George Zimmerman staged car crash

I don't really think people's opinions changed after that. Regardless of the fact whether he should have been found guilty (and the majority of people in America think he should), what he has done in the past can't be reversed by saving a family in a car crash.

So I personally think it would be too much of a fuss for a very weak result.

That's a lie. The majority of Americans don't believe that you should be convicted for defending yourself from a life-threatening attack.

A lot of people just seem to hate him no matter what. If he walked by and did nothing you would say he should have done something, but as he did do something you accuse him of trying to exploit his actions to get sympathy. Clearly some people just won't be happy no matter what.

What do the majority of Americans think about following instructions from the police?

I don't really think people's opinions changed after that. Regardless of the fact whether he should have been found guilty (and the majority of people in America think he should), what he has done in the past can't be reversed by saving a family in a car crash.

So I personally think it would be too much of a fuss for a very weak result.

Do you have anything to back this up, or is this just wild speculation because seeing Zimmerman's life in ruins isn't enough?

That's a lie. The majority of Americans don't believe that you should be convicted for defending yourself from a life-threatening attack.

A lot of people just seem to hate him no matter what. If he walked by and did nothing you would say he should have done something, but as he did do something you accuse him of trying to exploit his actions to get sympathy. Clearly some people just won't be happy no matter what.

The majority of the 300 million plus people in the US think that? I think it's very split.

He murdered someone. Don't really feel that much sympathy for him. He only got off because Americans have ****ty laws. Does not change what he did.

Even if this happened in a place without such laws, it would still be manslaughter. Hell, he might have even been found not guilty in england too, assuming he had a right to carry the gun, and the use of it was thought to be reasonable force. Although I am no expert on law:

"A man about to be attacked does not have to wait for his assailant to strike the first blow or fire the first shot; circumstances may justify a pre-emptive strike."

Seeing how at the time of the shooting, Martin was on top of Zimmerman attacking him, he is already under attack. If the defense could convince the jury that, at the time, Zimmerman felt he had no other option to save his life then that would be grounds for acquittal.

There is also no evidence at all that Zimmerman intended to kill Martin.

If someone pointed a gun at me I would either jump to hide or jump at him try to stop him using it, if the former is not possible. Funny how people interpret it that Zimmerman was the one defending himself and not the other way round. Remember the other guy had no gun, Zimmerman did. If you believe Zimmerman was defending himself, you might as well believe Martin was.

I'd imagine most people wouldn't try and attack someone with a gun, unless you've been trained it would be very stupid


Posted from TSR Mobile

Funny how people interpret it that Zimmerman was the one defending himself and not the other way round. Remember the other guy had no gun, Zimmerman did. If you believe Zimmerman was defending himself, you might as well believe Martin was.

If someone pointed a gun at me I would either jump to hide or jump at him try to stop him using it, if the former is not possible. Funny how people interpret it that Zimmerman was the one defending himself and not the other way round. Remember the other guy had no gun, Zimmerman did. If you believe Zimmerman was defending himself, you might as well believe Martin was.