OT - New thread on Florida shooting

[HeyBub]

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been
corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that
a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about. "

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-civil-rights-punch

Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one from the
Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested in the protests
over the shooting.

"Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of justice denied,
according to protesters who are expected to amass throughout the day to
continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest in the Sanford, Fla. case."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-nn-trayvon-martin-case-20120326,0,3121664.story

Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the facts are in.

Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.

[HeyBub]

HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

[Stormin Mormon]

Not relevant. According to the black race baiters, he was lilly white,
uptight, and outa sight.
(Sounds like a line from a joke?)

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:4OCdnV8ikrZ2fu3S...@earthlink.com...

[Doug]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:36:27 -0500, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

Aside from all of this, I am surprised our president who is an
attorney from a top notch law school, speaks before knowing all the
facts. As you point out, this is not the first time he's done this.
I'm not much of a beer drinker but I'll be glad to buy if he invites
me to the next beer summit.

[Doug]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:04:01 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Not relevant. According to the black race baiters, he was lilly white,
>uptight, and outa sight.
>(Sounds like a line from a joke?)
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>

I won't get into who's right or wrong but I will say I'm getting a bit
tired as I get older to hear that every time a black person is killed
or fired, it's a race issue. Everytime???? Really????
I won't deny they do face discrimination today but I do not believe
everytime things don't go their way, it's a race issue. When things
go right, I don't hear them bring up the race card then <grin>. I
just wish we could all get along but I guess that's not going to
happen in my life time :( .

[Molly Brown]

On Mar 26, 2:36 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> "With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
> Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
> Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
> his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
> authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.
>
> "That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been
> corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that
> a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about. "
>

> http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin...

>
> Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one from the
> Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested in the protests
> over the shooting.
>
> "Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of justice denied,
> according to protesters who are expected to amass throughout the day to
> continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest in the Sanford, Fla. case."
>

> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-nn-trayvon-martin-case-20120...

>
> Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the facts are in.
>
> Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.

1. To defend yourself means when you’re not moving or going anywhere
and someone is coming after you, your loved one or your property.
2. Unless you’re a member of SWAT and on duty, a gun can only be used
as a defense.
3. When you go AFTER someone ( read # 1 above) then you are no longer
considered to be defending yourself.
Florida has a marvelous law of “stand your ground” that is extremely
useful. If people like you don’t stop trying to subvert it, we’re all
going to lose.

[Stormin Mormon]

Myself, and at least a few others totally agree with you.

I have no doubt, there continues to be racial tension, and some hatred.
Along with a lot of hatred of the rich "who didn't pay their fair share".
Such hatred being promoted by the first post racial president.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Doug" <noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:fi12n75q2s1hmnjgj...@4ax.com...

[HeyBub]

Like me?

In what way, large or small, did you perceive I'm trying to subvert the
"Stand Your Ground" law? I think you've confused me with Idi Amin or some
other miscreant.

Further, you are completely wrong in your #3 above. The SYG law specifically
permits lethal force to defend yourself, irrespective of where you are
located or your (lawful) reason for being there. Presuming you have a right
to walk down the sidewalk, without regard for your motive in so doing, you
are covered. Specifically, if I follow you, and you don't like it, you own
the problem, not me*.

In the case I just outlined, while my following you may rile your anger,
provocation is not an excuse for you to attack me. And if you DO attack me,
I will blow your ass away.

--------
* Of course there are always exceptions. One that comes to mind is
"stalking," but unwanted and obsessive attention, to be illegal, must occur
over a period of time.

[Oren]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:25:33 -0500, "Doug" <noemail...@msn.com>
wrote:

>
>I won't get into who's right or wrong but I will say I'm getting a bit
>tired as I get older to hear that every time a black person is killed
>or fired, it's a race issue. Everytime???? Really????
>I won't deny they do face discrimination today but I do not believe
>everytime things don't go their way, it's a race issue. When things
>go right, I don't hear them bring up the race card then <grin>. I
>just wish we could all get along but I guess that's not going to
>happen in my life time :( .

Welcome to reality :-|

I was young and impressionable once. Actually considered offender
rehabilitation to be possible. You can't rehabilitate a person that
has never been habilitated.

Then I learned some are not capable of walking amongst decent
civilized people. I know of one human that has no human contact for
most of his time, there are exceptions when under a ten-man escort
(legal / medical).

There are predators and monsters walking about... keep an eye open!

[Ron]

> http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

[Stormin Mormon]

They tend to come out from under the wood work in case of power cuts,
hurricanes, TEOTWAWKI, or Jesse Jackson speeches. Same for Al Not So Sharp
ton.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Oren" <Or...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:j114n79ermn5ngk71...@4ax.com...

[Attila.Iskander]

"Molly Brown" <recycl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d1ea6d55-1e69-4c7a...@er9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

WRONG !
To defend yourself means to defend yourself INDEPENDENT of your "motion" or
"location

> 2. Unless you’re a member of SWAT and on duty, a gun can only be used
> as a defense.

WRONG AGAIN
But I'm not even going to bother addressing the many ways this one is wrong

> 3. When you go AFTER someone ( read # 1 above) then you are no longer
> considered to be defending yourself.

WRONG AGAIN !
1) If you "go after someone", is ONLY an issue if you CONTINUED the
process unchanged
2) If you "go after someone" the stop and attempt to leave, condition 1)
is annulled and if attacked self-defense DOES apply to you
3) If 2) then if the other comes after you, condition 1) applies to the
other, and self-defense applies to you and NOT the other.

> Florida has a marvelous law of “stand your ground” that is extremely
> useful. If people like you don’t stop trying to subvert it, we’re all
> going to lose.

Nobody has tried to subvert it.
You seem to have an incomplete understanding of the basic principles
that apply to self-defense INDEPENDENT of SYG.

[Attila.Iskander]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

news:xvWdnXswSpOYLOzS...@earthlink.com...

There are 2 issues here
1) the rules that apply directly to self-defense
2) the rules that apply to SYG (Stand Your Ground)
Because they can overlap, people are confounding the 2..

[John Carter]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:-emdnThrPa7DfO3S...@earthlink.com:

Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program. The police want eyes
and ears out there, not an untrained civilian with sidearms
going after a suspicious character. We operate in pairs and
without weapons. We did disnss a member for bringing a gun to
a watch. Our watch program is now inits seventh year, and during
that time, we have been responsible for many leads leading to arrets.
Our local police department loves the work we do to help them.

[Bill Kniess]

Molly Brown <recycl...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:d1ea6d55-1e69-4c7a-a7a3-1355067c4427
@er9g2000vbb.googlegroups.co
m:

<<<<<snip>>>>>>

>
> 1. To defend yourself means when you’re not moving or
going
> anywhere and someone is coming after you, your loved one
or your
> property. 2. Unless you’re a member of SWAT and on duty,
a gun can
> only be used as a defense.
> 3. When you go AFTER someone ( read # 1 above) then you
are no
> longer considered to be defending yourself.
> Florida has a marvelous law of “stand your ground” that
is
> extremely useful. If people like you don’t stop trying
to subvert
> it, we’re all going to lose.
>

Who are you saying here is the defender?

Subverting ? Are you saying we were a lost bunch from the
beginning of the country up to the time this law was
passed?

Marvelous law ? I'm an NRA member, but I have to say that
there was
NO reason to have a law like this enacted. (It was
bankrolled by my
NRA, and for the life of me, cannot find out for what
purpose they
push such legislation). It is plain and simple nuts. Just
about as
bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
What? Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
out in a bar and someone
gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle? What's going
to happen
now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.

