Yes, his life was in danger. You can get killed by getting punched in the head and falling to the ground. Given that Zimmerman was found innocent, it would tend to indicate the facts also support his contention that his life was in danger. What facts do YOU have that were not brought up during the trial that would indicate his life was NOT in danger?
I personally don't understand half the rules. I just recently returned from China, on American Airlines (heading back in another 10 days). Got bumped to first class. Ordered the chicken for dinner. Got the meal, a 4.5" long serrated metal knife, a solid metal butter knife, and two metal forks. Why should I worry about carrying on a knife when I can just book a first class ticket and have the airline hand them to me?
You must have very little faith in your fellow humans. I think it would be a rare person who wouldn't be motivated to save the lives of hundreds of people who were entrusted in his care.
This is an example of why having pilots pass through TSA security is unneeded- a constant irritation for me. A proper in-depth background check is all that is necessary, accompanied by ongoing review.
You, too, can do what pilots do. I do. It's called TS PreCheck, and as a result, I show up at the airport (LAX usually), walk to an at-most 2 person line, drop my bag and cell phone on the belt, and walk through a metal detector. Security takes less than a minute, even if I have to wait for one other person in the lane. No removal of shoes, or taking off my coat, or taking my laptop out of my bag, etc. Just walk through a metal detector like back in the 90s...
I'm always surprised at the number of people who don't know about this, nor use it. I guess one thing to be thankful for is that I never have to wait for security, and I can arrive at the airport ~30 minutes before my flight starts to board, and am always at my gate just before boarding starts...
If we learned nothing else from "The Highlander" TV series, it's that every 10-12 years, immortals need to appear to "die" so they can start over elsewhere and not be questioned about their appearing to never age...
Well, with everyone going to electric cars, we can use the now-plentiful gasoline to power local generators at each recharge station and generate the electricity locally!
Which is a REALLY great design ethos! Start with a slick, cool-looking cylinder then surround it with all kinds of random-shaped-and-colored boxes connected with snaky wires everywhere!
Why don't you go live where there is no centralized government then? Oh wait, there is no place like that.. except.. Somolia.
And you forgot that other hell-hole called Switzerland. You know, where the local cantons (states/provinces) have more power than the Federal Government and there is no executive to speak of.
But DON'T YOU SEE? RWR, but shaking things up and pushing for change, creating the chance that change could be BAD! If only he would have listened to the Democrats and just kept things stable and unchanging, you know - like back in the old days...
So much for the "progressives want progress, conservatives want to stay the same" mantra...
Absolutely! Of course, we notice that you've been extremely active in agitating against the Powers That Be. And whilst we may not actually prevail in a court case against you, we can ensure you're arrested, put into jail without bail, and basically bankrupted in an attempt to clear your own name. Think you'll ever get a job again after a high-profile arrest and long pre-trial about your accused meth dealing to kindergartners?
No, if you're smart, "citizen", you'll go ahead and just stay quiet about your political views for a while, and we won't have to use these records of that phone call to form the basis of an arrest...
Combine this sniffing of "who talked to whom" with the IRS targeting of groups tending to be politically opposed to the President. I think it's not a leap at all to determine a possible "real agenda"...
Who said anything about a criminal prosecution? You can be "detained" indefinitely without charge, at the whim of the Government. No prosecution needed; ergo, no need to worry about that pesky 4th Amendment.
Please see District of Columbia v. Heller where the Supreme Court found that possession of firearms for self-defense was part of the 2nd Amendment.
Now, why 30 rounds? Well, The Police Policy Studies Council found that trained police officers tend to have a hit rate around 15%. That means, on average, one of every 7 shots fired will strike the target. And that is for trained police officers, who practice rapid-fire, movement-based engagements. Not your typical firearm enthusiast.
Now add it all up. Assume you're as trained as a police officer. Assume you need 7 shots to strike your assailant once. And you need 3.5 hits to stop your assailant. That means you need somewhere around 25 rounds to pretty much guarantee you can eliminate a solitary assailant.
But what if there are two or three assailants? Suddenly 30 rounds doesn't look too promising, does it? There is a reason police officers typically carry pistols with magazine capacities in the 14-17 round range, and carry between 2 and 4 backup magazines. It's because in many armed confrontations it's not at all unreasonable to expect an officer to expend 50+ rounds to end the situation, if it comes to the point of gunfire.
Now, given the above, and the fact that the right to self defense is part of why the 2nd Amendment exists, why do you feel that 9 rounds is sufficient?
Slashdot Mirror
I just don't see the basis for a claim of self defense. Zimmerman started it, therefore he was on the offense, not the defense.
How did Zimmerman start it? What evidence is there for him starting the fight?
Yes, his life was in danger. You can get killed by getting punched in the head and falling to the ground. Given that Zimmerman was found innocent, it would tend to indicate the facts also support his contention that his life was in danger. What facts do YOU have that were not brought up during the trial that would indicate his life was NOT in danger?
it's all about Zimmerman's reason for shooting and killing Trayvon.
he said it was 'self defense'
but his *life was not in danger*
see that? his life wasn't in danger so 'self defense' is no defense
Yeah, it's not like getting punched and having your head hit concrete can kill you. Oh wait...
I personally don't understand half the rules. I just recently returned from China, on American Airlines (heading back in another 10 days). Got bumped to first class. Ordered the chicken for dinner. Got the meal, a 4.5" long serrated metal knife, a solid metal butter knife, and two metal forks. Why should I worry about carrying on a knife when I can just book a first class ticket and have the airline hand them to me?
