Zimmerman Did Nothing Wrong
I was going to stay out of the Zimmerman/ Martin fray but after reading some shameless news and commentary, I decided to weigh in on at least one aspect: Some accuse Zimmerman of being a vigilante. I suggest he did nothing wrong.
It took me a while to come to that conclusion. At first I mostly agreed with this writer that it was poor judgment on both sides. Then I started reading criticism of Zimmerman for literally stalking Martin and tracking him down. I don't think so.
What's wrong with someone taking an active role in a Neighborhood Watch program and looking out for suspicious people in his neighborhood? That sort of thing should be applauded, not condemned.
And if you saw someone in your neighborhood you thought suspicious, might it be a good idea to follow him to see what he's up to? Some of us would, some wouldn't, but there's nothing wrong with it.
What's wrong with confronting someone you think suspicious and asking him what he's doing? I did that myself just a couple days ago when some weird guy was hanging around my house and the house next door. Nothing wrong with asking a question and it might just send a bad guy packing when he realizes people are watching him.
Some of us might not have followed Martin as Zimmerman did. Many of us might not have had the courage to confront him and ask him what he was doing, but Zimmerman shouldn't be faulted for doing so.
There. I got that off my chest.
Also: Pat Buchanan takes a look at the case. Eric Peters has a pretty strong opinion, as well.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:12 AM
22 comments
22 Comments:
A while ago a man driving a large pickup, towing a piece of heavy equipment was on his cell phone in the center turn lane in Mckinleyville. He turned right in front of me and crossed both southbound lanes to enter a parking lot, still on the phone. I followed him. When he got out of the truck, I shouted, "Sir, you just cut me off and almost caused a wreck. You need to hang up and drive". He started towards me and yelled "SHUTUP". Should I have whipped out a pistol and shot him?. This is not the first time I have confronted a stranger. It never goes well and I have resolved not to do it again. Humans are unpredictable and can be very dangerous. It is wisest not to do things that might provoke a confrontation IMHO.
Your case illustrates how making legitimate complaints or asking legit questions can have hostile consequences. That doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't say something.
No, it probably would not be a good idea to pull a gun but, if you had, you could have saved yourself from attack had that fellow had that in mind.
Remember that by all accounts Zimmerman didn't pull his gun until he was on the ground facing serious injury. Had he displayed his gun earlier, Martin likely would have run off and that would have been the end of it.
Or, Martin could have replied, when asked what he was doing, "None of your business" and kept on going. He also could have simply said he was going to his father's(?) home and continued on his way.
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
For a neighborhood watch person carrying a loaded firearm, how is it that Zimmerman says he did not know where Martin was for a few minutes after following him as a neighborhood watch dog?
Zimmerman fibbed a bit, and was able to do so because the other party to the dispute is dead.
After hearing the witness describing the phone conversation with Martin (something the attorneys failed at doing properly), it became more clear what Travon was doing (walking, never stopped to play hide and seek).
As we move forward, HOJ is sure KARMA and BAD MOJO will find its way.
HOJ does not fault so much the jury, albeit being "all white" is not representative of the diversity of people in this country. Obviously, the jurors also rationalized using laws to come to a decsision that were not applicable to the case. The judge seemingly did not properly instruct the jury as to what laws apply in the case to discuss. Additionally, the juror interviewed stated that half the jury had Zimmerman guilty of something during a straw vote sometime after jury delibreations commenced.
I disagree Fred that Zimmerman is "scotch free clean".
Lastly, Zimmerman apparantly was asked a "trip-up" question by investigators about cameras catching the incident and Zimmerman supposedly says, Oh, Thank God.
Really? Self-Pronounced neighborhood watchdog with a loaded firearm who knows the area like the back of his hand and he will imply he has never investigated the neighborhood, thereby denying any knowing of the cameras, whether they existed or not (they don't exist)
. Also, Zimmerman seemed smart enough to "game the system"!
HOJ
.. thereby denying any knowing of the cameras, whether they existed or not (they don't exist).
I've been living in this house 20 years or more and have no idea if any of the neighbors have surveillance cameras. I don't know if even the Arkleys have cameras, although you'd think they would. I certainly wouldn't hold that against him.
Please remember that Zimmerman was told by the police not to continue following Martin but continued to do so. Please remember that an innocent young man is dead. Please remember Zimmerman killed him. I think maybe he did SOMETHING wrong...and so do you when you write that you think it's okay. It is not.
Nope. He followed Martin and asked him what he was doing when Martin confronted him. Then Martin attacked him and got killed. Zimmerman didn't do anything wrong.
He made a different decision on how to deal with the situation than many of us would, but it wasn't necessarily wrong. If it makes you feel any better, I'm sure Zimmerman now wishes he stayed in his car, too.
You did not respond to the comment. But how about this... if libertatianism is so great why is there not ONE libertarian government on planet earth???
"He followed Martin and asked him what he was doing when Martin confronted him. Then Martin attacked him and got killed. Zimmerman didn't do anything wrong."
You're making a pretty big assumption here -- that Zimmerman told the truth about how it all went down. I have my doubts. I don't blame the jury for letting him off, because there's certainly a reasonable doubt. But that's a long way from being sure that he did nothing wrong.