If someone was packing, out and about the
town runing erands and whatnot, and someone
looks at them funny, and they think they are
threatened, they have the right under this law
to defend themselves from this looker, even to
the death. Now you think this is a stretch, but
this is real life and anything can and does happen.

Bill Kniess
US Army
NRA

[Moe Gasser]

On 3/29/2012 3:12 AM, Bill Kniess wrote:

> bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
> What? Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
> out in a bar and someone
> gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle? What's going
> to happen
> now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
> bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.
>

Sounds like a bunch of Darwin Award winners to me.

[HeyBub]

Bill Kniess wrote:
>
> Who are you saying here is the defender?
>
> Subverting ? Are you saying we were a lost bunch from the
> beginning of the country up to the time this law was
> passed?
>
> Marvelous law ? I'm an NRA member, but I have to say that
> there was
> NO reason to have a law like this enacted. (It was
> bankrolled by my
> NRA, and for the life of me, cannot find out for what
> purpose they
> push such legislation).

Hmm. Thirty-one states have some form of Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws. Are
you saying that over 60% of the population passed a law with no reason
behind it? Or is it possible you simply do not understand what three out of
five do?

> It is plain and simple nuts. Just
> about as
> bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
> What? Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
> out in a bar and someone
> gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle? What's going
> to happen
> now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
> bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.

In my state, we've had the ability to carry concealed where liquor is served
since 1995. There has not been ONE SINGLE case - that I can find - of a CHL
holder shooting another bar patron. You're worried about something that is
so remote as to be absurd. We can also carry concealed in churches,
hospitals, the state capitol, libraries, parks, and the governor's office!
Again, no untoward happenings recorded.

It may be that Texans are more mild-mannered than the folks in your state,
but I suspect the real difference is in your fears versus reality.

Further, if a fight DOES break out, with pool cues and chairs sailing around
like ducks on a bug, I certainly would want to be armed.

>
> If someone was packing, out and about the
> town runing erands and whatnot, and someone
> looks at them funny, and they think they are
> threatened, they have the right under this law
> to defend themselves from this looker, even to
> the death. Now you think this is a stretch, but
> this is real life and anything can and does happen.

There's an old saying: "An armed society frowns on those who look funny."

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 26, 10:04 pm, Molly Brown <recyclebin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2:36 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
> > Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
> > Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
> > his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
> > authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.
>
> > "That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been
> > corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that
> > a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about. "
>
> >http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin...
>
> > Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one from the
> > Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested in the protests
> > over the shooting.
>
> > "Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of justice denied,
> > according to protesters who are expected to amass throughout the day to
> > continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest in the Sanford, Fla. case."
>
> >http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-nn-trayvon-martin-case-20120...
>
> > Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the facts are in.
>
> > Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.
>
> 1. To defend yourself means when you’re not moving or going anywhere
> and someone is coming after you, your loved one or your property.

That must be some new definition of defense that
requires that you be not moving or going anywhere.
So, if I'm going to Home Depot, walking to the store,
self defense no longer applies. I'll have to remember
that one......

> 2. Unless you’re a member of SWAT and on duty, a gun can only be used
> as a defense.
> 3. When you go AFTER someone ( read # 1 above) then you are no longer
> considered to be defending yourself.

If by going after someone you mean a
neighborhood watch person or any citizen for that
matter walking after someone they think is suspicous
to keep an eye on them until police arrive, then
a whole lot of us have done that. And it's prefectly
legal. You have a law that says otherwise?

> Florida has a marvelous law of “stand your ground” that is extremely
> useful. If people like you don’t stop trying to subvert it, we’re all

> going to lose.- Hide quoted text -
>

The SYG law doesn't even apply here. By Z's and the
only eye witness accounts, Martin had Z on the ground,
his back against the ground. He had broken Z's nose,
Z had a gash on his head, Z says Martin was banging
his head against concrete. Both Z and the witness say
it was Z yelling for help. The witness shouted out that
he was going to call police. Even that didn't stop Martin.
Therefore, the new law isn't even needed. By those
accounts, Z had no means of retreat. Capiche?

If you have any witnesses or evidence that I've missed
that contradict the above, please provide them.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 29, 3:12 am, Bill Kniess <m...@mymailsvr.org> wrote:
> Molly Brown <recyclebin...@gmail.com> wrote in

The Florida SYG law was passed after a citizen defending
himself was charged. I don't know all the facts and I think
he ultimately either wasn't convicted or got it overturned.
I heard the guy that sponsored the bill in the FL legislature
briefly explaining it on TV. It was passed to help prevent
this from happening again to a citizen using lethal force
justifiably. Given the propensity for many left wing
anti-gun prosecutors to bring charges, I'm not sure it's
a bad thing either.

What's more, it should not matter in the current case.
By Z's account and the eye witness account that has
confirmed the key parts of his story, he had no ability to
retreat at the time of the shooting.

It is plain and simple nuts. Just
> about as
> bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
> What?  Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
> out in a bar and someone
> gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle?  What's going
> to happen
> now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
> bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.
>
>   If someone was packing, out and about the
> town runing erands and whatnot, and someone
> looks at them funny, and they think they are
> threatened, they have the right under this law
> to defend themselves from this looker, even to
>  the death. Now you think this is a stretch, but
> this is real life and anything can and does happen.
>
> Bill Kniess
> US Army

> NRA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Norminn]

The only comment I heard from Obama was "If I had a son, he would look
like Trayvon Martin". I don't see that as political, just identifying,
as a parent, with a tremendous loss. Not to mention entirely different
experience as a black male. Now, here is a link to police video of Z.
just after the shooting...where is all the blood from the busted nose
and cut on his head?????

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/trayvon-martin-police-video_n_1386764.html

I'm not looking at the mess as a race issue; just wondering who is being
truthful and curious as to the REAL facts of the matter. I've met some
really, really nasty cops in my life and I don't have a race issue with
them. Some cops lie...some are racist bastards...

[Jim Elbrecht]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
-snip-

>
>Hmm. Thirty-one states have some form of Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws.

Check your math-- or your source. This map only shows 18.
http://www.adn.com/2012/03/26/2392504/stand-your-ground-bill-in-spotlight.html

If you've got another map or chart, I'd love to see it.

>Are
>you saying that over 60% of the population passed a law with no reason
>behind it? Or is it possible you simply do not understand what three out of
>five do?

And just a WAG, I doubt those states represent 15% of the population.
[and how many of them are, like FL, second guessing themselves this
week]



Jim

[Norminn]

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by PD
and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their program.

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <IP2dnWaoicsZxunS...@earthlink.com>,

Norminn <nor...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> >
>
> The only comment I heard from Obama was "If I had a son, he would look
> like Trayvon Martin". I don't see that as political, just identifying,
> as a parent, with a tremendous loss.

EVERYTHING any president does and says is political. He says this, a
couple days later the Feds join in on the investigation. You think that
might not taint the investigation at least a little?

>
> I'm not looking at the mess as a race issue; just wondering who is being
> truthful and curious as to the REAL facts of the matter. I've met some
> really, really nasty cops in my life and I don't have a race issue with
> them. Some cops lie...some are racist bastards...

And some are cop bashers since this has nothing to do with cops.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

[tra...@optonline.net]

> and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their program.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Most of the media, in their rush to judgement, has reported a
lot of highly biased and flat out wrong reports.

Here's the handbook from the Sanford, FL police regarding
their neighborhood watch program. It's 17 pages long. I'd
like you to show us where it says in there that neighborhood
watch folks can't drive their personal vehicles around the
neighborhood or walk down the street looking for suspicous
activity.

