|
Kana -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/20/2013 12:26:53 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:
Huh?When have I ever come out in any we re SYG?
If you're asking if I think Z was culpable for defending himself (if that were the case) no,of course not. Same as I'd feel were the positions reversed and what evidence existed indicated that Z attacked M and M happened to have a legal gun carried under a CCW.
My point is he put himself into the position to have to defend himself. Even if we believe completely the story Z gave, he isnt blameless in the scenario. Even the jurors saw that and they werent influenced by media during the trial. In that line of thought, many are objecting to the notion that "Zimmerman is innocent".
quote:
As for any future SYG, hey, peeps don't like it, get the laws changed.
That's what they are calling for.
quote:
What good does it do a man to gain his dream if he loseth his soul in the process?
No one lost their soul more than T that night.
Well, the blunt fact is that whenever one carries a weapon,pretty much any kind of dangerous weapon, one better be ready to use it, because if there's an altercation and you ain't, there's a large chance it ends up your ass.
That said, a case can be,and has been made, that the gun was the only thing potentially saving Z from massive harm that night. Not only was the case made, but a jury found it at least reasonably convincing from at least one (and that's all it takes in the end) jurors account.
We tend to downplay such things but people die accidentally all the time in fights. I have a buddy I grew up with, got in a fight when he was in the army, a bar brawl with lots of people involved, just a wild fracas, in the middle of it, trying to make his way to the door, he was confronted by, and struck a guy, not a great shot but a good one. Which would have been no big deal,but the guys heads clipped the bar on the way down and he died in the ambulance.
My buddy, no killer save by freak of fate, served five hard ass years for a crime he had no intention of committing.
When a person commits an act of violence, they are in essence rolling the dice nothing truly bad comes of it, that they can limit/control the damage/situation. Which is an entirely erroneous assumption.
Not to mention that people seem to be taking for granted getting your head slammed on the cement.That shit can fuck you up.Not just can cause permanently damage, but the entire process is kinda jarring. It's difficult to think rationally while your brains are being scrambled. Then there's the fact that violence, real sudden in your face violence is fast and hard and terrifying as all get out. Expecting entirely coherent decision making at such a juncture is somewhat unreasonable.
Point blank-cut it any way one likes, if M attacked Z, he rolled the dice that the cat he was attacking wasn't armed (The flip side of the carry coin. And I'll note that in Fla,where peeps are insane even by American standards, the chance a cat is carrying is pretty high. They are gun crazy in the sunshine state. A nice side effect of the ongoing campaign of fear that the American public has been barraged with). And if that's the case, I have little sympathy for him.Take the law into your own hands, cross the line into criminality, especially violent criminality, then you take that risk.
Finally, I think a lot of people make an assumption that Z would have acted in a different fashion had he not been carrying.That might be true. Might not.
Who know?
But w/o any basis in which to ground that belief, it's specious speculation.
Could Z have acted differently? Sure.
So could M.
In this, there's nothing different from any other tragedy.Lots and lots of missed paths, wrong roads taken, poor decisions,all of which lead to a final result.
|
|
|
|
