OT Short of news in the UK

Page 4 of 10  
wrote:

That is true. While I agree with that, if I was really PO'd because someone severely agitated me, I just pay pummel the hell out of him for a few minutes. It is not the right thing to do, but humans often react that way.
So easy to say what should be done, so difficult to maintain composure when in a bad situation.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

tell me,once someone starts pummelling you,HOW do you know they are going to stop before you're dead or severely injured? do you think people don't get "carried away" in the heat of the moment?
you have NO way of knowing. at that point you are relying on THEIR "good intentions" toward you.
As I said,people HAVE died from a SINGLE punch to the head.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/25/2012 10:40 PM, Jim Yanik wrote:

Okay. M punched Z. Is that how this started? Since you know all the facts enlighten us.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mar 25, 11:44 pm, gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote:

Who punched who to start it may never be known. And I'd say it largely doesn't matter. If I get into an argument with you and strike you, you have a right to defend yourself. You can use reasonable force. But if it gets to the point that I'm on my back, nose broken, head cut open, you're on top, I'm yelling for help, do you think you have a right to just continue pummeling me? That I can't use deadly force to end a beating? Apparently you believe the rules of engagement only work in one direction. Clearly if someone is getting beaten up severly enough they have every right to use deadly force.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote in

We have physical EVIDENCE that Zimmerman was punched,evidence and and witness testimony that Trayvon was ON TOP of Zimmerman. We have a report that Zimmerman was going back to his vehicle.
AFAIK,we have NO evidence or witness testimony of any physical contact on Trayvon. I agree that we have no way of knowing how the fight started,but in that case,the presumption of innocence is Zimmerman's. Innocent until PROVEN guilty.
you folks have to PROVE Z started or provoked a fight,nullifying his right of self-defense. you can't.
that Z followed Trayvon is not -proof- of any provocation.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then I hope you also realize that the guy receiving the pummeling has a right at some point to shoot you to end it.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

do you know the diference between a Taser and a stun gun? the Taser works (usually) at a distance,the stun gun requires you be within arms reach of an attacker. Both can be blocked by heavy clothing. Letting an attacker GET to within arms reach is not a good idea.
you'd have a guy carry many different defensive weapons(actually,I suspect you'd prefer people had no guns...),and then he's gotta choose,and that takes time you may not have.
defense with a handgun has the least risk and best success for one's self,which is what you the defender is concerned about,not the wellbeing of your attacker.

if you don't want to get shot,don't attack a person. simple. that proportionality concept is plain nonsense. as I've said before,a SINGLE punch to the head has killed people before. the way to stay unshot is to not try to punch me.
also,once an attacker begins beating on you,HOW do you know that he's going to stop before you die,or before you lose an eye,or become brain-damaged? you have NO way of knowing.
the way to stay unshot is to not try to punch me.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For the $.25, I'd prefer not to have to clean the blade.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/25/2012 7:39 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

A boy lost his life.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
gonjah <gonjah.net> wrote in

more likely,you may not get the chance to stab,particularly with a guy with a long reach like a 6foot plus person has. you might hit a button or other hard object that stops your blade. you more likely might just wound him and REALLY anger him.

through unwise actions of his own choice.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:03:56 -0400, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

Key though, is why he assaulted him. Did Z do something first? Still too soon to draw a conclusion.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Given no contrary evidence, that's what happened. All evidence, so far, supports Z; perfectly justified.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

We will probably never know who "started it",or if there was "provocation" that nullifies Mr.Z's self-defense claim,and that means Zimmerman goes free,as he has the presumption of innocence.
Following is not "provocation",nor is asking a few questions.
One thing; gated communities,especially those that have neighborhood watches,need to post signs stating that non-residents are subject to surveillance,stop and question by official watch members. I believe that gated communities are a sort of private property,as they are not open to the general public,but a sort of private club,limiting a visitors rights. And as a "private property",owners-residents have a right to stop and ask what a "trespasser" is doing there. IANAL,however.
It's a shame that people have to live in gated communities,behind bars,to have a little security.
BTW,there are some parts of Sanford where bars on windows and doors is common.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

But rational people don't presume guilt just because someone is black.

He has the right to watch, but unless he has police authority, I don't think he has the right to question. That can be confrontational and start a problem.

