I seen the biased media in full swing this morn. CBS anchor was talking to a friend of Zim ( african american) The friend said he had talked to Zim and Rev. Jackson this past weekend,this gentleman was not telling the media what they wanted to hear and they REALLY cutting this guy short. They didn't even let him finish his statement,and went to a totally different story. SAD!!
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
17 year old kid shot dead by Neighborhood Watch "Captain"
- Thread starter Kutnupe14
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
I heard this stat thrown out by the media recently and it reminded me that I saw it here. This is such a worthless statistic. All it says it that 23 fewer people had to face charges from a shooting. There are no discussion of the total number of shootings in any of those years, nor any comparison of total shootings to "justified" shootings. This is merely one of those statistics thrown out there to justify wanting to turn back the law.
I don't care what anyone says....
...putting myself in both of their shoes... 911 told the guy to fall back, yet the guy already falsely identified this kid as an intruder/criminal, then went against the instructions of the dispatcher and continued to stalk this kid. Then felt that he should go a step further and confront him??
Regardless of what happens at this point how could have the kid took the wrong action?
No matter what the scenario... I can't imagine the kid doing any action that could justify this guy shooting him. Not after being stalked, pursued on foot then confronted by a MAN twice his size with a gun.
This wasn't something that happened in a comfortable coffee shop where a man approached him in public asking him questions... This was a private neighborhood street on a dark, cold rainy night.
I don't care if the kid was suspended from school for slapping his bus driver, I don't care if the kid was high on PCP, butt ass naked, frolicking down the street singing show tunes. He had every right to feel threatened and every right to defend himself and I hope the shooter gets the rope for this.
And I don't care what loop holes anyone finds in the law books... dude was wrong and the kid lost his life because of it.
-The kid was walking home in the rain talking on his bluetooth wearing a hoodie.
-Kid was being followed block after block by a slow moving vehicle.
-Vehicle stops and grown man twice his size gets out and tells kid to stop
~~~
-Guy approaches "suspicious thug" kid asking him what he is doing here, why is he in this neighborhood.
-Kid asks why "creepy large white man" is following him and tells him to leave me the hell alone.
~~~
-scuffle ensues kid winds up on top, guy shoots kid
-Kid was being followed block after block by a slow moving vehicle.
-Vehicle stops and grown man twice his size gets out and tells kid to stop
~~~
-Guy approaches "suspicious thug" kid asking him what he is doing here, why is he in this neighborhood.
-Kid asks why "creepy large white man" is following him and tells him to leave me the hell alone.
~~~
-scuffle ensues kid winds up on top, guy shoots kid
...putting myself in both of their shoes... 911 told the guy to fall back, yet the guy already falsely identified this kid as an intruder/criminal, then went against the instructions of the dispatcher and continued to stalk this kid. Then felt that he should go a step further and confront him??
Why? Because he had a gun in his pocket and wanted to play sheriff? And don't feed me the line that the kid "stopped to peek in someones window." Why would the kid do anything illegal when he new he was being followed?
...putting myself in the shoes of the kid... its cold, dark and raining outside. I'm walking home from the gas station trying to get back to my parents house to continue watching the All Star game and this large MAN has been following me for blocks. I'm scared. The car stops and the man gets out and begins to pursue me on foot telling me to "stop" and asking me a bunch of questions. Again, he has been following me for blocks and its cold, dark and raining outside.... The guy approaches me on foot in a really assertive manner.
Regardless of what happens at this point how could have the kid took the wrong action?
-If the kid tried to run and the guy grabbed him and the kid whooped his ass....
-If the kid said "F.U." and the guy got into range and the kid blasted him in the jaw and mounted him for some ground and pound
-If the kid said "F.U." and the guy got into range and the kid blasted him in the jaw and mounted him for some ground and pound
No matter what the scenario... I can't imagine the kid doing any action that could justify this guy shooting him. Not after being stalked, pursued on foot then confronted by a MAN twice his size with a gun.
This wasn't something that happened in a comfortable coffee shop where a man approached him in public asking him questions... This was a private neighborhood street on a dark, cold rainy night.
