Feds to investigate fatal shooting of Florifda teen

[wrightme]

If you think withdrawing from a fight is easy then when's the last time you've been in a fight?

Youth is also a very good reason. When, exactly, do teenagers have any of the reasoning or judgment skills or maturity we expect in adults?

I'm not saying Z's life wasn't in danger, a child can kill as easily as an adult.

I'm only saying Z, as an adult, he's what 28?, should have demonstrated the reasoning and judgment of an adult.
Adults are legally held to a higher standard as he should be. He should have known better.

No matter what stupidity, immaturity or unreasonableness may occur, adult behavior outweighs juvenile behavior.

What do you feel he did that does not demonstrate the reasoning and judgement of an adult?

 

[Stanley]

What do you feel he did that does not demonstrate the reasoning and judgement of an adult?

1) I meant to say I agree with marshaul on the not fighting bit but then I am an adult...

2) Following anyone, at night, that you think is doing something suspicious shows a severe lack of judgment.

 

[wrightme]

1) I meant to say I agree with marshaul on the not fighting bit but then I am an adult...

2) Following anyone, at night, that you think is doing something suspicious shows a severe lack of judgment.

Why?

 

[Jake8x7]

This picture explains it all:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.ne...07575035_563865034_234412207_2130648980_n.jpg

 

[marshaul]

This picture explains it all:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.ne...07575035_563865034_234412207_2130648980_n.jpg

I'm sorry, but that was monumentally stupid. Retarded even.

"Peared"? lol

Whiteness scale? WTF?

Jews aren't white? Huh?

Funny, how the media has no problem showing an outdated picture of Trayvon, but they refuse to show a current picture of Zimmerman.

So, they show old photos of both? Way to make your point.

I think his point was that they're cherry-picking the photos. Too bad he failed to articulate it.

Fact: If Trayvon had ever been caught dealing drugs, that would have been a much more serious crime than the one Zimmerman committed.

WTF? First of all, while that may be true as far as the law is concerned, any halfway moral person would agree that assault is a "more serious crime" than a consensual business transaction. One is necessarily aggressive. The other is not.

Second of all, this is a fun game. Let me try:

Fact: If Zimmerman had been Adolph Hitler, he would be guilty of a far more serious crime than, well, the vase majority of crimes, ever.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Let's just make up random crimes and associate them with people.... because why, anyway? Because black people or drug dealers? Or what?

And that Facebook page isn't even the same Trayvon Martin, not that this is a new revelation.

As I've said, I believe Zimmerman is likely innocent, but sharing a bunch of insinuating, race-baiting garbage demeans this entire site.

For shame.

 

[marshaul]

If you think withdrawing from a fight is easy then when's the last time you've been in a fight?

If you've already won, it's trivial. It requires exactly zero effort. Continuing the "fight" once the guy is on the ground, that takes effort. You know, the fast-twitch muscle movements necessary to, you know, continue punching.

Youth is also a very good reason. When, exactly, do teenagers have any of the reasoning or judgment skills or maturity we expect in adults?

So it's OK for someone to continue to beat someone who's on the ground, so long as he's a youth? And what if he had killed Zimmerman? Would that be OK, too, because he's a youth?

Also, when a kid kills himself with a fast sport car, you might say "it was just youthful irresponsibility". And that may be so. But it doesn't make the kid any less dead.

Maybe Trayvon didn't deserve to die for his "youthful irresponsibility". But then, neither did the kid driving the sports car. Doesn't make him any less dead.

And you can't blame Zimmerman for failing to consider who deserved what when his life was in danger. Self-defense isn't, after all, about who deserves what. It's about the fact that every person has a right to prevent his death at the hands of another.

I'm only saying Z, as an adult, he's what 28?, should have demonstrated the reasoning and judgment of an adult.

He wasn't the one continuing to beat a person whom he already bested, was he?

Adults are legally held to a higher standard as he should be. He should have known better.

So, once he made the mistake of sticking his nose where it would have been wiser to keep out, he should have known better than to not let himself be beaten to death? Come on.

No matter what stupidity, immaturity or unreasonableness may occur, adult behavior outweighs juvenile behavior.

So, if cut someone off in traffic, and that person is a "youth", does that mean I should let him murder me in an act of road rage? After all, I should have known better than to cut him off, right? And after all, I'm the adult and not him?

Zimmerman may have been a fool, but nothing justifies Martin's behavior. And nothing short of attempted murder should compel a person to simply suffer their death at the hands of another.

 

[Stanley]

Why?

Why? The entire situation could have been avoided. That's why. A kid is dead. Yes, 17 is still a kid.

Poor judgment. Even if Z is innocent and truly remorseful he has to live with it.

Proper judgment would have been to inform 911 and move on or at least wait for the PD. Or stay in his car.

You ask why??? Lol

 

[Stanley]

So, if cut someone off in traffic, and that person is a "youth", does that mean I should let him murder me in an act of road rage? After all, I should have known better than to cut him off, right? And after all, I'm the adult and not him?

Zimmerman may have been a fool, but nothing justifies Martin's behavior. And nothing short of attempted murder should compel a person to simply suffer their death at the hands of another.

Don't be foolish. In a situation like this Z clearly should be held to a higher level.

