Night Strike wrote:Lootifer wrote:patches70 wrote:
And I've been asking those who automatically insist that Zimmerman is guilty of some crime then what charge should be leveled against him. Crickets chirp.
I haven't defended Zimmerman. I've defended the rule of law and due process over that of mob justice.
So what charge should be leveled against Zimmerman in your opinion? Then apply the law to your choice and see where that takes you.
Most of the non american crowd here are boggled by the fact that you can kill an un-armed person as a private citizen and not be funneled stright into the courts/judicial system, nor be immediately charged with something.
Sure it's the american way, but by jingo that seems like some weird shit.
Because it's still possible to be seriously hurt or killed without using a weapon. What I don't understand is how all the gun-haters think that isn't possible.
Huh? I didnt mention anything about a gun, or how the killing occured. That was not my point.
My point was Trayvon wasnt carrying any kind of offensive weapon; gun, baseball bat, knife, stick, anything. This immediately means the self defense argument is weakened (not completely bypassed of course!) because statistically/empirically/whateverly an unarmed person is less of a threat to your personal safety than an armed one.
Do you disagree with this?
(of course you should consider it on a case by case basis, but im not referring to that, im referring to the outsiders (us) looking in (american law) perception).
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
