MARCH 27, 2012 7:32PM

BAD CHOICES = Death For Trayvon Martin

Rate: 1 Flag

Racial issues aside - there are some glaring items about this matter involving the killing of young Trayvon Martin.  Mainly, that Mr. Zimmerman made some BIG mistakes, some very BAD CHOICES. 

His first BAD CHOICE was to carry a weapon for his "duty" as part of neighborhood watch.  (He was not in downtown Baghdad.)   

His second BAD CHOICE was to disobey the instructions of the 911 dispatcher.   

His third BAD CHOICE was to follow or pursue Mr. Martin.   

His fourth BAD CHOICE was to shoot Mr. Martin. 

 

All of these BAD CHOICES point in the direction of premeditated murder. 

  

The doctrine of self-defense falls apart if Party A pursues Party B.  It is overt aggression if the "intended victim" pursues the "intended assailant," instead of running like hell in the opposite direction. 

 

Also, the "Stand Your Ground" law in Florida is meaningless in this matter, because Mr. Zimmerman made the BAD CHOICE of ignoring the 911 dispatcher's advice to stay put.  Instead of doing that, Mr. Zimmerman made the BAD CHOICE to follow and confront Trayvon Martin.

 

Various news accounts mentioned: "Mr. Zimmerman trying to get hired as a police officer, for several years."  One must ask, how far did he get in the selection process? 

Almost all police departments require a psychological profile of applicants suitable for interview.  If Mr. Zimmerman did not pass that profile encounter, he would not be acceptable as a police officer.  That means he could still get a job as a mall security guard, unless such a firm has a similar psychological screening process.   

It looks like Mr. Zimmerman, apparently a cop wannabe, made a series of very BAD CHOICES. 

In effect, some people have said he is a moron.  At the very least, he is "reasoning impaired."  The truly scary part is this: more likely than not he has a driver’s license and is registered to vote.  

Now, Mr. Zimmerman should pay for his BAD CHOICES. 

No matter how Mr. Zimmerman's defense attorney will try to paint the picture – if you dress a donkey in frilly clothes and a hat, it still is a donkey – more likely than not, Mr. Zimmerman’s cowardice will be apparent to any jury.   

As Forrest Gump said in 1994, “Stupid is as stupid does.”  That defines Mr. Zimmerman to a T.

If Mr. Zimmerman had obeyed the 911 dispatcher and stayed in his vehicle, we would not be reading and hearing about this matter, and the young Trayvon Martin would still be alive…

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I place a great deal of blame on the NRA that pushes so hard for gun ownership.
You bet he made a lot of bad choices! The biggest bad choice he made was to be ignorant of the plain language of the very law his asserts in his defense. Ignorance is a BAD CHOICE.

With all due respect to all of this, it never fails to amaze me how people talk, talk, talk, about this case and it’s mostly race, race, race– which is totally legitimate for that is the ugly underbelly in America. This infestation of racism pollutes our body politic and is a disgrace on a great Nation.

But what troubles me most is that people also talk, and jabber hysterically about this law when they haven’t even troubled themselves to go read the freakin’ statute  so they might at least have a thimble full of knowledge demonstrating they have a clue what they are talking about.  Essentially it comes down to what Randolph McLaughlin, attorney for the family of Kenneth Chamberlain said speaking about that case on Democracy Now and comparing the police there to Zimmerman here. You can’t provoke a situation and then respond to it, "Oh, I had to use deadly force to protect myself."  That really is all of it in a nutshell. Superbly stated.

But if we are going to trash a law (when the real trash is law enforcement) we should at least go read it. This is easy. This is not rocket science.  If anyone is going publish their opinions credibility helps.  The law in question here is really simple enough for a 17-year old to understand.

Read "Trayvon Martin: Defense a Pig-Sty Beneath a Racist Facade?"  as well as the follow up commentary and I think you will agree that the ONLY person who can rely on this law as a defense is Trayvon Martin.

Indeed, even as to the alleged fight that broke out the legal consequence is the same. Under the plain and simple language of this law and the facts as we know them, The ONLY man with a right to stand his ground was Trayvon Martin and the only one legally authorized by law to meet force with force as that 6' 3" 140 lg boy against a 5. 9' 240lb gorilla with a gun.  

“Suspicion” will NOT suffice under this statute. Read it. Much more  must be specifically shown.  Did Trayvon fight back? Is this even a relevant question? If you were 140 lb  skinny teenager  displaying none of the BEHAVIOR SPECIFICALLY required before one can even evoke this statute (just read it!) and 250 gorilla jumps out of a car and comes after you as you are retreated from his aggression what would you do?  What would and person do? Waht they have a right to! Stand your ground and meet force with force if necessary to prevent great bodily harm.

Notice, once you read this simple and clear law, one person and one person only has the factual and legal right to assert on their behalf.  And that ONE person was Travyon Martin.  I rest my case.