Gblock;1476641 wrote:A friend of mine represents the insurance company for the housing association and they deny any connection to gz he was not sanctioned by anyone to watch the neighborhood. Further real neighborhood watch programs ban the use of guns just for this reason. So fail on both parts of that

Watch programs can't ban guns.

WebFire;1476734 wrote:Watch programs can't ban guns.

no law obviously of starting your own bootleg watch program but if you want to be affiliated with a legit national program these are their criteria

[h=6]USAonWatch's Official Statement[/h]
USAonWatch does not advocate watch members taking any action when observing suspicious activity in their neighborhood. Community members only serve as the extra “eyes and ears” and should report their observations of suspicious activities to their local law enforcement. Trained law enforcement should be the only ones ever to take action; citizens should never try to take action on those observations. USAonWatch encourages all watch groups to register with our national database where multiple resources are made available to assist in the training and maintaining of Neighborhood Watch groups and its members.

Gblock;1476779 wrote:no law obviously of starting your own bootleg watch program but if you want to be affiliated with a legit national program these are their criteria

USAonWatch's Official Statement


USAonWatch does not advocate watch members taking any action when observing suspicious activity in their neighborhood. Community members only serve as the extra “eyes and ears” and should report their observations of suspicious activities to their local law enforcement. Trained law enforcement should be the only ones ever to take action; citizens should never try to take action on those observations. USAonWatch encourages all watch groups to register with our national database where multiple resources are made available to assist in the training and maintaining of Neighborhood Watch groups and its members.

???

That doesn't ban a watch member from carrying a gun nor protecting him/herself.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-rescued-man-from-truck-crash-last-week-police-say/ I still content this is the weirdest shit ever

ohiobucks1;1476796 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-rescued-man-from-truck-crash-last-week-police-say/ I still content this is the weirdest **** ever

Clearly George Zimmerman caused the crash after following too closely

ohiobucks1;1476796 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-rescued-man-from-truck-crash-last-week-police-say/ I still content this is the weirdest shit ever

Clearly the family was white or he'd driven right on past.

ccrunner609;1476800 wrote:lolfail.........you are actually going to post wording from a organization that has no legal standing or influence? Please post a link to something that GZ did that actually broke a law.

Where did Gblock say that GZ broke a law?

rmolin73;1476829 wrote:Where did Gblock say that GZ broke a law?

Who said Gblock said Mr. Zimmerman broke the law? I think ccrunner asked for reference to where Mr. Zimmerman did break the law.

Con_Alma;1476858 wrote:Who said Gblock said Mr. Zimmerman broke the law? I think ccrunner asked for reference to where Mr. Zimmerman did break the law.

Which pretty much has nothing to do with what Gblock is talking about.

Gblock;1476779 wrote:no law obviously of starting your own bootleg watch program but if you want to be affiliated with a legit national program these are their criteria

USAonWatch's Official Statement


USAonWatch does not advocate watch members taking any action when observing suspicious activity in their neighborhood. Community members only serve as the extra “eyes and ears” and should report their observations of suspicious activities to their local law enforcement. Trained law enforcement should be the only ones ever to take action; citizens should never try to take action on those observations. USAonWatch encourages all watch groups to register with our national database where multiple resources are made available to assist in the training and maintaining of Neighborhood Watch groups and its members.

Says nothing about carrying a gun. Also, if all Zimmerman initiated was to follow (so as to continue "observing") Treyvon, he still broke no rule here. We're not playing freeze tag.

Per the police report, the gun was fired during Martin's assault on Treyvon. That's no longer acting as neighborhood watch. That's self-defense.

He neither violated the law nor the stipulations you've outlined.

ohiobucks1;1476796 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-rescued-man-from-truck-crash-last-week-police-say/ I still content this is the weirdest shit ever

I'd say the ballsiest part was even being seen in public. You know some crazy people out there are wanting to kill him, given this three-ring circus.

gut;1476818 wrote:Clearly George Zimmerman caused the crash after following too closely

Tiernan;1476823 wrote:Clearly the family was white or he'd driven right on past.

I'm repping both of these. Tiernan, this will probably be the only time that happens.

Never said he broke a law ..but I bet if had had to do it over he would have not broken a law in a much differnent way. Is there no grey area between not breaking the law and breaking the law that u can say he made some bad choices?

Gblock;1476895 wrote:Never said he broke a law ..but I bet if had had to do it over he would have not broken a law in a much differnent way. Is there no grey area between not breaking the law and breaking the law that u can say he made some bad choices?

