A question for 'Trayvon supporters'

How do you know who swung first? How do you know who the instigator was? If you can not take a few punches and can't stand losing a fight, do not get in one to start with. So in Florida, can I get in a fight, purposely start losing that fight, and then shoot my opponent dead and claim self-defense? Im not saying Zimmerman purposely started losing the fight, but we all have lapses of judgement and in times of anger we can do stupid things. Could there be a possibility that anger instead of fear caused Zimmerman to kill Trayvon?

Even if it was fear, does his fear justify homicide? If I am scared of death of clowns and a clown trys to pat me on my back can I shoot the clown dead? From my perspective I am at fear for my life, does that justify murder? Zimmerman was big, buff, took MMA classes, and took many self defense courses. Do you think a person, like Zimmerman, who has much experience with combat really believes that a bloody nose and a couple scratches are fatal? No, he knew his life wasn't in danger, he went overboard, committed murder, and used his knowledge of law to his advantage.

 

That is hypothetical and no eye witnesses have come forth to attest to what you claim. In fact the only eye witness to testify claims Martin was the aggressor and over Zimmerman pummeling him in MMA style. There was no aggression on the part of Zimmerman. He never brandish his weapon until he drew and fired the one shot that killed Martin. Your what if's are just that and have NO bearing on the truth or the Facts in this case.

 

If you're one who just wants to START trouble, I would rather you end up 6' under before someone senselessly loses their life.

 

Again that is all hypothetical. The prosecution has never claimed that Zimmerman took the first swing, and all indications and facts point to Zimmerman being sucker punched and then being attacked MMA style having his head slammed against the concrete walk at least twice. The prosecution has never be able to turn that around even with their only eyewitness who claimed he saw Martin over Zimmerman.
Come back with some facts and we'll discuss them.

 

I'm not here to argue with you. I don't go looking for trouble. I was asked a question and I answered. I am a septuagenarian and a licensed concealed weapons carrier for more than 50 years. I have yet to draw my weapon to protect myself, but I am prepared to protect my family and myself if attacked. BTW I practice at least once a week with my .45cal. Damn if ammo isn't getting expensive. Looks like I have to start reloading my own ammo again.

 

That's another hypothetical. There's no proof in what to say. In point of fact, John Good's testimony for the prosecution seems to blow that out of the water.

 

I can respect the wisdom that comes with age. And that's something that I do not think Mr. Zimmerman exhibited. I'm not trying to say that makes him 'guilty'... but his lack of better judgment led to a terrible outcome.

 

That only means Trayvon turned around and returned to confront him.

 

They became criminally irresponsible when he killed someone. Thats why we are having this conversation.

- - - Updated - - -

Or Zimmerman ran and caught up to him.

 

Exactly! And that was explained in a previous post of mine as to why that may have happened.

 

Stop being so silly. Post something substantive if you expect to be taken seriously.

 

And that is what I think happened as well. But, I do not know that as fact. But that is what I honestly believe without taking sides. I believe Martin was quicker, but Zimmerman was stronger. Zimmerman was taking the punishment while bringing his gun up.

 

Or Zimmerman ran and caught up to him.

Impossible. Martin had two minutes to cover 35 yards to get home. Even at the slowest pace he would be home well before Zimmerman had finished his phone call.

He clearly never went home but decided to confront Zimmerman. Martin was the aggressor.

 

Being taken seriously is negated by your suppositions. Being serious is not speaking for a jury. Being taken seriously is not insulting the name of a dead person.

When you suggest that someone be taken seriously, look at yourself first.

 

yes, because normally someone with a weapon undrawn goes up to a black person and asks "what are you doing" and then waits to get the living sh*t beat out of them to fire - is someone who has a lust for killing blacks.

 

Why shouldn't I insult Thugvon? He was a creep. Why should I be forbidden from discussing his (lack of) character?

 

Pure speculation.

 

And you have gathered all the information - from where, exactly?

 

Various sources. Not everyone is out to see only one side of the story. I started out as a Thugvon supporter.

- - - Updated - - -

Various sources. Not everyone is out to see only one side of the story. I started out as a Thugvon supporter.