Does anyone think George Zimmerman is guilty of murder?

[Beanz]

Zimmerman was acquitted..... but I don't think this guy's gonna be so lucky.


Florida man shoots and kills 17-year-old teen after argument over loud music at gas station - NY Daily News


This guy's got the look of a real scumbag.


Michael Dunn's trial in Jordan Davis shooting set for Feb. 3 | jacksonville.com


Hopefully, justice will be done.

That's a completely different situation though I think we can all agree on that.

Bullshit. We certainly can not. That is the whole crux of my argument. If Mr Dunn can try and claim self defence because he felt threatened then why are you so eager to deny that right in the case of Trayvon Martin. An innocent civilian followed at night is not allowed to feel threatened or use his hands in self defense and yet his armed assailant is allowed despite being armed to "feel threatend " and shoot the other guy dead. Why? Because if you suspend disbelief and skew justice to breaking point in order to defend the gun owner, it must have been the unarmed guy who struck him first. It must be because a girl on the other end of a phone thought he did, despite not seeing anything. It must be the pursued guy who is the aggressor because the Guy on trial for shooting him dead who was advised not to follow him said so. Not only that but he must have resorted to a sucker punch so he deserved to be shot anyway. Martin had no right to feel threatened because the media manipulated everything to make it seem like a race based crime. So incensed are you by this that common sense has been thrown out the window and the fact that I have not joined you in being incensed by media bias that I have not been dippy enough to get wound up about has left you "disappointed".

[El Kabong]

Bullshit. We certainly can not. That is the whole crux of my argument. If Mr Dunn can try and claim self defence because he felt threatened then why are you so eager to deny that right in the case of Trayvon Martin. An innocent civilian followed at night is not allowed to feel threatened or use his hands in self defense and yet his armed assailant is allowed despite being armed to "feel threatend " and shoot the other guy dead. Why? Because if you suspend disbelief and skew justice to breaking point in order to defend the gun owner, it must have been the unarmed guy who struck him first. It must be because a girl on the other end of a phone thought he did, despite not seeing anything. It must be the pursued guy who is the aggressor because the Guy on trial for shooting him dead who was advised not to follow him said so. Not only that but he must have resorted to a sucker punch so he deserved to be shot anyway. Martin had no right to feel threatened because the media manipulated everything to make it seem like a race based crime. So incensed are you by this that common sense has been thrown out the window and the fact that I have not joined you in being incensed by media bias that I have not been dippy enough to get wound up about has left you "disappointed".

1. An unarmed person sitting in a passenger position in a parked car cannot threaten someone's life. That's just basic common sense, but you're certainly free to disagree

2. Trayvon certainly had the right to feel paranoid at being followed, but in attacking Zimmerman he broke the law and it wasn't just 1 sucker punch it was a punch and a continued beating. George Zimmerman never physically threatened Trayvon (that we know of). Just following someone isn't a crime and if it truly bothered Trayvon here's a short list of what he could have done to avoid his fate: A) Run home
B ) Hide
C) Call the police on his cell phone
D) Verbally confront Mr. Zimmerman
F) Continue walking home casually and then tell his Father about the situation

That's 5 choices which would NOT have resulted in any violence at all

3. The media DID attempt to make it a race based crime and to deny the coverage was overwhelmingly skewed in FAVOR of Trayvon Martin is to be in complete denial.