You must have very little faith in your fellow humans. I think it would be a rare person who wouldn't be motivated to save the lives of hundreds of people who were entrusted in his care.
OTOH, the unthinkable has happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990
This is an example of why having pilots pass through TSA security is unneeded- a constant irritation for me. A proper in-depth background check is all that is necessary, accompanied by ongoing review.
You, too, can do what pilots do. I do. It's called TS PreCheck, and as a result, I show up at the airport (LAX usually), walk to an at-most 2 person line, drop my bag and cell phone on the belt, and walk through a metal detector. Security takes less than a minute, even if I have to wait for one other person in the lane. No removal of shoes, or taking off my coat, or taking my laptop out of my bag, etc. Just walk through a metal detector like back in the 90s...
I'm always surprised at the number of people who don't know about this, nor use it. I guess one thing to be thankful for is that I never have to wait for security, and I can arrive at the airport ~30 minutes before my flight starts to board, and am always at my gate just before boarding starts...
Hey, his name is attached to millions of posts at /, Including yours!
If we learned nothing else from "The Highlander" TV series, it's that every 10-12 years, immortals need to appear to "die" so they can start over elsewhere and not be questioned about their appearing to never age...
Well, with everyone going to electric cars, we can use the now-plentiful gasoline to power local generators at each recharge station and generate the electricity locally!
He's using lawyer-speak - you're not supposed to understand...
Which is a REALLY great design ethos! Start with a slick, cool-looking cylinder then surround it with all kinds of random-shaped-and-colored boxes connected with snaky wires everywhere!
And Cook's successor will give us the Mac Pro SpHERE.
Yes, but it will float on a magnetic cushion.
which will unfortunately wipe the hard-disk reducing its usefulness significantly but the hipsters won't notice because it pretty.
No, that feature is the new anti-NSA/FBI HDD security feature...
Why don't you go live where there is no centralized government then? Oh wait, there is no place like that.. except.. Somolia.
And you forgot that other hell-hole called Switzerland. You know, where the local cantons (states/provinces) have more power than the Federal Government and there is no executive to speak of.
Don't need to reject them at all.
You only need to not approve
.
But DON'T YOU SEE? RWR, but shaking things up and pushing for change, creating the chance that change could be BAD! If only he would have listened to the Democrats and just kept things stable and unchanging, you know - like back in the old days...
So much for the "progressives want progress, conservatives want to stay the same" mantra...
With what? Making a phone call is not a crime.
Absolutely! Of course, we notice that you've been extremely active in agitating against the Powers That Be. And whilst we may not actually prevail in a court case against you, we can ensure you're arrested, put into jail without bail, and basically bankrupted in an attempt to clear your own name. Think you'll ever get a job again after a high-profile arrest and long pre-trial about your accused meth dealing to kindergartners?
No, if you're smart, "citizen", you'll go ahead and just stay quiet about your political views for a while, and we won't have to use these records of that phone call to form the basis of an arrest...
Combine this sniffing of "who talked to whom" with the IRS targeting of groups tending to be politically opposed to the President. I think it's not a leap at all to determine a possible "real agenda"...
The CIA, yes - prohibited from domestic spying. The NSA? No. The FBI (who actually got the data)? No.
The courts do not permit "fishing expeditions".
Apparently, the current situation shows that some do...
Who said anything about a criminal prosecution? You can be "detained" indefinitely without charge, at the whim of the Government. No prosecution needed; ergo, no need to worry about that pesky 4th Amendment.
I think he'd prefer a unicorn. One that farts rainbows, please.
As the posters all said...
"CHANGE"
Can I HOPE it stops?
Funny thing, off the top of my head I can mention two close friends, both married 30+ years: one couple has spelt is separate rooms for years,
See, that's part of the problem right there. You're supposed to use the bedroom for sexual activities, not just academic pursuits...
Reminds me of this saying:
DUCT TAPE: Turns "NO NO NO!" into "Mmm Mmm Mmm!"
Please see District of Columbia v. Heller where the Supreme Court found that possession of firearms for self-defense was part of the 2nd Amendment.
Now, why 30 rounds? Well, The Police Policy Studies Council found that trained police officers tend to have a hit rate around 15%. That means, on average, one of every 7 shots fired will strike the target. And that is for trained police officers, who practice rapid-fire, movement-based engagements. Not your typical firearm enthusiast.
So how many rounds are needed, on average, to stop an assailant? Well, a little digging and we find that you typically need 3.5 hits to stop an assailant. In other words, you need to put between 3 and 4 holes in a person to incapacitate them to the point they are no longer a threat. Sometimes you get lucky and it's a single shot; sometimes it can take 17 hits to incapacitate someone to the point where you can finally safely handcuff them.
Now add it all up. Assume you're as trained as a police officer. Assume you need 7 shots to strike your assailant once. And you need 3.5 hits to stop your assailant. That means you need somewhere around 25 rounds to pretty much guarantee you can eliminate a solitary assailant.
But what if there are two or three assailants? Suddenly 30 rounds doesn't look too promising, does it? There is a reason police officers typically carry pistols with magazine capacities in the 14-17 round range, and carry between 2 and 4 backup magazines. It's because in many armed confrontations it's not at all unreasonable to expect an officer to expend 50+ rounds to end the situation, if it comes to the point of gunfire.
Now, given the above, and the fact that the right to self defense is part of why the 2nd Amendment exists, why do you feel that 9 rounds is sufficient?
Mmmm.... Whale...