by dontworrybehappy » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:41 pm
I find it funny how many people are making some wild-ass assumptions to try to bend their idea of what happened into something that is Zim's fault. Why don't we look at the evidence?
1. Zimmerman got out of his truck and confronted a suspicious looking black boy, who fit the description of known burglars in the area, behaving suspiciously. This is not illegal. Facts that don't change this: Him being neighborhood watch, him having the 911 operator telling him to stay put. Him having a gun. These are irrelevant.
2. Zimmerman claims that the kid ran, doubled back, and attacked him after a short confrontation. He says he was tackled and on his back. Bruises on the back of his head prove this. Nobody is going to analyze the amount of blood coming from these wounds. In fact, doing so proves you don't care about being fair, you want to micro-analyze the facts to fit your biased idea of what happened. The facts back up Zims account of what happened.
3. A witness stated they saw a black guy on top of a white guy with the white guy begging him to stop beating on him.
4. The gunshot residue on the shirt of TM shows the shot was point blank. This would also show Zim was telling the truth when he said he shot him when he was on top of him.
These are facts. Indisputable facts. I'm sorry the kids dead, but stupid actions sometimes have consequences. But I do hardly call him a kid, as he was 17. Its not like Zim shot a 5 year old.
"Police protection" is an oxymoron. Gun laws are like masturbation, they both feel really good, but after you're done you realize you haven't accomplished anything."