In fact, it says quite the opposite:

"Observation:
From your auto, truck or
van you can observe both the road
and other activities. Many people
walk or jog as a daily routine, going
to and from the store or work, or for their own physical fitness.
Observation and
recognition skills play a large part of your mutual protection. In
rural areas, your truck,
tractor, snowmobile or horse give you the opportunity to be mobile and
to observe."


As to the part about not being allowed to carry guns,
if that was the intention of the police, it sure seems
strange that there is not one word of it in that handbook.

[Norminn]

On 3/29/2012 9:05 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
> In article<IP2dnWaoicsZxunS...@earthlink.com>,
> Norminn<nor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>> The only comment I heard from Obama was "If I had a son, he would look
>> like Trayvon Martin". I don't see that as political, just identifying,
>> as a parent, with a tremendous loss.
>
> EVERYTHING any president does and says is political. He says this, a
> couple days later the Feds join in on the investigation. You think that
> might not taint the investigation at least a little?

In the minds of many, sure would! Actually, he made no reference to
evidence, guilt or innocence, or legal issues. Speaking as a human
being isn't wrong, and the pres may see it as a duty when the issue is
so huge.

>
>
>>
>> I'm not looking at the mess as a race issue; just wondering who is being
>> truthful and curious as to the REAL facts of the matter. I've met some
>> really, really nasty cops in my life and I don't have a race issue with
>> them. Some cops lie...some are racist bastards...
> And some are cop bashers since this has nothing to do with cops.
>

Cop bashers? That is a stretch....I've related some experience with bad
ones. That isn't saying all or many are bad...just stating reality.
Here's a tidbit from Sanford PD on matter of LAW:

' "Law enforcement officials will not hesitate to make an arrest for
stalking," the press release stated.

However, the Florida statute on stalking does not include language that
would provide special protection to city officials or prevent media from
asking questions. The Orlando Sentinel questioned the city about its
statement and its threat to arrest reporters for stalking.'

Did you think that racial prejudice had disappeared from law enforcement?

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 29, 9:23 am, Norminn <norm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On 3/29/2012 9:05 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
>

> > In article<IP2dnWaoicsZxunSnZ2dnUVZ_jydn...@earthlink.com>,
> >   Norminn<norm...@earthlink.net>  wrote:

No, I think it still clearly exists. Otherwise the Black Panthers
would
have been arrested by now. They put out a $10,000 reward for
the capture of Zimmerman, stating they wanted an "eye for an eye".
Now, if law enforcement wasn't racially prejudiced, the FL attorney
general would have arrested them for making threats. And Eric
Holder would have started an investigation into the violation of
Z's civil rights. But he didn't do that. Nor did he bring action
againt the Black Panthers who were standing outside polling
places in the 2008 election, holding baseball bats.

[Oren]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:54:30 -0400, Norminn <nor...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Now, here is a link to police video of Z.
>just after the shooting...where is all the blood from the busted nose
>and cut on his head?????

He was treated (First Aid) on the scene by paramedics and wounds
cleaned of blood, etc..... That was one report, so it explains the
lack of blood in this video.

[Doug]

Did they bring a change of clothes for him too?

[HeyBub]

Jim Elbrecht wrote:
> "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> -snip-
>>
>> Hmm. Thirty-one states have some form of Stand Your Ground (SYG)
>> laws.
>
> Check your math-- or your source. This map only shows 18.
> http://www.adn.com/2012/03/26/2392504/stand-your-ground-bill-in-spotlight.html
>
> If you've got another map or chart, I'd love to see it.

I may have misspoked.
"As of 28 May 2010 (2010 -05-28, 31 states had some form of Castle Doctrine
or Stand Your Ground law."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

>
>> Are
>> you saying that over 60% of the population passed a law with no
>> reason behind it? Or is it possible you simply do not understand
>> what three out of five do?
>
> And just a WAG, I doubt those states represent 15% of the population.
> [and how many of them are, like FL, second guessing themselves this
> week]
>

The most and third-most populated states (California & New York) do not have
a SYG law. The second and forth and fifth (Texas, Florida, and Pennsylvania)
do. I suspect, without going to the trouble of totaling things up, that the
60% figure is close to correct.

[HeyBub]

I'm sure he got one at the cop shop. I doubt they'd send him home nekkid.

[gonjah]

The EMT's were first rate considering the guy was beat to within an inch
of his life. Even washed his clothes. Washed his moon walking jacket too.

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gon...@wasted.net> wrote in message
news:lt6dnWfVUoUcD-nS...@posted.toastnet...

>
>
> The EMT's were first rate considering the guy was beat to within an inch
> of his life. Even washed his clothes. Washed his moon walking jacket too.

<YAWN>
How stupid !

[gonjah]

If you believe Geo. Z you're right. ;)

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <k419n71mlk6nggl2m...@4ax.com>,

Not on his close, though

[Oren]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:53:40 -0700, Oren <Or...@127.0.0.1> wrote:

Every picture tells a story, don't it. -- Rod Stewart

Video:

<http://video.foxnews.com/v/1535007675001/new-questions-over-use-of-photos-in-trayvon-martin-case/?playlist_id=87651>

[tra...@optonline.net]

It's not just Z, it's Z plus an eyewitness, the only eyewitness that
saw what happened, who was yelling for help.

The video is of poor resolution so it's not clear to me what
you should be able to see or not. The best shot is of the
back of his head. There were reports that he had a gash
and/or needed stitches. I would agree that if he had an
injury of that type you would think there would be at least
a bandaid or some kind of bandage visible and I don't
see one. The video doesn't help Z at this point, that's
for sure. Presumably the police have photos showing
the actual injuriess

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gon...@wasted.net> wrote in message

news:AoudnWthHPCPBOnS...@posted.toastnet...

I don't need to "believe" anyone.
I try to look at what DATA is available, and how the data fits the various
possible scenarios

1) The video image was Black & White, and of poor quality
NO way to really tell the extent of injuries
2) Contusions and lacerations to the back of the head do NOT always cause
profuse bleeding
3) Ditto for the face.
4) Ditto for the nose
5) It is quite easy to clean up someone who has stopped bleeding.
PARTICULARLY when the bleeding was minimal.

The video is at best non-indicative

But thank your for letting me demonstrate YOUR stupidity.

[gonjah]

Listen! It's the sound of Attila.Iskander squirming.

[Stormin Mormon]

Did they clean on his far?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Kurt Ullman" <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cbSdnVYejbwkBOnS...@earthlink.com...

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <cbSdnVYejbwkBOnS...@earthlink.com>,

Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <k419n71mlk6nggl2m...@4ax.com>,
> Oren <Or...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:54:30 -0400, Norminn <nor...@earthlink.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Now, here is a link to police video of Z.
> > >just after the shooting...where is all the blood from the busted nose
> > >and cut on his head?????
> >
> > He was treated (First Aid) on the scene by paramedics and wounds
> > cleaned of blood, etc..... That was one report, so it explains the
> > lack of blood in this video.
>
> Not on his close, though

Not on his clothes.. I really shouldn't try to respond while on the
phone. (g)

[Doug]

Break a nose and no blood on the shirt????