The available evidence pretty much points to Martin having attacked Zimmerman. If nothing else, Martin had no marks or wounds, other than being shot. Zimmerman had many bruises and wounds.
The assumptions I'm making are based on what we know. Your assumptions seems to be based on what you wish happened.
You did not respond to the comment.
I believe I did. Just because someone is dead doesn't mean someone did something wrong. However, in this case, Martin made the mistake of attacking Zimmerman. Had he just told Zimmerman what he was doing, or even kept on walking, that would likely have been the end of it.
"But how about this... if libertatianism is so great why is there not ONE libertarian government on planet earth???"
Off topic, but already answered elsewhere. Here's a link:
http://tinyurl.com/n7s6xrl
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Fred, are you a local wannabe cop acting in the capacity as a neighborhood watchdog carrying a loaded firearm having been involved in past neighborhood crime issues where people look-up-to-you and, and, and.
Ain't buying the b-s Zimmerman fibbed on knowing the other participant in the matter is dead.
The eyewitnesses were pawns other thanb Rachel ???? who defiantely had sincereness on the stand with what was going-on to her and highly doubt she lied at all.
Again, for Zimmerman to imply he took his attention off of Travon Martin for a moment does not psycholgically fit the emotiuonal state that a "watchdog would act under".
Zimmerman got away with more than that which a "not guilty verdict rendered."
After listening to one of the jurors, it is obvious that "intelligience" is lacking and deliberations on facts is questioned as to "what perceptions" the jury changed their minds on after the straw vote.
HOJ
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Fred, can HOJ follow you at night and provoke you to wonder "what's up bro, why ya followin' me?????"
HOJ
Henchman Of Justice" says,
flat woman said...
You did not respond to the comment. But how about this... if libertatianism is so great why is there not ONE libertarian government on planet earth???
Response: The reason could be because too many AMerican LOSERS vote 2 Party System.
Now, look at the City of Detroit, Michigan. Yep, 2 Party System dumbshit voters caused that mess too!
HOJ
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Zimmerman, being a religious zealot and liar who commits blasphemy before the court, could have easily "taken a dive" onto the concrete, fell, etc... then used the excuse of being on the ground as a means to pull-the-trigger.
How does a provocateer go from bravado to NOT INTERESTED ANYMORE TO PUSSY ASS VICTIM? LIES!
HOJ
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Fred, no one knows on the ground what bodily movements ZImmerman produced immediately prior to physical engagement. Then, at what point, did the "eyewitness" witness???
All unanswered right now.
HOJ
"Many of us might not have had the courage to confront him and ask him what he was doing, but Zimmerman shouldn't be faulted for doing so."
In the end an armed man who outweighed Trayon Martin by 40-60 pounds, stalked and killed a mother's child who was walking home from the store minding his own business. Among the things Zimmerman did wrong were to disregard the 911 operator's order to stay in his truck, to typecast a child he didn't know as a villain he had some right to pursue,to make himself an authority figure without portfolio giving himself the right to take another's life based only on a fantasy in his own head. If you see nothing wrong in any of this you have an idea of a society so barren of decency that you might well question your own sanity. It beggars me to consider such a shameful lack of empathy.
In the end an armed man who outweighed Trayon Martin by 40-60 pounds, stalked and killed a mother's child who was walking home from the store minding his own business.
No. In the end a guy who was looking after his neighborhood was attacked by what turns out to be a young punk. The defender ends up being attacked after asking the guy what he was doing in the neighborhood. In fear of his life, the defender finally draws his gun and shoots the guy.
Simple enough.
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Well, simplicity is the key to success! Add more components and pieces, then less simple, kinda like government. Soooooooo, add a Travon Martin "alive scenario" and it would be even more simple, yes or no?
HOJ
Here's the more likely scenario:
The teenager walking down the street gets scared, realizing he's being followed by a heavy-set creepy looking guy. He thinks the guy is some kind of pervert kidnapper molester. The guy grabs him, and he tries to defend himself - ends up getting shot by the fake wannabe loser cop.
To be honest, I'm a fit, averaged sized 45 year old male, and if that dude started following me down the street, I'd be concerned too, and I'm not a skinny 16 year old in a town I don't know.
Bottom line: the guy provoked the confrontation. Killed a kid. And got away with it by claiming self-defense in a fight against a kid who was much smaller than him.
I'm appalled at how many people think that thinking someone is following them is grounds to attack the person.
I think you've misunderstood my thought - I apologize if I wasn't clear. First, "thinking someone is following them"... well, GZ *was* in fact following him, so he, TM, didn't "think" someone was following him, he knew someone was following him.
After that, did TM turn around and run at GZ and "attack" him? Well, neither of us know if that's what happened. The only person who knows is the one who has significant reason to spin the story in a positive way for himself.
Another possibility is that GZ grabbed TM, and TM feared for his life because he thought GZ was a crazy pervert molester kidnapper, and fought back, thinking he should try to avoid being abducted and raped and killed.
I don't know what happened but there are many possible scenarios. The only thing we do know, is that if you want to kill someone, provoke them into a scuffle first, because then you can shoot them and get off by claiming self-defense.
Post a Comment
<< Home