(September 9, 2020 at 2:44 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:You gonna jest BEElieve, huh?(September 9, 2020 at 2:08 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: Your interpretation ignores physical evidence (Zimmerman's injuries) in favor of your obvious bias against self defense with a firearm.
The jury didn't.
And we’re sure That Zimmerman’s injuries couldn’t have been a result of Trayvon Martin defending himself from the guy who was stalking him (against the advice of the non-emergency line police operator that he originally called, incidentally) why, exactly?
.....
Martin did not have any marks on him except bullet holes.
Zimmerman had marks on him that were consistant with a physical struggle - and being struck.
Now I know you will ignore the obvious - the confrontation went from verbal, to physical, to deadly force being used.
Now. This is THIS case.
Not every other confrontation on the planet involving a black guy.
You figure it out.
In this case Mr. Martin escalated the confrontation from verbal to physical.
At that point by Florida law - the person being physically attacked can use any force necessary to stop the attack - including the use of firearms.
Don't like that?
Live somewhere where the laws are different.
Or bitch about it on the internet.
I doubt it will change Florida law.