Quote:
Originally Posted by tstew
This is where you guys lose me. I've said from the beginning to disregard the race of the people and consider the circumstances. The fact that anyone thinks it's okay for armed adults who are not law enforcement or trained or vetted in any way to start following teenagers for no reason at all is confusing. The fact that you think it's okay for him to continue to follow after he has already called the proper authorities and has been told that he didn't need to follow and should just meet the officers is even more confusing. When he does all of this, pursues the kid who he said was trying to get away from him (because apparently they always get away), eventually catches and kills him, anyone saying he was justified just confuses me to no end.
If there was no loss of life, it would be laughable to suggest that a teenager being chased would not be justified in standing his ground to the extent that he moderately injured his pursuer (if it did happen), but the pursuer is undoubtedly justified in standing his ground to the extent that he killed the person he was chasing (which we know did happen).
I hope nothing like this happens to anyone close to anybody here, but I think we would be well served to put ourselves in the shoes of the victim here (and I do believe there is one...and only one). I have a son who will likely be a larger than average 17 year old. The last thing I want is for armed yahoos to think they can arbitrarily chase and apprehend him for no reason at all.
|
You assume a lot of things that don't appear to be true. Let's think this through slowly. First, if I am on a neighborhood watch and there have been break ins and such in my neighborhood I am going to have my eyes open. When I see a suspicious person walking around who doesn't appear familiar, perhaps doesn't belong int he neighborhood, I'm probably going to look into it. I would call the authorities as Zimmerman did, but lets not be fools about this. The average response time to a 911 call in some places is upwards of 30 minutes. The suspicious person is long gone by that time. Not to mention, the dispatcher did NOT tell Zim NOT to follow Trayvon. They said they didnt need him to do it. BIG difference.
Second, if you or I are following a person who appears suspicious...why would the person we are following feel the need to assault you or me? I can follow someone around and if they didn't like it, the normal response would be to ask me why I am following them or call the police if they were really worried, not come at me and attempt to smash my head into the ground. There is no report that Zimmerman did anything BUT follow Trayvon. You don't turn around and attack a person for following you. You ask why they are following you, run away, or call the police.
Now, if the person we are following does decide to turn around and attack us, to me it tells me two things: first that I was right to be suspicious of them because innocent people don't just attack other humands and second, I better defend myself. And if I am armed, you better believe the person attacking me is the one getting put down.
It amazes me that no matter how much we keep finding out about "innocne tlittle" Trayvon people just seem to ignore it. One person in the story is a neighborhood watch member, passed the checks to get a concealed carry, volunteered weekends to help minorites and was respected and liked by his neighbors...INCLUDING many blacks. The other was kicked out of school for drugs and has the appearance of yet another thug with gold teeth. Yet somehow...the good guy is the teen druggy here?
Threaded Mode
