Trayvon Martin Debate - Columbus, OH

Discuss the national Trayvon Martin debate in Columbus, OH.

What's your reaction to the Trayvon Martin Case?

Columbus thinks we need more info
We need more info
 
45
It's racial inj...
 
11
It's a tragic a...
 
5

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#493 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
So he overstepped his boundaries even before he called police? Whoa!
What "boundaries" are you referring to? As Neighborhood Watch, he had the right to be anywhere on the grounds. And as you know, Florida law (you DID read it didn't you?) specifically mentions "in any other place where he or she has a right to be", so no, he didn't overstep any "boundaries".

You're wrong... again...
Above_The_Bull-i sh

United States

#494 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
What "boundaries" are you referring to? As Neighborhood Watch, he had the right to be anywhere on the grounds. And as you know, Florida law (you DID read it didn't you?) specifically mentions "in any other place where he or she has a right to be", so no, he didn't overstep any "boundaries".
You're wrong... again...


He overstepped his boundaries when he approached Trayvon.
Enzyte Bob

Westerville, OH

#495 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
Too bad your dumb uncivilized racist a#$ hasn't achieved anything.
I am not a racist, I am a bigot.

Grab a dictionary and read - you might learn something.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#496 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
He overstepped his boundaries when he approached Trayvon.
Did you listen to the police tape?

911 dispatcher: "Hes near the clubhouse now?"

Zimmerman: "Yeah, now hes coming toward me. Hes got his hands in his waist band."

Who approached who????

You're wrong.... again...

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#497 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
What "boundaries" are you referring to? As Neighborhood Watch, he had the right to be anywhere on the grounds. And as you know, Florida law (you DID read it didn't you?) specifically mentions "in any other place where he or she has a right to be", so no, he didn't overstep any "boundaries".
You're wrong... again...
There are no particular rights associated with being a member of Neighborhood Watch. He was not a security guard, simply a member of a community group that agreed to be vigilant about watching out for one another.

It is true that Zimmerman had a right to roam the grounds within the community. But then, so did Trayvon.

Face it. What we know of Zimmerman's behavior--chasing after Trayvon, particularly while armed (even though he had a legal right to be)--is easily interpreted as menacing behavior. And it is not hard to see that Trayvon FELT threatened as Zimmerman reported that he started to run. Further, if we accept the girlfriend's statement, Trayvon himself SAID that he was frightened by Zimmerman's behavior.

What I believe this is going to come down to is who had a reasonable justification for feeling threatened by the other. It would be very helpful to know who threw the first blow, but I don't think that is going to be available knowledge. Maybe Trayvon gave him a shove and turned to run and was brought down by a tackle, leading to them rolling on the ground. That could easily account for Zimmerman's injuries and falls far more reasonably into the realm of possibility.

What is not reasonable is the belief that Zimmerman, who was armed, moved from being willing to pursue to being the victim on the ground in fear for his life from an unarmed teenager--with absolutely no provocation on his part. Just doesn't fit.

“No respect.”

Since: Aug 10

Ashland, OH

#498 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you listen to the police tape?
911 dispatcher: "Hes near the clubhouse now?"
Zimmerman: "Yeah, now hes coming toward me. Hes got his hands in his waist band."
Who approached who????
You're wrong.... again...
But, Tony, that statement comes before he says he's running away, says "These a...holes always get away", and begins to pursue Martin on foot. So although we do not know who approached who to beging the altercation, there is at least some evidence which may imply Zimmerman initiated contact.
Angry Old and White

Delaware, OH

#499 Apr 5, 2012
Al Sharpton is up to no good. Negroes need to be ashamed of the Twana Brawley case and O.J. Simpson but Negores like Progressive Ohioian, Punkazz and WiseAmerica know only hate, not the love as taught by Martin Luther King.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#500 Apr 5, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
There are no particular rights associated with being a member of Neighborhood Watch. He was not a security guard, simply a member of a community group that agreed to be vigilant about watching out for one another.
It is true that Zimmerman had a right to roam the grounds within the community. But then, so did Trayvon.
Face it. What we know of Zimmerman's behavior--chasing after Trayvon, particularly while armed (even though he had a legal right to be)--is easily interpreted as menacing behavior. And it is not hard to see that Trayvon FELT threatened as Zimmerman reported that he started to run.
Yeah, that's the ONLY reason he might think of to run...
Further, if we accept the girlfriend's statement, Trayvon himself SAID that he was frightened by Zimmerman's behavior.

Uh huh, that's why he approached Zimmerman with his hand in his pants...

[QUOTE]What I believe this is going to come down to is who had a reasonable justification for feeling threatened by the other.
No, Trayvon's feelings are irrelevant, as he is not under consideration for being charged with a crime. Only Zimmerman's STATEMENT of his feelings of being threatened are relevant.
It would be very helpful to know who threw the first blow, but I don't think that is going to be available knowledge. Maybe Trayvon gave him a shove and turned to run and was brought down by a tackle, leading to them rolling on the ground. That could easily account for Zimmerman's injuries and falls far more reasonably into the realm of possibility.
There you go again... "Maybe" and "reasonably into the realm of possibility" are not relevant. PROOF is.
What is not reasonable is the belief that Zimmerman, who was armed, moved from being willing to pursue
At least until Trayvon started walking toward him, with his hand in his waistband (not ON his waste band, IN it)... There was also no evidence that Zimmerman had his weapon DRAWN before he was knocked to the ground.
to being the victim on the ground in fear for his life from an unarmed teenager--with absolutely no provocation on his part. Just doesn't fit.
A witness placed Zimmerman on the ground, under Trayvon, so it certainly DOES fit.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#501 Apr 5, 2012
markbano wrote:
<quoted text>
But, Tony, that statement comes before he says he's running away, says "These a...holes always get away", and begins to pursue Martin on foot.
So although we do not know who approached who to beging the altercation, there is at least some evidence which may imply Zimmerman initiated contact.
What evidence is that? Twice on the tape Zimmerman said Martin was coming toward him, and then after he says he's following him and they tell him "we don't need you to do that" and he responds "OK", there is almost two minutes of Zimmerman setting up a meeting with the police during which time nobody knows where Martin was or what he was doing (Zimmerman said he lost him ("He ran", "I dont know where this kid is")). Two minutes is a long time (hold your breath to prove). Time enough to, perhaps, sneak around a building planning to come up behind someone, only to find them facing you instead... cue the girlfriends statements... "I'm not going to run" (toward Zimmerman?), "I'm just going to walk fast" (toward Zimmerman?).