[Jim Yanik]

Bill Kniess <m...@mymailsvr.org> wrote in
news:XnsA02520B23D5...@74.209.136.89:

> Molly Brown <recycl...@gmail.com> wrote in

> news:d1ea6d55-1e69-4c7a-a7a3-1355067c4427
> @er9g2000vbb.googlegroups.co
> m:
>
><<<<<snip>>>>>>
>>
>> 1. To defend yourself means when you’re not moving or
> going
>> anywhere and someone is coming after you, your loved one
> or your
>> property. 2. Unless you’re a member of SWAT and on duty,
> a gun can
>> only be used as a defense.
>> 3. When you go AFTER someone ( read # 1 above) then you
> are no
>> longer considered to be defending yourself.

but there's no law against following someone,even while armed.
Nor is it any "provocation".

>> Florida has a marvelous law of “stand your ground” that
> is
>> extremely useful. If people like you don’t stop trying
> to subvert
>> it, we’re all going to lose.
>>
>
> Who are you saying here is the defender?

Considering Zimmerman was on the ground on his back with Trayvon on top of
him,I'd say he was defending himself,lawfully.
They have a witness for that,and the evidence supports it.

>
> Subverting ? Are you saying we were a lost bunch from the
> beginning of the country up to the time this law was
> passed?
>
> Marvelous law ?

YES!.
it removes the presumption of guilt from the victim,and makes the police
have reasonable evidence that a crime was committed before arresting or
charging a person who had to defend themselves,and it removed the "duty to
retreat" that protects the ATTACKER and not the victim.
"duty to retreat" actually INCREASES the risk to the victim.

> I'm an NRA member, but I have to say that
> there was
> NO reason to have a law like this enacted. (It was
> bankrolled by my
> NRA, and for the life of me, cannot find out for what
> purpose they
> push such legislation).

Try doing some reading. Wiki has a nice page on the Stand Your Ground law.

> It is plain and simple nuts. Just
> about as
> bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
> What? Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
> out in a bar and someone
> gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle? What's going
> to happen
> now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
> bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.

this sounds like that old "Wild West" nonsense again.
except it never happened. states where concealed carry is allowed in
restaurants that serve alcohol do not have these incidents,nor do they
where carry in bars is permitted.

also,one CAN be attacked when leaving a bar or restaurant.

>
> If someone was packing, out and about the
> town runing erands and whatnot, and someone
> looks at them funny, and they think they are
> threatened, they have the right under this law
> to defend themselves from this looker,

Nonsense. the standard is REASONABLE belief of imminent danger to your life
or that you might receive great bodily harm.

for a "NRA member",you sure don't don't know the law,or the issues.
but maybe you're not really a "NRA member".
there's certainly been plants that claim to be such,and were just Brady
Campaign folks. you have all the views of the Brady bunch.

Newsflash;the Second Amendment is NOT about hunting and sporting.

> even to
> the death. Now you think this is a stretch, but
> this is real life and anything can and does happen.
>
> Bill Kniess
> US Army
> NRA
>

Generally,the places where concealed carry is allowed in bars it's
predicated on the person NOT consuming any alcohol.
Not so for restaurants that serve alcohol.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

[Jim Yanik]

gonjah <gon...@wasted.net> wrote in news:lt6dnWfVUoUcD-
nSnZ2dnUV...@posted.toastnet:

yeah,ALL the police and EMTS all got together and lied on offical
reports...even the black ones. it's all a racist conspiracy...
Sheesh.

Plus,eyes don't blacken until long after the nose is broken,same for
bruising.
I also note that police kept Zimmerman's clothes as evidence.

I suspect the police have enough crime scene photos to prove all
this,except they don't release that stuff to the public until after an
investigation or trial is over.
Don't want to taint a potential jury pool.

[gonjah]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc4e-HdlhPY&feature=fvst
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc4e-HdlhPY&feature=fvst>

[Oren]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:38:33 -0500, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

Chuckle. A guy bonded out one day. He went home in his pajamas, the
exact clothes he was arrested in (feds).

[Oren]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:30:59 -0500, "Doug" <noemail...@msn.com>
wrote:

>Break a nose and no blood on the shirt????

Sure. I've seen it happen. Even some young kid can box his friends in
the driveway.

You can get your nose twisted with a left hook. Watch out for that.

[Jim Elbrecht]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>Jim Elbrecht wrote:
>> "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> -snip-
>>>
>>> Hmm. Thirty-one states have some form of Stand Your Ground (SYG)
>>> laws.
>>
>> Check your math-- or your source. This map only shows 18.
>> http://www.adn.com/2012/03/26/2392504/stand-your-ground-bill-in-spotlight.html
>>
>> If you've got another map or chart, I'd love to see it.
>
>I may have misspoked.
>"As of 28 May 2010 (2010 -05-28, 31 states had some form of Castle Doctrine
>or Stand Your Ground law."
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

There is a world of difference between SYG & Castle Doctrine. I
don't know why they'd lump them together. Shame on wiki for that
one, even though they explain the difference in the text that nobody
reads.

>
>>
>>> Are
>>> you saying that over 60% of the population passed a law with no
>>> reason behind it? Or is it possible you simply do not understand
>>> what three out of five do?
>>
>> And just a WAG, I doubt those states represent 15% of the population.
>> [and how many of them are, like FL, second guessing themselves this
>> week]
>>
>
>The most and third-most populated states (California & New York) do not have
>a SYG law. The second and forth and fifth (Texas, Florida, and Pennsylvania)
>do. I suspect, without going to the trouble of totaling things up, that the
>60% figure is close to correct.
>

*If* you want to lump all of the laws together, I suppose you could be
right. I don't, and stand by my WAG.

Jim

[gonjah]

You guys may want to take a clue from Fox News on this one....

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/19/447289/all-major-news-outlets-cover-trayvon-martin-tragedy-except-fox-news/

...and move on.

[ChairMan]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message
news:QaKdnZGyiso2U-nS...@posted.toastnet...

They are lying, I've seen it all over Fox, hell, it's even been covered on
Fox business channel.
You might want to find better sources for your news.

[G. Morgan]

Norminn wrote:

> Some cops lie...some are racist bastards...

<aside>

What pisses me off is that cops are allowed to lie and deceive the
suspect during questioning, but if the suspect lies he's guilty of
"obstruction of justice" (even if he had nothing to do with the
crime he's being questioned about).

Don't talk to cops...

Must watch if you have not seen this and live in the US.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
--
I like refried beans. That's why I wanna try fried beans,
because maybe they're just as good and we're just wasting time.
You don't have to fry them again after all. -Mitch Hedberg

[gonjah]

I don't usually watch Fox but I did watch it for about 45 min this
afternoon (out of curiosity) and the TM shooting was mentioned once
during an interview with the FL Guv. CNN's coverage was almost 24/7 for
awhile.

[Oren]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:35:29 -0500, G. Morgan
<seal...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:

>I like refried beans. That's why I wanna try fried beans,
>because maybe they're just as good and we're just wasting time.
>You don't have to fry them again after all. -Mitch Hedberg

If you don't like fried beans the first time, why you would you refry
them?

I miss something?

[Jim Yanik]

gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote in
news:QaKdnZGyiso2U-nS...@posted.toastnet:

thinkprogress is a Soros organization,they can't be trusted.

[HeyBub]

Jim Yanik wrote:
>>
>
> Generally,the places where concealed carry is allowed in bars it's
> predicated on the person NOT consuming any alcohol.
> Not so for restaurants that serve alcohol.

Right. My state tries to distinguish between a bar that serves pickled pig's
feet (carry prohibited) and a restaurant that serves wine (carry permitted).
In those places where carry is permitted, consuming an adult beverage is
likewise permitted.

[HeyBub]

Norminn wrote:
>
> The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
> roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
> supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by
> PD and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
> program.