I don't care if the kid was suspended from school for slapping his bus driver, I don't care if the kid was high on PCP, butt ass naked, frolicking down the street singing show tunes. He had every right to feel threatened and every right to defend himself and I hope the shooter gets the rope for this.
And I don't care what loop holes anyone finds in the law books... dude was wrong and the kid lost his life because of it.
1st... don't be a hypocrite!! You are telling me that you have "ample evidence"? Where did you get it? From a media source right?
Then you go on to tell me that I should "Quit absorbing media propaganda"
A bit of a contradiction there isn't it? My bad... maybe my "homework" isn't as valuable as yours... You obviously have some inside information that I don't. A secret source? Please share.... Either that or you should heed your own advice and don't over analyze "media propaganda". And futhermore if THIS -- > Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman is your source... then where does it prove much of anything we didn't already know?
Last edited:
MilitaryArms
Master
- Apr 19, 2008
- 2,751
- 48
How about we, as gun owners, stop throwing one of our own to the sharks? Why do any of us feel the need to feed the media frenzy and publicly accuse the man without evidence of being a murderer? We're not helping our case, ESPECIALLY when there is evidence he's not guilty of any crime at all.1st... don't be a hypocrite!! You are telling me that you have "ample evidence"? Where did you get it? From a media source right?
Then you go on to tell me that I should "Quit absorbing media propaganda"
because if THIS -- > Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman is your source... then where does it prove much of anything we didn't already know?
We don't need media reports to know there's solid evidence there wasn't a crime committed because the police haven't arrested him and the DA hasn't filed charges. That should tell you or anyone else that the evidence suggests no crime was committed.
I've never understood why so many gun owners are so quick to turn on fellow gun owners vs. supporting them.
United we stand, divided we fall.
I am not sure I consider any person who happens to own a gun "one of my own" but thats neither here nor there.
Honestly the only interesting thing to me is.. .the PF9 had a full mag and one fired but unjected round in the chamber.
So, he was most likely shot while fighting for the gun, or the gun was sandwiched between them or what have you. Grass stains etc.
Revolver > Semi Auto in a gut shot situation?
Kinda liking the moonclipped N frame carry gun more and more these days.
Honestly the only interesting thing to me is.. .the PF9 had a full mag and one fired but unjected round in the chamber.
So, he was most likely shot while fighting for the gun, or the gun was sandwiched between them or what have you. Grass stains etc.
Revolver > Semi Auto in a gut shot situation?
Kinda liking the moonclipped N frame carry gun more and more these days.
MilitaryArms
Master
- Apr 19, 2008
- 2,751
- 48
I'm not talking about just any gun owner, as in including criminals. Zimmerman was a legally licensed CCW holder practicing his right to self defense.
Again, either we stand united against those that oppose us or we follow your path of division and we fall (assuming we take what you've posted at face value).
I do consider people of this board, fellow CCW holders and fellow law abiding gun owners as "my own". I hang out with them, I tend to enjoy conversations more with them and I would help them if needed. It's a shame you don't view fellow gun owners the same way.
"WE" have nothing to do with what happened on Feb 26th. Can this case potentially affect "US"... yes it can.
But just because the shooter had a LTC... doesn't make him a "WE". Just because someone carries a gun, doesn't mean I should back him. That idiot has potentially caused "ME" to lose some of "MY" rights. Rights that I am responsible enough to handle....
I don't care what anyone says... he had no business taking that much liberty into his own hands. Had he caught the kid committing a crime, then this would be a different story. He could have made a "citizens" arrest.... but there was no crime being committed. Instead he profiled a 17yo walking down the road then decided to harass him even after the 911 dispatcher TOLD HIM NOT TO.
There was a thread on here just a week ago where one of the INGO members complained that his 17yo son had been pulled over after curfew because the LEO smelled "Marijuana" as the car drove by. Everyone on this forum was in an uproar about how it was BS that his son was being harassed... yet because this case potentially affects our 2nd amendment, 50% of the people in this thread will try to justify this self appointed batman for harassing and criminalizing a kid walking down the street in the rain with his hoodie up?
Don't blame the kid if Gun Rights get highlighted in the media... blame the idiot who didn't recognize his responsibility as a gun holder... the guy who held a pistol and sought out confrontation. He will be the reason gun rights are taken away.... not some kid with fast hands and a bag of skittles in his pockets.
