@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:Trayvon Martin, in fear for his life, ran to avoid confrontation.
He had
NO REASON to "fear".
There is
nothing improper with following anyone.
When I was a trial lawyer, I hired private detectives
to follow people (among other things) and then have
the private investigator testify in front of judge
& jury qua the findings of that pursuit; no problems.
Thru out American history, it has never been held
that following anyone is un-lawful, nor immoral.
MontereyJack wrote:Zimmerman pursued him and forced that confrontation.
The bad guy got away, out of sight,
within ez access of his home, but
he RETURNED and violently ambushed Zimmy.
MontereyJack wrote:Under Florida law, Trayvon and Trayvon alone had the unquestionable right to determine when he felt under threat of great bodily harm and possible death, Under Florida law he had the unquestionable right to kill Zimmerman at that point.
No; Florida says
: "reasonably".
It is very un-reasonable to become violent against anyone merely
for so innocuous an act as
FOLLOWING.
If a black had followed a white and the white had killed him for it,
the blacks 'd be screaming in defense of the dead follower.
Indeed, TM
did follow Zimmy, initiating the confrontation and
perpetrating the violence upon Zimmy, presumably because
he believed Zimmy to be un-armed. He picked the rong victim.
MontereyJack wrote: Under your own arguments, David, you must concede him that right.
SPECIFY the arguments to which u refer, please.
MontereyJack wrote: But I'm pretty sure you'd be screaming bloody murder right now
if Trayvon had succeeded in asserting the rights Florida law gave him, and Zimmerman was the one lying dead.
Not if the situation were
directly reversed. I 'd
apologize to Martin,
on behalf of the white race. If I had an identical
twin brother
who perpetrated upon TM the acts that TM actually did inflict
upon Zimmy, then I 'd apologize to TM, on behalf of my family
whom he 'd have disgraced.
Jack, I don't begrudge it to the blacks that thay prefer their own race.
I 'd not condemn anyone of any race who prefers his own race above others;
its only natural (
liberal ideology to the contrary notwithstanding),
but in this case, the blacks elected to subordinate the truth
to racial loyalty and to subordinate the elementary morality
of the natural right to defend yourself from predatory violence
to racial loyalty; that is
REPREHENSIBLE in the
extreme.
Good and sound reasoning prevailed in the end; I was sure that it wud. OK,
but if Zimmy had been convicted (e.g., if the jury 'd been packed
with leftists or blacks): my rage wud have surpassed ineffability.
White fury wud slowly build. Resentment wud fester,
as Zimmy suffered in prison (be it for 30 years or 30 minutes).
A conviction wud have conformed Florida law to the notion
that u have freedom of self defense if a white attacks u,
but legally, u must allow a black to beat your head on the
street to his delight, if u wanna avoid long-term incarceration.
To say that
resentful ill will against the black race
wud slowly grow as the whites considered this state of affairs
(with journalists n columnists commenting n analyzing it)
is much to
understate the case. I 'd remain
peaceful,
but I 'd hold Zimmy 's plight (and the corrupt state of the law
with its potential applications) against the black race collectively
in my discretionary decisions with them, modest & humble
tho my vengeance wud be.
If the blacks actually feel that way now toward us,
then let it be and bring it on. We 'll deal with it.
David