Once a fight starts the more mature person, usually the older, is more likely to stop it. Hell, older people avoid them usually.

Teenagers not so much. You know exactly what I'm dating marshaul.

That's why, except in heinous crimes, children aren't tried as adults.

 

[marshaul]

Proper judgment would have been to inform 911 and move on or at least wait for the PD. Or stay in his car.

I agree. This error in judgement, however, is of a lesser magnitude and moral wrongness than continuing to assault someone once you've already subdued them. Adult or youth, that fact remains.

 

[Stanley]

I agree. This error in judgement, however, is of a lesser magnitude and moral wrongness than continuing to assault someone once you've already subdued them. Adult or youth, that fact remains.

False. Expecting a teenager to be able to reason this way is naive...

Teenagers DON'T reason like adults. Z still bears the responsibility.

 

[marshaul]

That's why, except in heinous crimes, children aren't tried as adults.

Murder isn't a heinous crime? What about attempted murder? Is it less bad simply because the attempt was foiled?

What would you call continuing to beat someone who is already defeated and on the ground? Having a good time?

 

[wrightme]

Why? The entire situation could have been avoided. That's why. A kid is dead. Yes, 17 is still a kid.

Poor judgment. Even if Z is innocent and truly remorseful he has to live with it.

Proper judgment would have been to inform 911 and move on or at least wait for the PD. Or stay in his car.

You ask why??? Lol

Zimmerman had as much right to be in that location as Trayvon did.

Zimmerman chose his course of action. You can choose yours.

To you, his choice was poor judgement. To him, YOUR choice might be.

 

[Stanley]

Murder isn't a heinous crime? What about attempted murder? Is it less bad simply because the attempt was foiled?

What would you call continuing to beat someone who is already defeated and on the ground? Having a good time?

You assume M didn't think Z was going to do him harm.

Crying an screaming isn't submission in that instance. Unconsciousness is.

You telling me if a robber in your house came at you and you started shooting you'd stop when he started screaming for help? Not likely...

 

[marshaul]

False. Expecting a teenager to be able to reason this way is naive...

Teenagers DON'T reason like adults. Z still bears the responsibility.

I don't expect teenagers to reason like adults. I also don't expect adults to let teenagers kill them because teenagers lack judgement.

We're not talking about a criminal trial. We're talking about self-defense. Zimmerman was afraid for his life. And reasonably so. That is not the time to cut a youth some slack.

At least, I sure won't be cutting a youth any slack if I truly believe my life is on the line. Having poor judgement doesn't give someone the right to kill me, or the right to have me allow them to try, just because I'm older.

 

[Stanley]

Zimmerman had as much right to be in that location as Trayvon did.

Zimmerman chose his course of action. You can choose yours.

To you, his choice was poor judgement. To him, YOUR choice might be.

You follow someone around at night and see what happens.

It was poor judgement period.

As for me, I haven't committed homicide have I? I'm pretty sure my judgment now is better than his.

 

[Stanley]

I don't expect teenagers to reason like adults. I also don't expect adults to let teenagers kill them because teenagers lack judgement.

We're not talking about a criminal trial. We're talking about self-defense. Zimmerman was afraid for his life. And reasonably so. That is not the time to cut a youth some slack.

At least, I sure won't be cutting a youth any slack if I truly believe my life is on the line. Having poor judgement doesn't give someone the right to kill me, or the right to have me allow them to try, just because I'm older.

So if you scare someone into attacking you then you can shoot them?

I'm pretty sure self defense doesn't work that way. What do I know?

 

[marshaul]

You assume M didn't think Z was going to do him harm.

No, I don't assume that. I, do, however, assert that he lost any right to defend himself once Z begged him to stop / for help.

Crying an screaming isn't submission in that instance. Unconsciousness is.

Unconscious = dead if your assailant doesn't decide to stop. Sorry, but my life is too valuable to give someone that benefit of doubt.

You telling me if a robber in your house came at you and you started shooting you'd stop when he started screaming for help? Not likely...

Not the same scenario. If the robber was lying on the ground, bleeding out, then you're damn right I'd stop shooting. There is no right to a coup de grace. I might be prepared to shoot him further were he to draw a gun, but I would not be justified in continuing to shoot once the robber was no longer a threat. A robber might still be a threat if he were calling for help, but a person is not still a threat in a hand-to-hand altercation once you're on top of him beating the tar out of him and he's begging you to stop / for help.

 

[wrightme]

You assume M didn't think Z was going to do him harm.Crying an screaming isn't submission in that instance. Unconsciousness is.

You telling me if a robber in your house came at you and you started shooting you'd stop when he started screaming for help? Not likely...

If he DID think that, he chose an odd behavior in approaching him, didn't he?

 

[marshaul]

So if you scare someone into attacking you then you can shoot them?

I'm pretty sure self defense doesn't work that way. What do I know?

If I make it clear I'm no longer a threat, say by being underneath the guy, begging for help as he's beating me senseless, then, yeah, I can shoot him. And I would, too.

Not that I would do the first part. But you're leaving out the critical detail.

 

[marshaul]

BTW, unconscious also = concussion, which can cause permanent handicap, and has a mortality rate of around 10%. Sorry, but nobody gets to do that to me.