"WE".... not even close....
Thats like me saying "WE" when we talk about the guy at Fort Hood who decided to kill 13 people because he and I are both Vets?
But just because the shooter had a LTC... doesn't make him a "WE". Just because someone carries a gun, doesn't mean I should back him. That idiot has potentially caused "ME" to lose some of "MY" rights. Rights that I am responsible enough to handle....
I don't care what anyone says... he had no business taking that much liberty into his own hands. Had he caught the kid committing a crime, then this would be a different story. He could have made a "citizens" arrest.... but there was no crime being committed. Instead he profiled a 17yo walking down the road then decided to harass him even after the 911 dispatcher TOLD HIM NOT TO.
There was a thread on here just a week ago where one of the INGO members complained that his 17yo son had been pulled over after curfew because the LEO smelled "Marijuana" as the car drove by. Everyone on this forum was in an uproar about how it was BS that his son was being harassed... yet because this case potentially affects our 2nd amendment, 50% of the people in this thread will try to justify this self appointed batman for harassing and criminalizing a kid walking down the street in the rain with his hoodie up?
Don't blame the kid if Gun Rights get highlighted in the media... blame the idiot who didn't recognize his responsibility as a gun holder... the guy who held a pistol and sought out confrontation. He will be the reason gun rights are taken away.... not some kid with fast hands and a bag of skittles in his pockets.
"WE".... not even close....
Thats like me saying "WE" when we talk about the guy at Fort Hood who decided to kill 13 people because he and I are both Vets?
Interesting comment in light of the many demands on this board that LEOs give up their bad apples.
We should stand behind responsible gun owners. Perhaps a thorough investigation will exonerate Zimmerman - great. However, the damage is already done by what many will forever view as stupidity by a carry permit holder. In his initial 911 call, Zimmerman states that Martin was running. The dispatcher advised Zimmerman not to follow. It all went downhill from there.
I know a LOT of people who own guns, that I would have nothing to do with personally.
Just because you walked into a gun store, bought yourself a gun, you are now a "gun owner".
I agree that most of the folks on this forum are good guys, and quality human beings, but they werent made that way because they bought a gun.
They were good guys, before they ever walked into that gun store.
If a guy owns a gun, that means we share a common interest.
Period.
It doesnt make them automatically the salt of the earth.
I know a lot of people, have seen a lot of people walk in and buy guns, that frankly I wouldnt want to know my home address.
A good man is a good man, wether he owns a gun or not. The gun doesnt change that, before or after the purchase.
MilitaryArms
Master
- Apr 19, 2008
- 2,751
- 48
It interesting how such freedom loving gun owners, or so you claim, have already convicted a man who in all likelihood acted within Florida state law and defended himself. He's now an idiot to be compared to the Ft. Hood shooter.
I don't want to derail the thread any further with this discussion, but I do find it eye opening. I hope my freedom never rests in the hands of some of you who are so quick to judge sans evidence and who don't consider fellow gun owners (LEGAL) to be on of your own.
I don't want to derail the thread any further with this discussion, but I do find it eye opening. I hope my freedom never rests in the hands of some of you who are so quick to judge sans evidence and who don't consider fellow gun owners (LEGAL) to be on of your own.
You've already admitted you don't care about the facts and that your mind is made up regardless of the facts so this is to untangle your web of misconceptions for others.
Z. was following M. when on the 911 call. We don't know that he continued to follow after 911 daid, "we don't need you to do that" (which is not a "command" by the way). In fact, Z. tells 911 that M. is approaching him, so we really don't know who initiated the confrontation. It sounds as if M. did. M.'s girlfriend says she heard Z. ask M. what he was doing. That doesn't sound like an attack by Z., but may have been the beginning of an attack by M. There's no indication that a "bunch" of questions were asked, and from the 911 call it sounds as if M. approached Z. "on foot in a really assertive manner," not the other way around as you claim.