Of course, none of this need be proven by Zimmerman... it's up to the prosecution to prove Zimmerman's account COULDN'T BE right. And that's going to be pretty tough, in my opinion.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#502 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
No, Trayvon's feelings are irrelevant, as he is not under consideration for being charged with a crime. Only Zimmerman's STATEMENT of his feelings of being threatened are relevant.
Ummmm, Trayvon is DEAD! George Zimmerman killed him. That is the only reason that his feelings are less than relevant--because he is no longer with us to tell us what he was feeling as he lay on the ground screaming with a gun in his chest.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#503 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
Of course, none of this need be proven by Zimmerman... it's up to the prosecution to prove Zimmerman's account COULDN'T BE right. And that's going to be pretty tough, in my opinion.
Tony, correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you genuinely relish the possibility that George Zimmerman could get clean off for killing Trayvon Martin.

Any truth to that?

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#504 Apr 5, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Tony, correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you genuinely relish the possibility that George Zimmerman could get clean off for killing Trayvon Martin.
Any truth to that?
I "relish" the prospect of due process being done correctly, and its results being accepted by all. I don't always get what I want though...

"Clean off"? I really doubt that. Legally, perhaps, but I can only imagine Zimmerman, having had to take a life, will be emotionally scarred for quite some time, if not for life. And don't forget, without an acquittal, the possibility of future indictment hangs over his head forever. Not "clean off" by any stretch of definition.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#505 Apr 5, 2012
And what do you "relish"? Do you relish the thought of members of congress, without knowing what happened, intentionally giving justification to hatred (and thereby all of the consequences of that hatred)?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/...

“Accept No Substitutes”

Since: Oct 11

Marengo, OH

#506 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
He overstepped his boundaries when he approached Trayvon.
No he didn't. Zimmerman had every right to approach and question. One of my neighbors did it to two guys looking at a car (a beautifully restored '79 Camaro Z-28) in the driveway of another neighbor's house at 10:00 PM. They left in a hurry.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#507 Apr 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I "relish" the prospect of due process being done correctly, and its results being accepted by all. I don't always get what I want though...
"Clean off"? I really doubt that. Legally, perhaps, but I can only imagine Zimmerman, having had to take a life, will be emotionally scarred for quite some time, if not for life. And don't forget, without an acquittal, the possibility of future indictment hangs over his head forever. Not "clean off" by any stretch of definition.
All good reasons that gun-toting should be taken far more seriously than I believe many do.

“some...you just can't reach”

Since: Jun 08

others...you don't want to

#508 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
You're way off base...people in here are discussing evidence. You're the only one bringing up "whitey"
i have read plenty of posts suggesting there is no justice unless you are white.....adding the "y" does not change it...
Above_The_Bull-i sh

Philadelphia, PA

#509 Apr 5, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a racist, I am a bigot.
Grab a dictionary and read - you might learn something.


I looked YOU up in the dictionary. It said "The hole of a dirty hairy a#$"
Above_The_Bull-i sh

Philadelphia, PA

#510 Apr 5, 2012
George Jefferson Hilliard wrote:
<quoted text>No he didn't. Zimmerman had every right to approach and question. One of my neighbors did it to two guys looking at a car (a beautifully restored '79 Camaro Z-28) in the driveway of another neighbor's house at 10:00 PM. They left in a hurry.


Mustangs are better!

“Accept No Substitutes”

Since: Oct 11

Marengo, OH

#511 Apr 5, 2012
Above_The_Bull-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
Mustangs are better!
Not back in the '70s. Camaros went down the drain starting in '83. Mustangs were ugly and underpowered from '74 to '86. Today, they're a sweet ride.
Above_The_Bull-i sh

United States

#512 Apr 5, 2012
George Jefferson Hilliard wrote:
<quoted text>Not back in the '70s. Camaros went down the drain starting in '83. Mustangs were ugly and underpowered from '74 to '86. Today, they're a sweet ride.


Okay I'll admit. Camaros are nice. Even the classics I've seen. But being that Im younger, the newer Mustangs have always been attractive to me.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
message for glittersucks (Sep '12) 12 min Ashley Stevens 6
Franklin Township trustees split on fire levy 1 hr They cannot kill ... 2
destiny Gilliam/benbrook 2 hr They cannot kill ... 2
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 3 hr Male 3,959
Lawyer booked on charges he stole from guardian... 5 hr the narrow and wi... 15
Breaking: Second Nurse w/ Ebola flies with 99.5... 5 hr Male 113
President Ebola 5 hr Male 620
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 16 hr J-Corn 981

Columbus Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]