The Trayvon Martin case

[Gaybutton]

A police video is all over the news today, in which the video shows Zimmerman arriving at the police station after his initial arrest.

Zimmerman claims Trayvon attacked him, broke his nose, was bashing his head, and he had a deep gash on the back of his head. Assuming there is no screw-up and there is no mistake that the video is Zimmerman, the obvious questions are where's the gash? Where's the broken nose? Where's the man in pain from his injuries and having been beaten? Where's the remorseful man crying inconsolably? Where are the grass stains on his jacket?

Judge for yourself:

[lvdkeyes]

Also, police protocol is when handling people who have blood on them the police must wear protective rubber gloves. There are no rubber gloves visible in this video which leads to believe that the police saw no blood.

[Gaybutton]

the police saw no blood.

I think the police did see blood. The trouble is, all the blood was on Trayvon Martin.

Zimmerman's problem now is he is faced not only with the possibility of a court of law, but also the court of public opinion.

To me it all boils down to one thing. He said he was on his way back to his car when he was attacked. That means he was in a car. If he saw something he considered suspicious, he was supposed to call the police, report what he saw, and nothing more. He was not supposed to exit his car and start following anybody. That's exactly what they tell you not to do. He should have reported it and then gone home. The moment he got out of the car, especially carrying a gun on his person, whether it was legal for him to do that or not, that's when the real trouble started. No matter what happened next, Zimmerman started the trouble when he got out of his car. If he did what he was supposed to do, none of this would have happened.

I don't think Zimmerman set out to hurt or kill anyone and I don't think he had any idea that anything serious was going to happen, but I do think he wanted to be the "tough guy" and be viewed as the neighborhood hero.

[easyguy11]

As a non-American, to me it all stems from the right under law to bear arms. There's too many weapons around, carried by nutters.

[lvdkeyes]

I couldn't agree more. I am in a hot debate over this topic right now on Huffington Post site.

[Gaybutton]

I'm all for the right to protect yourself. I don't think anyone should have to be the victim of someone else's violence with nothing available to be able to protect yourself. But I am opposed to the idea that people should be carrying weapons "just in case."

I also am opposed to the idea of anyone being allowed to own a gun without completing a police sanctioned training course in how to properly use it and be subject to passing a test on an annual basis along with refresher courses. When you have people out there with guns, who have had no professional training of any kind, and have a "shoot first and ask questions later" mentality, then we're all in serious danger. How would you like, for example, to end up dead over a road rage incident and all the person who kills you has to do is claim you were attacking him and he thought you were going to kill him - even if he really thought so?

Better still, no guns! If Zimmerman had been carrying pepper spray instead of a gun, maybe things would have gone a little bit better. He might not have had a legitimate reason to use it, but nobody would be dead either.

[Alex]

Now this case finally goes to trial.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/ ... 4Z20130609