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES patrol, even
in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt him a second time?

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message

news:X4GdncRmzuFjA-nS...@posted.toastnet...

That response is the response of a loser realizing it's been bitch-slapped.
Learn to enjoy it, slappy..
It's probably not the first time.

[Attila.Iskander]

"Doug" <noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:oha9n7d0cr1dpqq2g...@4ax.com...

Depends on how the nose is broken
Not all broken noses bleed
Sometimes they bleed so little that people don't even realize it's broken.

Ex EMT - Been there, Done that.

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message

news:QaKdnZGyiso2U-nS...@posted.toastnet...

After you alphonse

[Doug]

Ok. I guess you should know <grin>.

[Doug]

Usually I watch CNN tho I now watch a little of Fox News at times
because CNN bores me with too much over analyzing news stores. I bet
they wouldn't like to hear this but that's how I feel.

[gonjah]

On 3/29/2012 11:19 PM, Doug wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 21:40:19 -0500, "Attila.Iskander"
> <Attila....@Live.com> wrote:
>
>> "Doug"<noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:oha9n7d0cr1dpqq2g...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:35:01 -0500, "Attila.Iskander"
>>> <Attila....@Live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "gonjah"<gon...@wasted.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:AoudnWthHPCPBOnS...@posted.toastnet...
>>>>> On 3/29/2012 12:08 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:
>>>>>> "gonjah"<gon...@wasted.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:lt6dnWfVUoUcD-nS...@posted.toastnet...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The EMT's were first rate considering the guy was beat to within an
>>>>>>> inch
>>>>>>> of his life. Even washed his clothes. Washed his moon walking jacket
>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>> <YAWN>
>>>>>> How stupid !
>>>>> If you believe Geo. Z you're right. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I don't need to "believe" anyone.
>>>> I try to look at what DATA is available, and how the data fits the various
>>>> possible scenarios
>>>>

>>>> 1) The video image was Black& White, and of poor quality

>>>> NO way to really tell the extent of injuries
>>>> 2) Contusions and lacerations to the back of the head do NOT always
>>>> cause
>>>> profuse bleeding
>>>> 3) Ditto for the face.
>>>> 4) Ditto for the nose
>>>> 5) It is quite easy to clean up someone who has stopped bleeding.
>>>> PARTICULARLY when the bleeding was minimal.
>>>>
>>>> The video is at best non-indicative
>>>>
>>>> But thank your for letting me demonstrate YOUR stupidity.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Break a nose and no blood on the shirt????
>> Depends on how the nose is broken
>> Not all broken noses bleed
>> Sometimes they bleed so little that people don't even realize it's broken.
>>
>> Ex EMT - Been there, Done that.
>>
>
> Ok. I guess you should know<grin>.

A broken nose will "most likely" bleed.

[Doug]

I thought so too but I'm not going to argue with a EMT or doctor. I'll
just take his word for it.

The other thing I noticed is that zimmerman is getting out of the
police car on his own power and looks comfortable or pain free to me.
I would think the injuries would bother you and I'd think a broken
nose would hinder your breathing to some degree???? Of course I'm
still no authority on this stuff so maybe I'm wrong.

Still not going to draw any conclusions as to who is guilty and I'm
tired of the race card. From my experience I once knew a wannabe
police man and he had a mucho type attitude then. I won't go into
detail about him but my guess is that this incident isn't a race issue
but more of a macho attitude gone wrong.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 30, 7:20 am, "Doug" <noemailaddr...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:48:12 -0500, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:
> >On 3/29/2012 11:19 PM, Doug wrote:
> >> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 21:40:19 -0500, "Attila.Iskander"

> >> <Attila.Iskan...@Live.com>  wrote:
>
> >>> "Doug"<noemailaddr...@msn.com>  wrote in message

> >>>news:oha9n7d0cr1dpqq2g...@4ax.com...
> >>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:35:01 -0500, "Attila.Iskander"

> >>>> <Attila.Iskan...@Live.com>  wrote:

He was walking on his feet, not his head. What exactly was
he supposed to do to evidence pain from his injuries?
Ever wath COPS onb TV? There are all kinds of banged
up people put into or taken out of cop cars. Except for
tall ones having difficulty because of their height, or
ones deliberately resisting, they all seem to get in and
out of the car just fine.

>
> Still not going to draw any conclusions as to who is guilty and I'm
> tired of the race card.   From my experience I once knew a wannabe
> police man and he had a mucho type attitude then.  I won't go into
> detail about him but my guess is that this incident isn't a race issue

> but more of a macho attitude gone wrong.  - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

And there you go drawing the conclusions.

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <-bGdnfvGKf5xlejS...@earthlink.com>,

Farting in his general direction is generally viewed as a violation of
air quality laws.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 29, 5:35 pm, G. Morgan <sealte...@osama-is-dead.net> wrote:
> Norminn wrote:
> > Some cops lie...some are racist bastards...
>
> <aside>
>
> What pisses me off is that cops are allowed to lie and deceive the
> suspect during questioning, but if the suspect lies he's guilty of
> "obstruction of justice" (even if he had nothing to do with the
> crime he's being questioned about).

No need to get upset or feel for the bad guys. The reasoning
is simple. When the cops lie, the motive is to find out the TRUTH,
so that justice can prevail. When the suspect or one of his
cohorts lies, it's to avoid prosecution and justice. Their motive
is corrupt and hence they may be charged with obstruction
of justice.

>
> Don't talk to cops...

If you're a criminal being questioned about your crime, that is
usually good advice. If you're not, then it doesn't apply. In fact,
it could be very bad advice. For example, let's say your
friends BooBoo and Slim pick you up for what you think is
just a ride to a friends house. Along the way, they make a
stop somewhere else, tell you to wait in the car. They go
inside, you hear shots and a few minutes later they run
back to the car. In that case, if you come forward
immediately with your honest story, you will likely
not be charged because
you are innocent. But if the police finally figure out
who all was in that car because they have a witness
and come find you a week later, you could be in a position
that is much harder to defend.

[Attila.Iskander]

"Doug" <noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message

news:oscan7dqv4pukvn5f...@4ax.com...

Most recent case was a (soccer) teammate of my 12 year old son
Took a clearing shot to the face from less than 6 feet.
Got knocked off his feet.
Jumped up - kept playing for another couple of minutes until his nose
swelled up the size of an orange.
Came off because he couldn't breathe
Ice pack, gentle palpation
You could feel the break under the swelling
Off to the hospital
Break confirmed by X-RAY
Tough guy didn't want pain killer before doctor re-aligned broken parts
Had a HUGE "OW" moment !
According to dad, mom nearly fainted at the sound of her "baby" screaming in
pain
Wanted to do facial reconstruction of doctor with nails
Son interceded that he had declined pain killer

Headline read:
Doctor Saved From Irate Mom By Macho 12 Year-Old .
Details at 6:00 pm.

Oh yeah.
Not enough visible blood to be sent off field by referee following
original contact with ball.

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message

news:pPadnUpbGruWpujS...@posted.toastnet...

<sigh>
Always funny to have an example of people making an argument and ignoring
the words they use to make it
"most likely" is very different from "will"...

[Attila.Iskander]

"Doug" <noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message

news:r35bn71ro0t1bf88j...@4ax.com...

There is a complete lack of good data
Zimmerman's dad indicated that there was a lot of data that was not made
public that would eliminate most of the rumors/speculation going around.
That would be typical of any ongoing police investigation, where they will
release tidbits to satisfy the news rats but not give away the game.