Hinde sight is 20/20.

Should GZ have just stayed in his car? Sure.

Should TM have just went home? Sure.

Gblock;1476895 wrote:Never said he broke a law ..but I bet if had had to do it over he would have not broken a law in a much differnent way. Is there no grey area between not breaking the law and breaking the law that u can say he made some bad choices?

The more I think about it, no. He thought (for reasons we cannot even guess, as we have zero facts into this, let alone proof) Martin suspicious. He followed him, observing him. Treyvon initiated further confrontation and was violent. Zimmerman used his legally carried weapon in self-defense after having been assaulted.

The alternative: See a person you think is behaving suspiciously. Call the cops and tell them where he is now. Don't follow and let them play a guessing game as to where he has gone between the time you called them and the time they get there.

Given the events, it's not likely that this would have been high profile for the police, so more than likely, nothing would have happened, and if he HAD been the burglar in the neighborhood, which had been a problem lately, and which Zimmerman wouldn't know one way or the other, he would have gotten away to potentially rob another house (again, if he HAD been the burglar).

Gblock;1476895 wrote:Never said he broke a law ..but I bet if had had to do it over he would have not broken a law in a much differnent way. Is there no grey area between not breaking the law and breaking the law that u can say he made some bad choices?

It could have been handled better, but nothing Zimmerman did warranted that reaction from TM. The fatal choice, here, is TM deciding to go back and commit assault rather than just go home. How refreshing it would be to see more people asking "Why didn't TM just go home?"

Trueblue23;1476900 wrote: Should TM have just went home? Sure.

That's not hindsight. Besides assault being a crime, his actions are completely ill-advised.

Zimmerman had done this dozens(?) of times. People do this every day asking people they don't recognize in the neighborhood/building where they are going or what their business is there. Those "good neighbor" practices very rarely result in any sort of physical confrontation. Zimmerman had no reasonable expectation that his actions would provoke such a response from TM.

If we remove the unproven allegation of racial profiling from the mix then Zimmerman did absolutely nothing wrong. And even if Zimmerman was racially profiling, that still doesn't give TM the right to assault him.

ohiobucks1;1476796 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-rescued-man-from-truck-crash-last-week-police-say/ I still content this is the weirdest shit ever

Such a wanna-be cop.

-CNN: George Zimmerman rips occupant of car out of his own vehicle!

-MSNBC: Zimmerman carjacks family.

Gblock;1476895 wrote:Never said he broke a law ..but I bet if had had to do it over he would have not broken a law in a much differnent way. Is there no grey area between not breaking the law and breaking the law that u can say he made some bad choices?

You know, in some possible world wherein Zimmerman doesn't have a firearm on him and he just gets his ass beat after harassing a dude on the street for tenuous reasons at best, people would say he was asking for it, it was a fight not unlike all kinds of other fights and nobody bats an eye. The fact is that in our society it as an illegal battery if you attack someone. However, In ordinary situations where death doesn't result we don't think of a man who starts punching a man who was harassing him as a lawless goon and exonerate the recipient of the ass beating from judgment because he "broke no laws".

Of course the right thing to do was for Trayvon Martin to just take the harassment and go about his way. It is never the right thing to attack an asshole and break the law but fights and happens all the time with people rarely taking the type of puritan stance against one of the fighters like they are in this case because you got people who are team GZ and people are team TM.

GZ acted like an asshole POS that night who had deputized himself as a wannabe law-officer on "neighborhood watch" trying to engage in what amounts to a kind of arrest of an individual over whom he had no power or justification for doing so, but that is not against the law. The guy Beating the douche to a pulp is. The douche shooting the guy who flew of the handle and beats him within an inch of his life also isn't against the law...but we can still acknowledge that he acted like an asshole giving rise to a tragic situation even if we think the media et al turned this into a political circus.

Remove the unfounded racial profiling allegations...

"Teen assaults neighborhood watch volunteer" - sounds pretty thuggish to me. There's no evidence that the alleged "harassment" remotely justified being assaulted. If Zimmerman hadn't shot TM in self-defense, TM would justifiably be sitting in jail.

