Jamie Foxx's T-shirt causes an outrage

[decocker 7,198]

Yeah, but they ended up in a scuffle which means neither tried to retreat. Granted not one knows specifically what happened but I don't believe GZ would have should TM if he ran. I dunno, maybe he would have but in this case, there was a fight first. Or he beat the ####### out of himself to give himself justification

as a 17 year old male - the instinct is not to run from another male in pursuit. we do not teach our almost adult male children to run when confronted, do we?

gz was not a cop. he was not in uniform. in my opinion, tm could have sat on top of gz and beat gz's face in till the cops got there and been perfectly justified. gz had no business getting out of his car - period.

[GandD 5,966]

as a 17 year old male - the instinct is not to run from another male in pursuit. we do not teach our almost adult male children to run when confronted, do we?

I will teach my kid to avoid conflicts with strangers, esp at night with no one around. I hope they will heed my teaching. I can't think of anything good that would ever come from confronting someone in this setting.

in my opinion, tm could have sat on top of gz and beat gz's face in till the cops got there and been perfectly justified

I disagree. I don't think anyone needed to be hurt here, even the mall cop.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Let me help you:

fact

  Use Fact in a sentence

fact

[fakt] Show IPA noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. 3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth. 4. something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable. 5. Law. . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.

Source:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fact?s=t

What I described is what happened. All of this is well documented and not in any way disputed.

[Teddy B 17,252]

as a 17 year old male - the instinct is not to run from another male in pursuit. we do not teach our almost adult male children to run when confronted, do we? gz was not a cop. he was not in uniform. in my opinion, tm could have sat on top of gz and beat gz's face in till the cops got there and been perfectly justified. gz had no business getting out of his car - period.

It doesn't have to be taught Val. It's a natural instinct to avoid danger whenever possible. It takes a thought process and teaching to confront it. TM had a way out of this too, he chose to fight instead. That's the problem I have with anyone proclaiming his complete innocence. Restraint and common sense goes both ways.

[decocker 7,198]

I can't think of anything good that would ever come from confronting someone in this setting.

I disagree. I don't think anyone needed to be hurt here, even the mall cop.

ah, but tm was already being confronted. he was defending himself.

no one needed to be hurt, if mall cop had kept his behind in his car - on the phone with the actual police. since he couldn't stand absolving his perceived power over to the cops, he took matters into his own, untrained, hands. result? gz's now a murderer. actions have consequences.

[decocker 7,198]

It doesn't have to be taught Val. It's a natural instinct to avoid danger whenever possible. It takes a thought process and teaching to confront it. TM had a way out of this too, he chose to fight instead. That's the problem I have with anyone proclaiming his complete innocence. Restraint and common sense goes both ways.

for all the talk about victim blaming on this board..good lord.

fighting is not a death sentence, never used to be anyway.

fight or flight - there are two options wired within us. making the wrong choice in a split second in no way deflects from tm's innocence.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I have no idea who gets out of their car and follows someone even though you know the actual cops are on their way to deal with the person you're following.

It amazes me how quick people on this forum are to jump to the defense of someone using a gun in a given situation. Especially when that situation is self defense. But TM didn't use a gun, he used his fists to defend himself against someone who initiated a conflict with him and people still think he did the wrong thing.

These are some of the same people who believe people should be shot for pulling into the wrong driveway. That "mistake" should have consequences, but apparently, the actions of GZ should not.

Amazing.

[GandD 5,966]

Really, I don't pretend to have a complete opinion one way or another in this case. I don't know how anyone could without a video or confirmed account of exactly what happened. I usually just try to take a lesson for my own life after what I see. In this case it was a reinforcement of my belief that too many morons have guns and to vote accordingly. And of course to tell my kid to not walk alone at night and to walk away from strangers or immediately call the police. I feel like this is a teaching opportunity for me to explain what the dangers of this world are. I know its a position of acceptance but at this point I feel like I'm just trying to figure out the best way to navigate the world as it is without someone in my family getting shot.

[Teddy B 17,252]

for all the talk about victim blaming on this board..good lord.

fighting is not a death sentence, never used to be anyway.

fight or flight - there are two options wired within us. making the wrong choice in a split second in no way deflects from tm's innocence.

Choosing to fight means he had a choice. That doesn't bode well in a court of law either. The case can, and probably will be made that TM ended up being the agressor and GZ was in fear of his life when he shot TM. And all it will take is a couple jury members to think this way and GZ will walk.

I have made several posts here stating I believe that GZ was the agressor and is to blame for the death of TM and he should go to jail for it,. I'm not "victim blaming", because at the time TM decided to confront GZ he was not yet a victim of anything, other than being followed by some over zealous, racist yahoo on neighborhood watch. There was no gun pulled and TM was not cornered. TM had a way out too, he chose to confront GZ.