I did look at the video of Zimmerman at the Police station too.
The image quality, and the angle of view is not good enough to discern
bruises or lacerations, front or back.
Also remember that bruises and lacerations do not necessarily mean big
purple blob or scratch from eye to chin. They could mean a collection of
very small injuries that would only be visible on close inspection.

So when people expected him to get out of cruiser with bandages and ice
pack, and saw nothing of the sort, it's understandable they immediately
dismissed an reports of injury.
As to bits of grass, since officers are often responsible or keeping their
cruisers clean, some have a real aversion to putting someone grubby, covered
with dirt and grass bits into the car before cleaning them off.

Case in point, I was flying down the NY State Thruway on my motorcycle, from
Montreal to NYC, in the middle of the night, in driving rain doing about 95
when the 55 double-nickel was still in force.
State trooper pulled up next to me, turned on all his lights, including the
inside ones, and just waved at me to slow down.
At under 65 mph , he gave me a thumbs-up and shut down his lights and drove
on.
I'm pretty sure that he was trying to avoid getting a soaking-wet
motorcyclist in the back of his pristine cruiser.
Note:, that he did hide under a bridge will all lights off, about 30 miles
down the road, to see if I stayed at around 60-65. When I passed in front of
him, I blipped my high beams, and he did the same. Which I believe confirmed
my impression.

[Attila.Iskander]

"Doug" <noemail...@msn.com> wrote in message

news:93dan79l03pm90q1o...@4ax.com...

CNN has a real problem that they get stuck chewing the same meat for hours
on end
They also need to be "sensational" to keep their audience listening.

[Jim Yanik]

gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote in
news:pPadnUpbGruWpujS...@posted.toastnet:

If you're punched in the nose and you immediately fall down on your
back,blood may not get on your shirt.

some folks clot faster than others,too.

[gonjah]

I guess you forgot that the police said his nose was bleeding.

[Doug]

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:01:26 -0500, "Attila.Iskander"

That's funny. I made the same drive but going from NYC to Montreal
and got pulled over by a state trooper. Long funny story but he let
me go when I explained.

[gonjah]

Anderson Cooper did a very good job of questioning one of the eye
witnesses yesterday. The witness seemed to contradict Geo Z's father's
account of the story Geo told the father. Of course the father could
have gotten the story wrong or Geo could be lying to make it sound like
he was the victim, which to me, is the most logical conclusion.

The police said Geo's nose was bleeding. The reason so many (of the
doubters) thought it was odd there was no blood on the shirt is they
wanted to see some confirmation of his story. Of course, it is possible,
the nose only bleed a little, but what we're looking for is something to
tie his story together. So far, I'm not finding it.

I have no bias against the police. In general, I've always had a lot of
respect for cops. Maybe too much. From what I gathered, the police
wanted to arrest Geo that night but the prosecutor released him because
of the SYG law.

[gonjah]

I think that could be said of all 24/7 news channels.

I enjoyed watching Fox as a change of pace. It's the editorials I don't
care for and that goes for CNN and MSNBC too IMHO. I don't like either
side telling me how I should think.

[Ron]

On Mar 30, 11:33 am, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:

> Anderson Cooper did a very good job of questioning one of the eye
> witnesses yesterday. The witness seemed to contradict Geo Z's father's
> account of the story Geo told the father. Of course the father could
> have gotten the story wrong or Geo could be lying to make it sound like
> he was the victim, which to me, is the most logical conclusion.

Not much of a witness IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoJPIAGdBE4

>
> The police said Geo's nose was bleeding. The reason so many (of the
> doubters) thought it was odd there was no blood on the shirt is they
> wanted to see some confirmation of his story. Of course, it is possible,
> the nose only bleed a little, but what we're looking for is something to
> tie his story together. So far, I'm not finding it.

The question that I have that I can't believe people like Nancy Grace
haven't brought up is...If in fact Zimmerman was on his back defending
himself and then shot Martin while he was on top of him, how come no
blood from Martin on Zimmerman's shirt?

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Mar 30, 1:33 pm, Ron <BigELil...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 11:33 am, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:
>
> > Anderson Cooper did a very good job of questioning one of the eye
> > witnesses yesterday. The witness seemed to contradict Geo Z's father's
> > account of the story Geo told the father. Of course the father could
> > have gotten the story wrong or Geo could be lying to make it sound like
> > he was the victim, which to me, is the most logical conclusion.
>
> Not much of a witness IMO.

And not much of an interviewer either. This witness says he
heard and saw some of the event from his window. Yet, Anderson
Cooper never asks "What did you hear them saying?" Nor
does he ask how far away the witness was when he was
watching through a window at night. Witness says he
heard the beginning of the confrontation, then went away
and later returned to open the window and watch. No answer
as to how long that interval was. The most the witness says
is something like "I went off to do something else". Cooper,
being the great interviewer, doesn't even ask what that
something else was or how long it took.

IMO, the witness is giving mostly opinion, little as to facts
that bring any new information.

>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoJPIAGdBE4
>
>
>
> > The police said Geo's nose was bleeding. The reason so many (of the
> > doubters) thought it was odd there was no blood on the shirt is they
> > wanted to see some confirmation of his story. Of course, it is possible,
> > the nose only bleed a little, but what we're looking for is something to
> > tie his story together. So far, I'm not finding it.
>
> The question that I have that I can't believe people like Nancy Grace
> haven't brought up is...If in fact Zimmerman was on his back defending
> himself and then shot Martin while he was on top of him, how come no
> blood from Martin on Zimmerman's shirt?

At least two possibilites:

1 - There is blood. AFAIK, nothing concrete about that has
been released by the police. The police did keep his clothing.

2 - There wasn't much blood, if any, from the entrance wound in
the short amount of time they were still together.

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message

news:IridnabGVLE_W-jS...@posted.toastnet...

I guess I did.

[Attila.Iskander]

"gonjah" <gonjah.net> wrote in message

news:_cGdnUtPX7-TSOjS...@posted.toastnet...

I stopped watching "news" reports a long time ago.
Even before Rather-gate
There are so many other sources that are not under pressure to sell
themselves to the audience for advertising money, that it has made my life
much more pleasant while being better informed too.

[HeyBub]

Doug wrote:
>
> That's funny. I made the same drive but going from NYC to Montreal
> and got pulled over by a state trooper. Long funny story but he let
> me go when I explained.

Here's an explanation for you:

Driving down the freeway in my unmarked car at 3:00am, I was passed by a
Pontiac doing at least 100! Wow! In about ten seconds a Houston police
cruiser passed me doing the same speed.

After a mile or so, I saw the cruiser had the Pontiac stopped. I pulled in
behind with my grill lights on. I exited my car just in time to hear on
Houston officer command the Pontiac driver to step out of the vehicle.

This GIANT black man got out of the car. I thought, honest-to-god, he must
be a defensive linebacker for the Houston Oilers.

"Why are you going so fast?" asked one of the Houston cops.

"Pussy, man!" said the driver.

The two Houston cops looked at each other. They both looked at me. I
shrugged. They slowly turned back to the driver. One cop asked: "Say what?"

"Pussy man!" the Pontiac driver repeated. "My old lady called. Said she was
in the mood and for me to get my black ass over to her place!" the driver
explained. He finished up with "...and she ain't in the mood all that often,
officers!"

We three cops looked at each other again. Finally the lead Houston cop said:
"Well, we can't rightly give you a ticket for that. Go on, get outta here,
but take it easy."