We don't know for sure who was confrontational yet. Could have been either one.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did he presume GUILT? Of what? He told police the kid -looked suspicious,and mentioned certain -behaviors- to back it up. and he asked that THEY check him out.
But that has nothing to do with the self-defense done by Zimmerman. even if Zimmerman profiled the kid,that does not meet the standard for "provocation" that would negate a self-defense claim.
here's the applicable Florida statue that I came across on Wiki today;
776.04 Use of force by aggressor. -The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless: (a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or (b)In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
It's been cited several times now by police that Zimmerman had returned to his SUV when he was attacked. IOW,he WITHDREW from following Trayvon.(no mention of any confrontation,either.) the news report I read today said that Zimmerman was approached by Trayvon after he got back to his SUV,and Z pulled out his phone to call police again when Trayvon punched him,and he fell to the ground,where Trayvon jumped on him and began pummelling him,and banging his head into the sidewalk.(I wondedr if police found Z's blood and maybe hair in that area?) Zimmerman's injuries support that according to police.

Baloney; any person can walk up to anyone and politely ask them questions that are not provocative or "confrontational". Asking what a stranger is doing in a gated community is not "provocative",unless you have a big chip on your shoulder;aka attitude. For that mater,you don't know if the guy is approaching to ask you directions. Especially if you mention you're part of the neighborhood watch,which does confer some legitimate reason to ask such questions about your being there. (I wonder if they have some jacket,hat or other identifying clothing that lets people know you're Neighborhood Watch?)
So I guess this depends on your definition of "provocation" sufficient to disallow self-defense. Asking what you're doing in a gated neighborhood is not IMO,"provocative" in that manner. To a -reasonable- person....
BTW,did you know Zimmerman and his wife was mentoring a black single mom's two boys? Until he had to go into hiding,that is.also Zimmerman's black frfiend is backing him up. Does that sound like Z is a racist?
It's ironic that the family was bitching today about background checking their dead son...that peoplre really don't know much about,and that they use a younger,much nicer "innocent" picture than what he had on his Facebook page.

You keep harping on that,but you and I both know there's NO witnesses or evidence for that,and in that light,Zimmerman doesn't get charged under Florida law. there's also a part of the Stand Your Ground law that provides immunity from arrest or charges,provided there's no reasonable evidence of provocation. (IOW,that would stand up in court) there is none.
And it's becoming clearer and clearer that Trayvon was the initiator of hostilities.
Oh,one other new bit of info;Trayvon's suspension was for pot in school. they found some small bits of MJ in a plastic baggie in his effects. One more thing his parents probably didn't know about their sweet innocent kid.
This is just another Tawana Brawley or Duke U fiasco.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 05:28:01 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

Yes, it is very murky. No doubt the kid was on tip. At that point, no doubt that Z was fearful. Perhaps shooting was his only recourse.
What we don't know though, is why. Maybe the kid was the aggressor, but maybe, just maybe, Z did something that we don't know about. Maybe, if we knew, we'd say, yes, he should have the crap beat out of him.
Anyone that says this is a simple self defense case is not using facts to make that decision. We still have a lot to hear about, to learn about. We should really keep an open mind until the facts are in.
No one though, said that asking a question justifies punching. That is one of those murky spots where we don't know what was said or done. I can see two opposite scenarios leading to an altercation. Could have been started by either party.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

the Miami Herald ran an article yesterday about Tray having multiple suspensions,and his being found with 12 pieces of women's jewelry and a flat-blade screwdriver in his backpack,that the security officer described as a "burglary tool". He claimed a "friend gave them to him to hold". Maybe he was looking for houses to burgle when Zimmerman saw him "acting suspiciously". Also,HOW does a 17 yr old get the money for a gold "grill"? maybe stealing jewelry?
it DOES establish that Tray was a vandal(graffiti),burgler-thief,and an illegal drug user. NOT the "innocent kid" he's being portrayed as.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mom yesterday weighed in that because of these revelations the cops were trying to "demonize the victim". Pot? Kettle?
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Or that someone is white, or Hispanic. ...or that the dumb kid is black. The fact that this is an issue shows what a racial circus it is.

You have evidence that he did?

We have only have your fantasy that Zimmerman attacked first.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It 's not a presumption It's a rational and logical derivation. that young black males are apt to be more dangerous to you than any other member of society by a LARGE factor

And you were making comments about others making assumptions and conjecture And then you do it yourself.

It appears that Martin first slowed down to get Zimmerman closer then turned and confronted him with the statement: "Why were you following me.." After which a scuffle was heard..
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.