BoatShoes;1476918 wrote:You know, in some possible world wherein Zimmerman doesn't have a firearm on him and he just gets his ass beat after harassing a dude on the street for tenuous reasons at best, people would say he was asking for it, it was a fight not unlike all kinds of other fights and nobody bats an eye. The fact is that in our society it as an illegal battery if you attack someone. However, In ordinary situations where death doesn't result we don't think of a man who starts punching a man who was harassing him as a lawless goon and exonerate the recipient of the ass beating from judgment because he "broke no laws".

Of course the right thing to do was for Trayvon Martin to just take the harassment and go about his way. It is never the right thing to attack an asshole and break the law but fights and happens all the time with people rarely taking the type of puritan stance against one of the fighters like they are in this case because you got people who are team GZ and people are team TM.

GZ acted like an asshole POS that night who had deputized himself as a wannabe law-officer on "neighborhood watch" trying to engage in what amounts to a kind of arrest of an individual over whom he had no power or justification for doing so, but that is not against the law. The guy Beating the douche to a pulp is. The douche shooting the guy who flew of the handle and beats him within an inch of his life also isn't against the law...but we can still acknowledge that he acted like an asshole giving rise to a tragic situation even if we think the media et al turned this into a political circus.

How does keeping within visual distance of a person and asking their business in your neighborhood constitute harassment? At all? Hell, I did that last week to a guy that was sitting in a black Silverado in front of my house, seemingly doing nothing. Was I harassing him by doing that?

gut;1476952 wrote:Remove the unfounded racial profiling allegations...

"Teen assaults neighborhood watch volunteer" - sounds pretty thuggish to me. There's no evidence that the alleged "harassment" remotely justified being assaulted. If Zimmerman hadn't shot TM in self-defense, TM would justifiably be sitting in jail.

Of course he would. The state has the monopoly on force except in certain very limited circumstances. That is also true for any guy in a bar fight or any other altercation, etc. Otherwise reasonable people might also be saying things like "Zimmerman was a dick and had an ass beating coming by the way he was acting" too. We wouldn't be talking about things like "justification". Martin would be in jail and Zimmerman would still be looked down upon by the black community for following a black kid in his car and then chasing him through the park and grabbing a hold of him, etc. etc. and otherwise acting like a kind of dick.

O-Trap;1476967 wrote:How does keeping within visual distance of a person and asking their business in your neighborhood constitute harassment? At all? Hell, I did that last week to a guy that was sitting in a black Silverado in front of my house, seemingly doing nothing. Was I harassing him by doing that?

You are sugar coating it. I would feel harassed if a car was following me for several minutes and then the guy chased after me when I started to run away and then grabbed a hold of me (per the girl's testimony from what she heard on the phone).

bad choices are not illegal. the media is race baiting the country.

and our fucking president is race baiting the country. at some point that dumbass needs to shut the fuck up.

BoatShoes;1476987 wrote:You are sugar coating it. I would feel harassed if a car was following me for several minutes and then the guy chased after me when I started to run away and then grabbed a hold of me (per the girl's testimony from what she heard on the phone).

I'm not sugar-coating anything. I'm just not reading anything into it, which you seem to be doing.

And it doesn't matter if you would "feel" harassed. Following someone, showing no signs of aggression, is not harassment.

As for the girl on the phone, she's not a credible witness of what it would take eyes at the scene to witness.

There is zero credible evidence to suggest Zimmerman was doing anything harassing. Those who suggest otherwise are seeing something that isn't there. Possibly what they want to see.

BoatShoes;1476981 wrote:Martin would be in jail and Zimmerman would still be looked down upon by the black community for following a black kid in his car and then chasing him through the park and grabbing a hold of him, etc. etc. and otherwise acting like a kind of ****.

That's quite an extrapolation of the facts. Yes, I can see how one might hold your perspective when you imagine a scenario that is completely unfounded.

Zimmerman did nothing that "had an ass beating coming". To think otherwise based on the facts is almost purely a socio-economic perspective. People with something to lose (financially) would rarely advocate what TM did, and almost certainly not under the circumstances that we know to be fact.

BoatShoes;1476981 wrote:Zimmerman would still be looked down upon by the black community for following a black kid in his car and then chasing him through the park and grabbing a hold of him, etc. etc. and otherwise acting like a kind of dick.

It would be a shame, given his "Justice for Sherman Ware" campaign.

There is no physical or eye-witness proof to suggest that Zimmerman began the physical altercation (grabbing might constitute that, I would think). What we have is a girl with a beef against Zimmerman, which she is not even in a position to justify.

Maybe that sounds cold, but truth and facts are impartial.