Why is a "white guy" in the neighborhood "really creepy" while the black guy is not, but instead is a perpetually 8 year old little angel. If it turns out that M. was on suspension for assault as alleged then it does show a propensity for anger and willingness to attack "full grown men" (unless the bus driver was a woman). The state of mind of M. is irrelevant because it is pure speculation and can never be known, unless he somehow recorded it or made more elaborate statements to his girlfriend than has been reported.
It's good to see that you were able to check your bias at the door and calmly review the available evidence and arrive at a mature, reasoned conclusion. Because, if you hadn't, we would have no choice but to dismiss your opinion as that of a rambling bumpkin who may not quite be up to participating in such a forum debate.
There are so many assumption in those two sentences by themselves that it boggles the mind. How can you be so unequivocal about something you have no personal knowledge of?
Just because you have a gun and a LTCH does not automatically make you someone I want to have anything to do with. In fact, if you have appointed yourself the neighborhood nanny and are seeking out confrontations in public and on other people's property, I specifically don't want much to do with you because you are a threat to my good reputation.
I generally do view many fellow gun owners as being my own, but there are absolutely exceptions to that. There are some gun owners with LTCH I know that I want nothing to do with.
I don't know if this was a bad shoot or not; I simply am not privy to enough credible information to come to anything like a sure conclusion on this. My GUESS is that the shooter MAY have an unclean hands legal problem and it is possible, if not probable based upon his hunting the kid through the neighborhood, that he is pre-empted from asserting self-defense.
But the bottom line is, I don't know any more than you know. Maybe he had ceased interactions and was headed back to his truck when he was violently attacked. It is possible based upon what little I know as has been reported through the distortions of the media.
Either way, there is no way I'm calling this guy "my own", and I wouldn't even if he hadn't shot the kid. Stopping a crime in progress is on thing. Hunting suspicious looking people on foot with a gun through the neighborhood is simply a recipe for a disaster like occurred here.
Best,
Joe
I think you are taking my statement a little too far.
A gun is a tool. I own one.
A Leatherman is a tool. I own one too.
Do I think that I am suddenly in some sort of blood bond with every purchaser of a gun or a Leatherman?
Uh... no.
You are just a guy with a gun, or a guy with a Leatherman, until you are something more than that.
And yes, showing up at events, shooting matches, etc, will quickly make you part of the "community" and you will be more than just a "Gun Owner".
I hope that clarifies my statement a little better.
Thats not even the same kid bro.
Totally debunked, and mostly used by white supremacist groups, like Stormfront.
Its another kid, with the same name, Trayvon Martin, and it originated with belive it or not... Massad Ayoob. Hows that for bizzare?
I have heard these are authentic photos; the bottom right picture was taken off the social networking page. Whether or not the bottom right picture is real, the top right picture is a 5 year old picture. There is media bias in this case and the media is setting it up.
It is not real. It is a totally different kid.
And frankly, just looks like a kid screwing around on a facebook page.... do you really find that pic threatening?
This is where that pic originated from.
Massad Ayoob » Blog Archive » GEORGE ZIMMERMAN AND TRAYVON MARTIN: WHAT WE DON
And this is what he had to say about it.
"Update: Turns out that the Trayvon Martin Facebook page mentioned here last night was the wrong Trayvon Martin; that has been deleted with my apologies, and thanks to those who flagged me to the error."
You were told wrong.
- Status
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
mom45Momerator -
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv
Members online
- bulldogs42
- Blacknight179
- morve80
- Brandon
- JettaKnight
- Timjoebillybob
- Meatstick
- SEIndSAM
- Averygc
- Okimeister
- mom45
- KG1
- Jowl1
- Gabriel
- CPE1704TKS
- Doug
- AlienRayGun
- 45sRfun
- 15kiserc
- Cameramonkey
- hoglegs
- X3r0h0uR
- stale_ranch
- joe138
- Demoderb1989
- Middlefart
- WillH
- Judamonster
- Godbybe
- ChrisK
- indyblue
- Bigdog357
- squeals99
- Denny347
- Dirtebiker
- repeter1977
- 700 LTR 223
- wagyu52
- ancjr
- farva118
- jsn_mooney
- Lmo1131
- Hillbilly
- FredMcIntire
- Angrysauce
- jsx1043
- BR8818
- zbloxzoid
- Cuasi
- Vanguard.45