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 (29m) : tell her I reckon
dfosterf (30m) : Micah Robinson cut. Probable PS player tomorrow. Has to call mom back and t
Zero2Cool (3h) : New site so much better. Might make switch and deal with it.
dfosterf (3h) : Mecole Hardman to our practice squad
dfosterf (3h) : Nick Nieman from Texans our 5th linebacker. Special teams signing
TheKanataThrilla (4h) : Looks like we signed Clayton Tune as QB3
wpr (4h) : TKT people lose their minds over QB3. Point is almost none of them are ready that's why they are on the PS and other teams don't take them.
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Unfortunately he doesn't seem ready to be an emergency QB.
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : As a Canadian and a follower of Canadian University football. I am rooting for him
dfosterf (5h) : I bet a lot of us will follow the Taylor Elgersma journey with interest. Personally, got a Kurt Warner vibe goin' on. I like him
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Not sure if either will be claimed though.
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Tune or Hooker would make sense
dfosterf (5h) : Clayton Tune cut by the Cards? Don't know if that's the guy, we shall see
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : Per Bill Huber, the Packers will not be bringing back Taylor Elgersma or Sean Clifford on the practice squad, so a new third quarterback
Mucky Tundra (6h) : Schefter must have deleted his tweet
dfosterf (8h) : Hopefully Jerry reaches under the seat cushions and ashtrays of his jet and scrapes up the 45 million apr and spares us further nonsense
dfosterf (8h) : Have to admit the PO'd Cowboy fan videos would be fun to watch. Problem with draft picks is half their fanbase barely knows what that is
beast (8h) : I think Cowboys fans are ready to get their pitch forks and burning sticks if Jerry were to trade Micah
dfosterf (8h) : If Jerry traded Micah to GB, here in northern Va. they would have to quick build yet another data center to handle the internet hate traffic
Zero2Cool (9h) : its signing and trades that you don't hear about, other then announced
Zero2Cool (9h) : If you hear rumors about Packers sign or trade, won't happen. Not how they work
dfosterf (9h) : 19 players in a contract year. Jones called loss to us worst loss in Cowboy history. Forget Parsons trade. Not happenin' Cap'n
packerfanoutwest (10h) : The Packers, meanwhile, are the youngest team in the league for the third consecutive year.
dfosterf (12h) : That it was darkest before the dawn in Bengals and Commanders before they got deals done
Zero2Cool (12h) : what is Schefter saying?
dfosterf (12h) : He was getting Dorito infusion therapy
dfosterf (12h) : He's outta shape. Why, just the other day I saw him splayed out on the trainers table
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Parsons has followed Rasheed Walker on Twitter. Quite the choice
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Kuhn is a former player who works for the team, if somethings going down, he would be close to it
Mucky Tundra (19h) : @kuhnj30 Micah Freaking Parsons
Mucky Tundra (19h) : A LOT of buzz on the Bird App regarding Parsons; even Schefter is saying it's serious
dfosterf (26-Aug) : *Orzech*
dfosterf (26-Aug) : Orzich long snapper 3 yr extension
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : Packers signed someone for three year deal
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : lol i know it's insane ... sign up for the waiver wire then you'll know
wpr (26-Aug) : YES!!!!!!
Mucky Tundra (26-Aug) : WE WANT THE LIST! WE WANT THE LIST!
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : @JJLahey · 2m Holy crap, Packers, where the heck is the list?
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : haha folks on Tweeter every year this time ... 'where is list Packers!!" hahaha
wpr (26-Aug) : He played pretty good.
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : NAZIR STACKHOUSE HAS MADE THE 53
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : NOOOOO KALEN IS GONE
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : Kalen King and Kamal Hadden making it. me thinks
schroeder84 (26-Aug) : @dfosterf I suspect Elgersma WILL be hard to hide. Raw, but talented
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : pp.com is broken, halt testing, gotta go do work things for a bit
hardrocker950 (26-Aug) : Mecole Hardman was released, to the surprise of few
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : PP.com updated. Reset Password works, and now User Profile pages are a thing
Zero2Cool (25-Aug) : Soft hope plan is having fantasy football weekly on-site that i build. cannot do that with this setup.
Zero2Cool (25-Aug) : It's older technology, resource hog, cannot be upgraded/changed. That's to start.
packerfanoutwest (25-Aug) : Ok, but what is wrong with this site?
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
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

11h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

25-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

24-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Aug / Around The NFL / beast

23-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

22-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

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