Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-02-2012, 04:24 AM
jms62's Avatar
jms62 jms62 is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,802
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin View Post
Fair enough. I can appreciate your point of view. But let me ask you one question. This is just a hypothetical question. If you were on the jury and there was clear evidence that Trayvon and Zimmerman had some words such as the things we have read: Trayvon: "Why are you following me?" Zimmerman: What are you doing here?" Then the conversation was over. Zimmerman walks away and is heading back to his car. Trayvon attacks him from behind and knocks him to the ground.

If you believed that is what happened, how would you vote if you were on the jury? I'm only giving a hypothetical. I'm not saying that this was how the incident went down. I'm just asking you hypothetically if you knew for sure that this was what happened, how would you vote if you were on the jury?

I would vote the same because again the fact that he continued after being told not to shows that he was the agressor. Knowing he had a gun and knowing the stand your ground law in my mind he was trying to provoke an altercation.
__________________
Game Over
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-02-2012, 01:15 PM
joeydb's Avatar
joeydb joeydb is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 3,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 View Post
I would vote the same because again the fact that he continued after being told not to shows that he was the agressor. Knowing he had a gun and knowing the stand your ground law in my mind he was trying to provoke an altercation.
That's really the key point because the "stand your ground" law means exactly that - you don't have to flee an aggressor. But if you become the aggressor, the law no longer applies. In fact, if Mr. Martin was armed, he'd be protected by the stand your ground law if Zimmerman was first to take hostile action.

"Stand your ground" is an improvement over gun control that is too restrictive, but does NOT protect an aggressor. Zimmerman will lose his case if he thinks that the law will protect his actions. The 911 call documents that fact.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:19 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb View Post
That's really the key point because the "stand your ground" law means exactly that - you don't have to flee an aggressor.
Unfortunately for Trayvon, his aggressor carried a Glock 9mm with the safety off and a round in the chamber, and shot him dead.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-02-2012, 07:36 PM
joeydb's Avatar
joeydb joeydb is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 3,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Unfortunately for Trayvon, his aggressor carried a Glock 9mm with the safety off and a round in the chamber, and shot him dead.
That might very well be how the case is decided once all the evidence is in. And he should be sentenced accordingly if he is guilty.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-02-2012, 07:56 PM
Rudeboyelvis Rudeboyelvis is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb View Post
That might very well be how the case is decided once all the evidence is in. And he should be sentenced accordingly if he is guilty.
That's what I tried to explain to her 10 pages ago - good luck
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-02-2012, 08:00 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
That's what I tried to explain to her 10 pages ago - good luck
You mean like back at post #17 when I agreed with you, rocket scientist?

Yeah ... you've been paying really good attention to the discussion. Not.

Here's a lesson for you: when you join back in a discussion, and the only reason for your post is just to be a rude gratuitious ass.hole trying to diss another poster?

You might end up looking really stupid.

Just sayin'
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-02-2012, 08:06 PM
bigrun's Avatar
bigrun bigrun is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: VA/PA/KY
Posts: 5,063
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
You mean like back at post #17 when I agreed with you, rocket scientist?

Yeah ... you've been paying really good attention to the discussion. Not.

Here's a lesson for you: when you join back in a discussion, and the only reason for your post is just to be a rude gratuitious ass.hole trying to diss another poster?

You might end up looking really stupid.

Just sayin'

Now now, remember he has you on ignore...so he missed your post...see..
__________________
"If you lose the power to laugh, you lose the power to think" - Clarence Darrow, American lawyer (1857-1938)

When you are right, no one remembers;when you are wrong, no one forgets.

Thought for today.."No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit
they are wrong" - Francois, Duc de la Rochefoucauld, French moralist (1613-1680)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-03-2012, 07:11 AM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
You mean like back at post #17 when I agreed with you, rocket scientist?

Yeah ... you've been paying really good attention to the discussion. Not.

Here's a lesson for you: when you join back in a discussion, and the only reason for your post is just to be a rude gratuitious ass.hole trying to diss another poster?

You might end up looking really stupid.

Just sayin'
Here's a lesson for you. When you try and act witty and your responses include calling someone a rocket scientist, using the phrase "not" and then using the term "diss" you look like someone stuck in 1993.