" 'preciate it officers," said the Pontiac driver as he left black marks on
the pavement driving away.

We three stood on the side of the freeway for a moment, feeling good that,
in one small way, we made the world a better place.

[Doug]

On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 10:28:15 -0500, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

Wow :) Well if not better, happier for one couple at least. My
story was competely different and during daylight hours. BTW, I live
in a Houston suburb now so I'll try to remember your story in case I
get pulled over for speeding <grin>.

[Robert Green]

"Ron" <BigEL...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:05462399-d458-41f0...@gw9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> HeyBub wrote:
>
> The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:
>
> * He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
> bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
> * Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
> * Another suspension for tardiness and truancy
>
> All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
> burglary-ridden sub-division.
>
> http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-t...

<So does Zimmerman.>

< http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj >

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article discusses.

<
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-20/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-20120320_1_robert-zimmerman-domestic-violence-online-petition?pagewanted=all >

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

--
Bobby G.


--
Bobby G.

[Robert Green]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

<stuff snipped>

> Further, you are completely wrong in your #3 above. The SYG law
specifically
> permits lethal force to defend yourself, irrespective of where you are
> located or your (lawful) reason for being there. Presuming you have a
right
> to walk down the sidewalk, without regard for your motive in so doing, you
> are covered. Specifically, if I follow you, and you don't like it, you own
> the problem, not me*.
>
> In the case I just outlined, while my following you may rile your anger,
> provocation is not an excuse for you to attack me. And if you DO attack
me,
> I will blow your ass away.

It all depends. In Maryland, for instance, if you were on your way to make
the night deposit at the bank's night depository and were being closely
followed, you could easily claim you felt "apprehended danger" and the
person following you could possibly be blown away without legal penalty.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=26851

It's a very sticky issue here. I wouldn't advise anyone that it's OK to
closely follow another person, especially at night. As Zimmerman proved,
that's just asking for trouble.

--
Bobby G.

[harryagain]

"Robert Green" <robert_g...@yah00.com> wrote in message
news:jl9uuu$tfr$1...@dont-email.me...

Wonderful place America. I expect the next thing will be that Zimmerman
knew all this before he shot him.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

You mean like this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-to-do-internal-investigation-on-zimmerman-segment/2012/03/31/gIQAc4HhnS_blog.html?hpid=z6

[gonjah]

This thing stinks like old fish:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-audio-screams-were-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say

[Ron]

Check this out

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/Firearms%20Quick%20Reference%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.


--
Grab your gun and bring the cat in.

[Ron]

gonjah wrote:
>>
>
> This thing stinks like old fish:
>
> http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-audio-screams-were-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say
>

Yes, it does!

[Oren]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:02:02 -0400, Ron <bigel...@msn.com> wrote:

>> This thing stinks like old fish:
>>
>> http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-audio-screams-were-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say
>>
>
>Yes, it does!

... and then:

"But he also said he could not confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because
he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice.

So this expert just uses one side of the evidence?

[gonjah]

I wonder why the experts aren't using the phone conversation that
Trayvon had with his gf? To me, the scream sounds like a younger man.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:00:55 -0400, Ron <bigel...@msn.com> wrote:



>
>Check this out
>
>http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/Firearms%20Quick%20Reference%20Guide.pdf
>
>I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.

No matter what an investigation show, Florida authorities are under a
lot of pressure from assorted protest groups. They may charge him
just to appease them. I would hope they still go by facts of the case
though, not political pressure.

[Oren]

You tell me. I'm not the expert.

Why did you change your posting nym from Jim T?

[Robert Green]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

> Hmm. Thirty-one states have some form of Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws. Are
> you saying that over 60% of the population passed a law with no reason
> behind it? Or is it possible you simply do not understand what three out
of
> five do?

The population? I doubt very many people in these states KNEW they were in
a castle doctrine or SYG state. These laws were part of a concerted agenda
by the NRA and others to have legislators quietly change existing laws or
add new ones. As we've seen with union busting laws, vaginal ultrasound
dildoing laws, anti-immigration laws, gay-marriage laws, pot intitiatives,
etc. the battleground for reshaping America has moved to the statehouses of
America.

However, I don't know of any state that passed a SYG law by referendum or
any kind of popular vote. They were quietly lobbied in. -Ask people here.
I'll bet a lot of them were surprised by how many states have become Stand
Your Ground states. I think that might change now that people are becoming
aware of what SWG is all about. To the bashers - save your breath: I don't
really think Zimmerman was a SYG shooting but nevertheless, it served to
focus attention on SWG.

> > It is plain and simple nuts. Just
> > about as
> > bad as Ohio's law permitting concealed carry in bars.
> > What? Don't the lawmakers know how easy a fight breaks
> > out in a bar and someone
> > gets hit with a pool queue stick ora bottle? What's going
> > to happen
> > now with concealed guns? People will be carted out in body
> > bags rather than on ambulance gurneys.
>
> In my state, we've had the ability to carry concealed where liquor is
served
> since 1995. There has not been ONE SINGLE case - that I can find - of a
CHL
> holder shooting another bar patron.

That *you* can find. That's a serious limitation. Does your state publish
the names of CHL holders? If not, how can you or a reporter tell whether a
shooting involves a CHL? This article explains precisely why "not finding
any cases" absolutely does not equal "not being any cases."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/us/more-concealed-guns-and-some-are-in-the-wrong-hands.html

<<Mr. Diez, as it turned out, was one of more than 240,000 people in North
Carolina with a permit to carry a concealed handgun. If not for that gun,
Mr. Simons is convinced, the confrontation would have ended harmlessly. "I
bet it would have been a bunch of mouthing," he said. Mr. Diez, then 42,
eventually pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to
kill. >>

The following paragraphs make it clear that the information you say you
can't find is very hard to find in the first place. Its absence is proof of
nothing other than how difficult it is to match public shootings with very
private lists of CHL holders. The data that's available nowhere near as
rosy as you suggest and tends to support Bill's view on things. The
Zimmerman shooting may lead to a much closer look at these SYG laws now as
people ask themselves "when did we pass *that* law?"
<< The New York Times examined the permit program in North Carolina, one of
a dwindling number of states where the identities of permit holders remain
public. The review, encompassing the last five years, offers a rare,
detailed look at how a liberalized concealed weapons law has played out in
one state. And while it does not provide answers, it does raise questions.
More than 2,400 permit holders were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors,
excluding traffic-related crimes, over the five-year period, The Times found
when it compared databases of recent criminal court cases and licensees.
While the figure represents a small percentage of those with permits, more
than 200 were convicted of felonies, including at least 10 who committed
murder or manslaughter. All but two of the killers used a gun. Among them
was Bobby Ray Bordeaux Jr., who had a concealed handgun permit despite a
history of alcoholism, major depression and suicide attempts. In 2008, he
shot two men with a .22-caliber revolver, killing one of them, during a
fight outside a bar.>>

CHL holders become neither angels or devils when they get their "carry
ticket." But they do remain people and they have all of the failings of
people. A number of the studies I've looked at say that once a person gets
a CHL, he's often able to keep it despite no longer qualifying for any
number of serious reasons. Followup is very poor.

> You're worried about something that is so remote as to be absurd.

Sorry, Bill's right and it's not that remote at all. Plenty of permit
holders in plenty of states kill plenty of patrons in bars while drunk.
Although the above shooting by Bobby Ray is just North Carolina, they allow
reasonable extrapolation. I've seen cases in other states where CHL holders
killed people in bars.