Unfortunately in this day and age fighting can be and very often is a death sentence.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

This is true. I think people are bringing this up because some TM supporters started using the opposite tactic to proclaim his innocence. It started, by some people saying, this poor innocent kid was gunned down. Then the other side researched him and used facts to show he wasn't such a great kid. Then the original side researched GZ and found out he wasn't such a good guy either. Now both sides use backgrounds to support their particular agenda. Most likely this is a result of two aggressive people meeting and making bad choices. I assume neither tried to avoid the other and it escalated from there. Guy with the gun won as they usually do. The gun part is the real shame. Its just so final.

Yeah, but they ended up in a scuffle which means neither tried to retreat. Granted not one knows specifically what happened but I don't believe GZ would have should TM if he ran. I dunno, maybe he would have but in this case, there was a fight first. Or he beat the ####### out of himself to give himself justification

I know Karee is trying to look at this objectively. But your posts I'll address since val eri said what I was thinking:

The only aggressive person in this scenario was GZ. TM was trying to get home, he was running away, hence GZ getting out of his car and chasing him on foot. At that point it's either fight or flight, TM chose the former first, hence the chase, the latter came afterwards. Now it could be that GZ caught up to him, or TM decided not to be "scared" and go on the offense, but the fact remains the same, GZ started this whole mess, he called the cops on a innocent kid(by innocent I mean he wasn't committing a crime at the time since folks on here think suspension and weed smoking automatically mean you are guilty of something), he followed him in a vehicle for about a minute, which means TM was going away from him, and when he lost sight of him(TM is still trying to leave) he got out of his car and started running after him. Now who is being aggressive?

Here is a statement I would like all who really think GZ is the victim here, to ponder. Who do you think was more of a threat that night? The 17 year old pot smoking grafitti unarmed kid who tried with great effort to remove himself from a man who just decided to chase him down out of the blue, or the 28 year old domestic violence, assulting a police office(with resisting arrest thrown in for good measure) armed man who couldn't get out of his car fast enough to catch this criminal in his own mind(remember he said, these ***holes always get away).

[decocker 7,198]

Unfortunately in this day and age fighting can be and very often is a death sentence.

if one person has a gun in the fight, yes.

in my mind, all fault lies with gz from moment he got out of his car. it's as simple as that.

what we have here, is two people who could technically claim they were 'standing their ground' but only one of them had a gun - so only one of them is dead.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Choosing to fight means he had a choice. That doesn't bode well in a court of law either. The case can, and probably will be made that TM ended up being the agressor and GZ was in fear of his life when he shot TM. And all it will take is a couple jury members to think this way and GZ will walk.

I have made several posts here stating I believe that GZ was the agressor and is to blame for the death of TM and he should go to jail for it,. I'm not "victim blaming", because at the time TM decided to confront GZ he was not yet a victim of anything, other than being followed by some over zealous, racist yahoo on neighborhood watch. There was no gun pulled and TM was not cornered. TM had a way out too, he chose to confront GZ.

Unfortunately in this day and age fighting can be and very often is a death sentence.

Do you know what the sad part is in this case? Depending on who you ask, Tm might not have had a choice in the matter. I completely forgot about this: http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-phone/story?id=15959017

"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."

Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.

"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."

So I agree with you Teddy, if he chose to fight rather than run, it's tragic, but what if he was cornered? I guess this will have to come to trial as well.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

what we have here, is two people who could technically claim they were 'standing their ground'

That right there is the problem. The current law in FL may support that - we will find out - but there should be no such thing as a right to "stand your ground" when you are actually looking for a confrontation. Stand your ground ought to require defensive measures. You can't aggressively run towards trouble and then turn around and claim you were just standing your ground. That's insane.

[GandD 5,966]

what we have here, is two people who could technically claim they were 'standing their ground' but only one of them had a gun - so only one of them is dead.

Yes

Look, I want to go on record here an say I think GZ was the instigator in this situation. That neighborhood did not need him protecting them from TM. But I don't know of a way to cure this world of the GZs. In fact, we make a lot of them cops. So, I think TM was a victim that should have ran from the aggressor. Never fight a man with a gun.

[decocker 7,198]

That right there is the problem. The current law in FL may support that - we will find out - but there should be no such thing as a right to "stand your ground" when you are actually looking for a confrontation. Stand your ground ought to require defensive measures. You can't aggressively run towards trouble and then turn around and claim you were just standing your ground. That's insane.

exactly. that's why i say that no matter what action tm took before he was murdered - gz is at fault from the moment he stepped out of his vehicle to handle the situation himself.