to tell his side of the story.
I find it highly unlikely that a fully grown man needed to "defend" himself against a lanky teenager who was 5'6" or 5'8" at the most, weighing 140-150 pounds. Zimmerman acted like a power-hungry cop in some tin-pot dictatorship like Russia or North Korea who shoots at unarmed protestors and then claims "self-defense".
a lanky teenager who was 5'6" or 5'8" at the most, weighing 140-150 pounds.
Because Martin had a nametag that said 'Hi, my name is Trayvon", right?I think Zimmerman should have been found guilty. He had no business following Trayvon around in the first place, and had Trayvon been a white kid named Tommy instead,
I bet you're wrong.I'll bet that Zimmerman wouldn't have even taken any action.
You don't know that he didn't listen. He said "ok". What proof do you have that Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after he said "ok"?The police told him to back off but he didn't listen.
You're making so many assumptions which are not proved by the evidence.He should have at least been found guilty of manslaughter. Even if he wasn't looking for a fight (which I don't believe), he certainly acted out of order and was negligent in his actions. Let's remember that Zimmerman got a trial; Trayvon didn't even get that - Zimmerman decided he was judge, jury and executioner on the spot.
Pffft. Life doesn't even begin before one reaches 40. Little puppies....
You know you're getting old when you think the clerk in the store left their lollipop on the counter to come and chat you up. I remember one time when I actually asked some exuberant youth if I could speak to their mommy or daddy. (True story.)
5'11". Taller than Zimmerman. And only 30 lbs lighter.
5'11". Taller than Zimmerman. And only 30 lbs lighter.
You can stop right there. I wasn't making an argument or offering commentary. I was correcting someone's numbers.O.K but at the same time...
Having said that even .I do not believe the height /weight/age difference between them left Zimmerman a helpless defensless rag doll at the complete mercy of Trayvon.Just not buying it.
Oh, and then there's the fact that EVEN IF Treyvon initiated a physical confrontation, he likely had every right to do so; he was being followed, harassed, and likely threatened by a man with a gun, who was not a cop, had no authority to be doing what he was doing, and had actually been told by REAL AUTHORITIES to stay in his car.
If I was being followed by a guy with a gun who was harassing me and accusing me of crimes on the basis of the color of my skin, I likely would have bashed his head into the pavement as well- and would be entirely justified in doing so.
30 lbs lighter... In other words, the defense's narrative about Treyvon attacking Zimmerman, sitting on his chest and pounding his head into the ground is close to a physical impossibility.
Not to mention that, even if God intervened and granted the strength of Samson to Treyvon, so he COULD hold down a grown man and bash his head into the ground (pretend, for the time being, that this is even REMOTELY PLAUSIBLE), Zimmerman had his gun holstered on the back of his belt- he would have been lying on it, and presumably unable to access it.
And the prosecution never brought this hole in the defense's fictional narrative to the attention of the jurors. Nor did they challenge the witness who tried to justify Zimmerman's racial profiling. Nor did they provide an alternative narrative to the defense's FAIRY TALE.
In other words, the prosecution mailed it in, and given how incompetent they were- not following basic procedures in any criminal prosecution- they should probably be investigated for collusion, or at the very least incompetence on an epic scale.
With a legitimate prosecution, its hard to say whether justice would have miscarried again anyways, but it certainly couldn't have hurt.
A sad chapter in the history of American jurisprudence.
Is survival instinct relevant here? I'm asking both sides who are critical and who are supportive of the jury's verdict.
Question:
Is it entirely possible that both parties were operating from survival instinct? I'd brought up instinct before in another thread when a woman was being molested on a bus and her actions were debated. I brought up my own experience of "fight or flight" instinctive response when assaulted. One doesn't think, one simply acts.
I will also admit that I have not watched the trial, and have only paid attention to the responses from the trial itself (I find the national conversation much more interesting). I was very skeptical of Zimmerman's case when I first heard the story, but not hearing testimony beyond soundbites and I've only seen bits here and there from the trial.
So, I'm reading this thread and just digesting what I can. But the thought did pop up in my head as to how people act and react when they feel they are in imminent danger.
My opinion is not informed enough to be reasonable on Zimmermans innocence, I think. The national conversation on gun laws, the state of Florida (same state that acquitted Casey Anthony, too), racism (black, white, and hispanic), and neighborhood watches have interested me more. It's certainly opened up a lot to talk about, sadly because of the shooting death of a teenaged boy.
Is survival instinct relevant here? I'm asking both sides who are critical and who are supportive of the jury's verdict.
Zimmerman didn't know Martin wasn't armed.On the recording ot the police he made reference as well that he was reaching into his waste band .(probably for his cell phone because he was NOT armed).
This interview sheds light on what TM might've thought of GZ's intentions.I think so.I think both of them had the "hair raised on the back of their neck".Trayvon knew he was being followed by some creepy stranger and had no idea why.Zimmerman had decided he was following some sort of criminal up to no good.On the recording ot the police he made reference as well that he was reaching into his waste band .(probably for his cell phone because he was NOT armed).
Zimmerman didn't know Martin wasn't armed.
This is an oft repeated inaccuracy.The POLICE told him NOT to.