Using Your Cellphone During a Movie? Have a Bullet.

Broken clock and all that

I don't think "Stand Your Ground" applies here. If a judge or DA decides that stand your ground applies, there isn't a trial.

People seem to think that SYG is either (1) self-defense or (2) a license to kill.

It isn't. SYG does not apply unless there is a legitimate self-defense situation. It removes the obligation to retreat when confronted with aggression. Without SYG, you can't claim self-defense if running away was an option. But being forced to flee is itself aggression.

When the Trayvon Martin shooting happened, some were ignorantly (or cynically) blaming it on SYG. But SYG never applied because Zimmerman was never in a position to retreat once Martin attacked him.

Zimmerman was told to retreat by the police dispatcher, but never mind...right?

1. No, he wasn't. Zimmerman was told "We don't need you to do that" when Zimmerman said he was following after Martin. And Zimmerman quit running at that point. He was not trying to force contact with Martin

2. It was not a self-defense situation at that point. Martin had run away after observing Zimmerman on the phone. Zimmerman only followed after Martin had run off. Zimmerman had quit running after the dispatcher said they didn't need him to follow. The two men only came into contact because Martin turned back and approached Zimmerman.

So how many times did Zimmerman stick his nose where it didn't belong?

Doesn't matter. You don't get to initiate violence against a person based on your estimation of the appropriateness of their being there.

Irrelevant. Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law didn't come into play in the Martin shooting. Not legally, and not practically. Zimmerman never even claimed he was "standing his ground".

Quite so. Zimmerman's acquittal is more of a tribute to prosecutorial overreach as anything else. Charging him with murder was either stupid or a calculated move by an ambitious special prosecutor: either she would get to show how "tough on crime" and if he walked, it would be a victory for the racists who were convinced Martin had it coming. I say he is guilty of colossally bad judgement that may or may not have amounted to involuntary manslaughter. It is a fact that he disregarded what was at least a suggestion from the police dispatcher that he back off, which anyone with shit for brains would have heeded. He also was clearly sticking his nose where it didn't belong by acting as an "unofficial" neighborhood watch person and trying to detain someone and provoked a situation that he couldn't handle with anything short of deadly force. In short, he was guilty of being an idiot, although that isn't a crime under Florida law, or as far as I know, Common Law. If it was a crime he'd (and some Wordforgers) would be doing life.

For the record, like loitering, being forced to retreat had been so thoroughly neutered by the courts that it was rendered unenforceable. Moving one foot backwards, into a bladed shooting stance, or moving towards cover from which to shoot was determined to be evidence of an attempt to retreat.

Zimmerman was trapped underneath a very not 11 year old Tayvon Martin, who was on top of him smashing his head into the ground. Martin was 6'2.

It was almost certainly Zimmerman screaming for help the entire time.

It is very unlikely he approached Martin with the gun out.

We don't know who initiated the fight, which could be the only reason that self-defense might be thrown out. But at the time of the shooting, two different eye witnesses testified that Martin was assaulting Zimmerman, Zimmerman was trapped prone underneath him, and that the person screaming for help was Martin.

And the forensic evidence matched that account.

As outraged I was by the initial media reports, I definitely would have voted to acquit if I was on that jury.

I still support BLM, as we've all seen this is only one of numerous highly problematic issues in dealing with black men. The one that really astounds me is Jemel Roberson, a black security guard who stopped a mass shooting at a bar, and was then shot by police as they responded because they presumed he was the assailant.

What "numerous highly problematic issues in dealing with black men"?

Please enumerate.

Let's see, there's context there, because I stated that is why I support BLM.

Think hard Steve. There's been a few examples in the media.

Why would someone support BLM and think there have been highly problematic issues dealing with black men?

Who then went on to say he was astounded at Jemel Roberson case?

Go ahead. You'll get there.

you made the statement. clarify it.

It's pretty clear, Steve. Here it is again: I still support BLM, as we've all seen this is only one of numerous highly problematic issues in dealing with black men. The one that really astounds me is Jemel Roberson, a black security guard who stopped a mass shooting at a bar, and was then shot by police as they responded because they presumed he was the assailant.

What do you think is the problem with that statement?

Not clear enough

Ok, name one issue, problematic or otherwise, in dealing with black men.

Dear lord man - the number of black men shot by police. You know, the reason I support BLM and specifically mentioned Jemel Roberson.

Go get some caffeine. Maybe a blow job. You are usually a smart guy but something in the ole pipes is clogged todday.

sorry, I misinterpreted your statement. It does seem that you were saying it's problematic dealing with 6'2" Trayvon Martin and black men in general.

And as we have seen repeatedly, even right here on Wordforge, none of that matters. The narrative was set within the first hour of the incident and no amount of evidence will change peoples' minds.

Overcharging by an ambitious prosecutor didn't help. The evidence was never there to support a murder charge.

Well, not quite. I'm the one who started that thread - Shot for getting skittles. I was as outraged as anyone else. And Mike just stated that he acknowledges that murder charge wasn't warranted.

But yeah, there are a lot of emotional people on the subject, and not everyone is willing to reconsider evidence. Siloing is a thing too - I have a group of liberal friends who are all very smart, but have been captured by their news sources just as much as Fox News captured the church and racist crowd.

The thing is though, when it comes to facts the left is much more likely to be correct. But there's dogma there too, the farther left you are, the more likely you have adopted it en toto.

When you see everything through the lens of a narrative, you're likely to fall victim to confirmation bias, interpreting every fact--no matter how absurdly--as validation of your preconceived notions. When you do this in response to initial news reports of an event, you wind up taking a hardline stance that you can't walk back. Evidence that goes against the narrative then gets ignored or wrapped up in some conspiracy theory.

I've heard people claim that Zimmerman's recorded police call--that shows clearly he was not in pursuit of Martin immediately before their encounter--was an elaborate setup by Zimmerman to exonerate himself for the murder he was preparing to commit. Or that he purposefully inflicted his own injuries--a broken nose and contusions on the back of his head--to support his claim of self-defense. Or that Zimmerman wrestled with Martin for a couple of minutes to give credence to his story could more plausibly be sold as self-defense. Absurd.

The victim might be an angel and the accused can be a scumbag, or vice versa, but if we're to have justice, each individual case must be evaluated on the facts of that case, nothing more.

stay in your fucking car if you can't handle the situation without shooting someone.

Don't try to beat a stranger to death over a misunderstanding.

Don't start what you can't finish.

Don't start.

Why are ya'll talking about Zimmerman and not the old retired cop who just got off for shooting a guy after arguing and throwing popcorn at him?

Unreal acquittal, doesn't make any sense to me. But I hail from a place that at least has some sanity left

Your posting history over the last five years would have words with thee.