You're just flat out incorrect in the quoted.

You need better than "more likely" in American court systems. All we know is that Martin's GF said Martin initiated verbal contact first. Everything after that is blind speculation.

Why would someone be mounted on top of a guy, punching him and smashing his skull against the ground for >40 seconds if all he wanted to do was go home?

Do you know what a "fact" is? It isn't your opinion of what is more likely...

Yeah this kind of story is controversial but the Herald figured it was worth reporting so I posted it. By everyone's account this is a tragedy.

Stop bending facts to fit your preconceived notion.

The armed, racist, paranoid, self-proclaimed, neighborhood watch commander who was chasing after a kid he outweighed by 100 pounds was clearly attacked, unprovoked, by that kid, who was on the verge of killing him. Thank God he had his gun with him to save his life.

I unfortunately have to leave the thread for awhile, so won't be able to continue.

But is it likely that Martin was 1) inflicting deadly force on Zim, AND 2) Zim exhausted all possible alternatives and means of escape AND 3) finding that he couldn't, he was able to draw and fire a deadly shot?

Or is it more likely that Martin either A) was not inflicting deadly force on Zim, or B) had stopped inflicting deadly force on Zim.

Iyo of course.

No, it isn't. Slamming someone's head against the ground is attempting to do great bodily harm to them. It could easily result in a concussion or brain injury. You are legally justified, pretty much everywhere in the US, to use deadly force to stop that. It's shocking to me that anyone would believe otherwise.

I can understand people trying to paint a different light of the kid though.

The fact is that kids are kids, they do stupid things. I've stolen, lied, cheated, beaten, etc etc etc in my life.

In general, I would say I'm a good person and I've had many people also say the same to me, but I've done plenty of bad things/mistakes and I've regretted them. The kid's 17, he's bound to have gotten into some trouble. It's not like he was a known gang-member who was a suspect in multiple murders.

Having a news story about writing on a locker is simply lol.

Have we once more forgotten that Zim was ARMED AND RACIST AND CHASING AFTER THE UNARMED MARTIN FFS?

We're really arguing that Martin may have started it now?

And a cite on the "mount and punch/smash his skull against ground for >40 seconds" would be nice as well.

Generally, such a situation leads to more damage than a broken nose, and some lacerations to the back of ones head, no?

Or being a further threat to the law and order of the community. Justice has prevailed.

You really need to stop saying this to the point of you sounding so sure of it. We keep bringing up his weight because it makes it so unlikely this has occurred. Can it? Sure. Likely? No. Maybe the kid is punching Zim and his head cracked against the ground or something. A 150 lb kid grabbing a 200+ lb man and literally trying to slam the life out of him is just highly unlikely.

There's a HUGE difference between someone getting punched/beat up by a flyweight compared to the picture of a curb-stomping steel-toe boot kicking/punching/beat down conan-the-barbarian scenario you are suggesting.

Will be interesting to learn if autopsy shows powder burns on Martin. At this point we don't know if he was shot while on top of and beating Zim, or what.

My money is on the following scenario: creeper stalks and freaks out a kid, then confronts and probably shoves him, kid beats the crap out of him and gets shot in the process.

I put responsibility at 70% Zim, 30% kid.

Willing to bicker over precise percentages.

You were either fat or a man child.

In 5th grade football, you weren't allowed to carry the ball if you were over 100 lbs, which was considered really big.

I guess you didn't read the other option. That you just aren't as clever as you think you are and can't cogently make an argument without tripping over your own logic.

This in desperate need of a bump. It was completely overlooked due to all that hate crime derailing.

All the good deeds Martin has supposedly done in his life are being used to show he couldn't have been the one to start the fight.

I am trying to think of situations that would end with a backpack full of jewelry and a screwdriver, and I have not been able to come up with one that paints a good picture of Trayvon.

No need to bring my pudginess as a child into the thread.

In all seriousness I think I was 155 in 5th grade. I know I was 185 going into high school.

Does anyone know if the NRA has updated their tally of incidents where a firearm prevented a crime from occurring yet?

2,500,001 IMO

If I unrightfully start an assault on someone and in the process begin to get my *** kicked am I allowed to shoot said person in self defense?

I know this is overly simplified and not at all reflective of the entire event more so just an argument I am unsure of the answer to.

Seems to me if you provoke/instigate an incident you no longer have a right to self defense?

The prosecution has to. You don't just get to assume it.

In one of the 911 calls you can hear screaming for at least 40 seconds, which means it was probably going on for longer since the woman had to hear the screaming, decide she was going to call 911 and then do it. Other witnesses have said they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman while Zimmerman was yelling for help shortly before the shot was fired.

It could cause anything from a bump to a crushed skull. Depends on lots of things, I'm sure.

The answer is: it depends.

Thank God for concealed carry.

Its pretty funny in one post you go after someone for blind speculation and then the next part counter what someone says with blind speculation. We dont know at all he was punching him and smashing his skull against the ground for >40 seconds. But given the injuries Z had its really unlikely he was.

Have i really missed something?

.