Meanwhile in Vopland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregor-y

It's based on legal workings from he civil rights era where blacks (or whites registering them to vote) would be killed and local municipalities would either ignore the killings, refuse to prosecute based on claims similar to the current self defense explination, or put the killers on trial only to have a sympathetic jury (since jury selection was pretty heavily screened and blacks weren't allowed to serve) acquit them. Because a strict interpretation of the constitution does not prevent this, and because those actions were particularly egregious (though it had been happening for decades at a lower level), the only way to prosecute these crimes at a higher level was to interpret the killing based on a violation of the civil rights law, which was intended to prevent discrimination. In these cases the murders, being racially motivated, amounted to discrimination so federal law enforcement could get involved.

It's a long history spanning age-old local/federal and racial tensions that really hasn't been addressed as much as patched over by successive laws.

---

I dont get it, a black bloke is killed by a white bloke in what sounds like a racially motivated attack, and that zimmerman bloke isn't in jail/a nut house?

Call me daft, but the courts over there sound a little bit out of date!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Proof, as if it were needed, that while seeking to defend oneself is all very well, put a weapon into the equation and the possibility of a mistaken, unnecessary reaction on the part of the person seeking to defend themselves can bring about a far more tragic result than would otherwise be the case.

---

Indded.

I can’t help but question if the accused would have followed the victim in the first place had the State not permitted the possession of concealed weapons?

Does Florida's “stand your ground” law apply in this case where it is the accused that instigated the confrontation by following then questioning the victim?

It's been used to justify actions just as suspect in the past. The few times I've been involved with the operations of the justice system here in Chicago - in addition to some particularly egregious public flaunting of the law by the police department - make me think these problems exist everywhere to some extent.

I don't know, it's just sad.

Any white kills a black and the whole country goes crazy. They should look at the data for interracial crimes.

Hispanic vigilante donkey persues and ends up shooting unarmed decent black kid. There, interracial crime for you. :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by race aficionado

Yep, self defense. :dozey:

Assuming he had to defend himself from a soda and some skittles does not warrant the use of deadly weapon to retaliate.

MobileMe Gallery

---

Don't confuse the stated facts:
1. travon was trespassing - my understanding it was a private guard gated community
2. According to Zimmerman, Travon started the altercation.
3. You have to let the case play out because right now they appear to have no case against Zimmerman.
4. I think in most parts of this country if you are attacked you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force.

All you anti gun dudes make it sound like Travon was walking down the street eating skittles and was popped by Zimmerman. Apparently the facts do not
support this. I am sure if they have any case worth taking to court they will arrest Zimmerman.
So far the moral of this story is:
Don't trespass
Don't attack a guy with a gun

Ok TIREs - little quiz
You are fly fishing up a very remote canyon. Of course you have your 17 shot Glock 10mm in your shoulder holster to prevent it from getting wet.
You are approached by 4 shady looking characters.
At what point to you tell them to stop:
At what point do you pull out the equalizer?
At what point do you reduce the world's population?

Or do you just sit down on a big rock and let them shove that Glock where the sun don't shine.

TIREs - Nice guy that I am - I will give you a little hint
Double-Murder Charges Dismissed Under

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roamy

Ok TIREs - little quiz
You are fly fishing up a very remote canyon. Of course you have your 17 shot Glock 10mm in your shoulder holster to prevent it from getting wet.
You are approached by 4 shady looking characters.
At what point to you tell them to stop:
At what point do you pull out the equalizer?
At what point do you reduce the world's population?

Or do you just sit down on a big rock and let them shove that Glock where the sun don't shine.

---

Shady looking doesn't usually mean the person is up to no good and is not a reason to shoot anyone. I remember when I was in Boston. We were looking for a parking space and saw a sign advertising parking for a fee, so we decided to drive there. A shady looking character came to us and asked for the car keys. Since all parking lots and parking garages in Finland are self service, my first thought was "uh-oh, here goes the car". Turned out that it was his job to park the car for us. When we came back we got the car back in good shape and everything was OK. Luckily I didn't have a gun and shoot him when he asked for the keys.