My state is governed by case law and not statute. That means you really
take your chances applying deadly force as a private citizen. If you cut
loose with a pistol in a barfight in Baltimore where no one else had a gun,
I'm pretty sure that if you weren't a cop, you'd be going to jail.

You're trying to equate not finding something with it not existing.

That's a logical fallacy that also known as HeyBubbing. (-: We ain't
BubBuying it.

> We can also carry concealed in churches,
> hospitals, the state capitol, libraries, parks, and the governor's office!
> Again, no untoward happenings recorded.

Who is we? All CHL holders everywhere? In Texas? You and your squeezette?
Whatcha mean "we" kimosabe?

To whom did those untoward happenings not happen? To you? To everyone? As
far as you can tell? Certainly not to the shooting victims in North
Carolina.

If you think about it, your claims just don't pass the common sense test.
To suddenly have a population of angelic CHL holders who do no wrong ever
just isn't believable. They are fallible human beings.

> It may be that Texans are more mild-mannered than the folks in your state,
> but I suspect the real difference is in your fears versus reality.

I suspect the difference is you're not looking very hard for what you don't
want to find.

> Further, if a fight DOES break out, with pool cues and chairs sailing
around
> like ducks on a bug, I certainly would want to be armed.

Decades, no century of case law disagree with you. The law's position is
"you would want to leave." While the line has blurred somewhat lately, the
application of deadly force is still very tricky business. In something
like a barfight where the other participants are unarmed and you have the
ability to escape you'll still go on trial for some sort of offense. As a
police reporter my CHL training was specifically job related and it dealt
with - at great lengths - the difference between deadly force applied by a
sworn officer of the law and a shooting by a private citizen (basically
every one who is NOT a sworn LEO).

Your advice may be great for Texans, but even though many states are SYG and
castle doctrine states, they have some serious exceptions to the application
of deadly force. That means you damn well better know the right answers to
questions the cops will ask you after the shooting.

Here's just one example:

Maine (Deadly force justified to terminate criminal trespass AND another
crime within home, or to stop unlawful and imminent use of deadly force, or
to effect a citizen's arrest against deadly force; duty to retreat not
specifically removed)

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-a/title17-Asec107.html

Guess the trick question you'll be asked . . .

> > If someone was packing, out and about the
> > town runing erands and whatnot, and someone
> > looks at them funny, and they think they are
> > threatened, they have the right under this law
> > to defend themselves from this looker, even to
> > the death. Now you think this is a stretch, but
> > this is real life and anything can and does happen.
>
> There's an old saying: "An armed society frowns on those who look funny."

I'm all for CHL's - as long as you make sure you keep them from kooks,
brandishers, froteurs, psychos, murdering Muslim US Army majors, convicted
felons, alcoholics, illegal aliens, Catholic priests and a few other types.
Oh, and as long as you make them pass a range test - like cops have to, take
at least 20 hours of courses on the laws pertaining to deadly force in their
state and perhaps a few other conditions. People take proficiency tests and
other exams to be able to drive a deadly weapon. It's not too much to ask
the same of someone looking to carry one. Maybe even mandatory insurance,
just like automobiles.

Now that a number of states have enacted new carry laws the earlier research
that showed only good outcomes is beginning to tarnish.

--
Bobby G.

[gonjah]

First, I don't know. That's why I was "wonder"ing.

Second. What difference does it make to you? Stick around and I'll
change it again. AFAIK it's legal. You're a conservative. Don't I have
the right to do what I want as long as it's legal? I know people that
change there handles with each post. Get over it.

[Oren]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:00:55 -0400, Ron <bigel...@msn.com> wrote:

>Check this out
>
>http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/Firearms%20Quick%20Reference%20Guide.pdf
>
>I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.

Charge him with what?

Here is a portion of the Police Report.

See initial charges, yet to be brought. Read the narratives.

PDF

<http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-03/69081607-29132322.pdf>

[Oren]

On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:55:06 -0400, "Robert Green"
<robert_g...@yah00.com> wrote:

>Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
>suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Um, Florida being a Castle Doctrine state protects from a justified
shooting. The family cannot sue for wrongful death, take your house,
land, cats, dogs or anything from all the people you ever knew.

My state is not called a castle doctrine state because THAT one point
in the law was not written in this past year. Had protection from
civil liabilities been added, we would be in the states called Castle
Doctrine.

I see today, "deep pockets" in Texas is or has already given $10,000
to the Zimmerman defense -- assuming he committed a crime and is
arrested, put on public trial and all that mess.

[Ron]

I don't know what. That is why I said "something". The lead
investigator on the case wanted to charge him with manslaughter, but
state attorney Norman Wolfinger said there wasn't enough evidence to
lead to a conviction. Wolfinger has since recused himself and a new
state attorney (Angela Corey) has been appointed by Governor Scott to
investigate the case.

[Oren]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 15:07:13 -0500, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:

>Second. What difference does it make to you? Stick around and I'll
>change it again. AFAIK it's legal. You're a conservative. Don't I have
>the right to do what I want as long as it's legal? I know people that
>change there handles with each post. Get over it.

Watching a liberal throw a hissy-fit. LMAO

Got anymore good ones?

Shit. killin' people is legal!

[gonjah]

On 4/1/2012 6:26 PM, Oren wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 15:07:13 -0500, gonjah<gonjah.net> wrote:
>
>> Second. What difference does it make to you? Stick around and I'll
>> change it again. AFAIK it's legal. You're a conservative. Don't I have
>> the right to do what I want as long as it's legal? I know people that
>> change there handles with each post. Get over it.
> Watching a liberal throw a hissy-fit. LMAO
>
>

Almost as fun as watching you make a fool of yourself. I won't say
conservative because I like most conservatives.

BTW: I always tell people I like when I change my handle. That's why you
had to ask.

Goodbye Oren.

[Oren]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 19:57:55 -0500, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:

>
>Goodbye Oren.

Your bat, your ball.

You just might miss me.

[HeyBub]

Ron wrote:
>
> Check this out
>
> http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/Firearms%20Quick%20Reference%20Guide.pdf
>
> I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another
> story.

Could be. There are several reasons, however why Zimmerman wasn't arrested.

* A warrant for an arrest must state "probable cause" that the accused
committed a crime. Evidently there was some disagreement as to whether there
was sufficient evidence of a crime.

* Upon arrest, the "speedy trial act" clock begins. If an arrest is not
necessary, it would be foolish to arrest someone and put the prosecution
under an unnecessary time constratint.

* Even if arrested, Zimmerman would make bond in a heartbeat, maybe even
release on PR, so the arrest would serve no good purpose.

* Florida law specifically PROHIBITS an arrest in a probable self-defense
case.

* The sanctions for a false arrest are substantial. Who would be willing to
risk them?

Try to follow along:

Florida Statutes #776.012
Use of force in defense of person - A person is justified in using force
that is intended or likely to cause death or bodily injury against another
when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct
is necessary to defend himself or herself against the other's imminent use
of unlawful force.

Now add to the above
Florida Statutes #776.032
Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of
force - (1) A person who uses force as described in #776.012... is justified
in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action
for the use of such force. (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard
procedures for investigating the use of force, but the agency may not arrest
the person for using force unless it determines that probable cause exists
showing that the force that was used was unlawful.

It's crystal clear that the cops did NOT have probable cause to believe
Zimmerman acted unlawfully. All they had, at the scene, was Zimmerman's word
against nobody's!

The forensic evidence and semi-witness accounts may elevate the cop's
thinking to the probable cause level, but at the time, on the street, they
just couldn't do it.