Just sayin'
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-03-2012, 03:03 PM
Coach Pants
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm hoping for a race riot now. It's obvious that the herd needs a good culling. I'll watch from the comfort of my bunker.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-03-2012, 09:13 AM
Clip-Clop Clip-Clop is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Manningtown, Colorado
Posts: 2,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Unfortunately for Trayvon, his aggressor carried a Glock 9mm with the safety off and a round in the chamber, and shot him dead.
Glocks do not have "safeties", no guns really have safeties other than the holder. Carrying a weapon without a chambered round is as useless as not carrying a weapon at all.
__________________
don't run out of ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-03-2012, 09:51 AM
Danzig Danzig is offline
Dee Tee Stables
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: The Natural State
Posts: 29,940
Default

and all a safety does on a gun is keep the trigger from being pulled. guns can and have gone off with a safety on...that's why they teach muzzle control, as that's the only real way to keep from shooting something you don't want to shoot.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-03-2012, 10:53 AM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
and all a safety does on a gun is keep the trigger from being pulled. guns can and have gone off with a safety on...that's why they teach muzzle control, as that's the only real way to keep from shooting something you don't want to shoot.
The safety on my 9mm and .45 does not prevent the trigger from being pulled but rather disengages the hammer action. Neither will or can fire with safety on though you can pull the trigger on both.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-03-2012, 11:05 AM
Clip-Clop Clip-Clop is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Manningtown, Colorado
Posts: 2,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
The safety on my 9mm and .45 does not prevent the trigger from being pulled but rather disengages the hammer action. Neither will or can fire with safety on though you can pull the trigger on both.
What pistols are you using?
__________________
don't run out of ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-04-2012, 06:15 AM
Danzig Danzig is offline
Dee Tee Stables
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: The Natural State
Posts: 29,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
The safety on my 9mm and .45 does not prevent the trigger from being pulled but rather disengages the hammer action. Neither will or can fire with safety on though you can pull the trigger on both.
i'll have to take a look, but i'm pretty sure my .45/.410 taurus judge has a safety that prevents trigger pull.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-03-2012, 02:37 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop View Post
Glocks do not have "safeties", no guns really have safeties other than the holder. Carrying a weapon without a chambered round is as useless as not carrying a weapon at all.
"Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people". Sure.

Yeah. Carrying his Glock with the safety off and a round chambered was exactly what unstable citizen vigilantes shouldn't be doing. Maybe Zimmerman ought to be lecturing police departments how to really carry their weapons?

I think the gun was brought out by Zimmerman, but it accidentally discharged. I think he had it pointed at the kid, but he didn't mean to fire it.

We'll see.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-03-2012, 02:42 PM
Clip-Clop Clip-Clop is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Manningtown, Colorado
Posts: 2,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
"Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people". Sure.

Yeah. Carrying his Glock with the safety off and a round chambered was exactly what unstable citizen vigilantes shouldn't be doing. Maybe Zimmerman ought to be lecturing police departments how to really carry their weapons?

I think the gun was brought out by Zimmerman, but it accidentally discharged. I think he had it pointed at the kid, but he didn't mean to fire it.

We'll see.
I am not kidding, Glocks do not have any safety at all, like some other pistols do have a mechanism that is meant to prevent accidental discharge but in no way is meant to make the weapon safe.
If they were indeed fighting, Zimmerman having the gun on him makes it life and death automatically. He doesn't know what happens if Trayvon gets the gun so he pulls it, potentially freaks out and shoots him. Has there been any report on the distance from which the shot was fired, I have not seen that anywhere?
__________________
don't run out of ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-03-2012, 02:46 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop View Post
I am not kidding, Glocks do not have any safety at all, like some other pistols do have a mechanism that is meant to prevent accidental discharge but in no way is meant to make the weapon safe.
If they were indeed fighting, Zimmerman having the gun on him makes it life and death automatically. He doesn't know what happens if Trayvon gets the gun so he pulls it, potentially freaks out and shoots him. Has there been any report on the distance from which the shot was fired, I have not seen that anywhere?
I haven't held a Glock since I was dating cops in the 1980's and they'd take you to a shooting range for a date but are you sure about that?

There is an official autopsy report, but that's the one thing that hasn't been leaked yet. All I have heard in the media was that he was shot in the chest, and fell forward on his arm. Yet other people, witnesses, were apparently around as Zimmerman got up off Trayvon, and saw Zimmerman put his hand up on his forehead as if, "what have I done!?" ... but alot of variance in what different alleged witnesses have said publicly about what went down.

Witnesses, unfortunately, are notoriously bad at objectively actually seeing what happened (for example, their true and accurate self-recollections will vary widely from a security videotape)
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.