Would Zimmerman still get 48% DU support for murder if his name were in the title?

[stone space]

Recently, there was a poll of DUers regarding Zimmerman's murder.

In it, 48% of all DUers who responded supported by plurality all 3 of the following clauses:

(1) Zimmerman broke no laws.

(2) Zimmerman acted reasonably.

(3) Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes

Zimmermann broke no current laws, acted reasonably and Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes

15 (48%)

Abnredleg, shedevil69taz, 840high, Lurks Often, mackdaddy, Surf Fishing Guru, blueridge3210, Big_Mike, Calista241, COLGATE4, Straw Man, mr_liberal, virginia mountainman, gejohnston, mog75

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172164331

But while Zimmerman got a lot of support for his murder in that DU poll, his name was left out of the title, which may have skewed the poll results somewhat, creating a false and misleading impression of what DU is all about.

So, I'll put the the question before the wider DU community:

Remember, to answer "yes" you need to agree with all 3 of the above clauses of support, not just 1 or 2 of them.

Do you support Zimmerman?

7 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, Zimmermann broke no current laws, acted reasonably and Florida laws relating to any of his actions need no changes.
	4 (57%)
	No.
	3 (43%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[GGJohn]

1. Back at it again I see Mr. Alleged Calculuz Teacher.

[stone space]

2. Do you find gunstalking and murdering unarmed Black kids funny?

I don't understand your response.

[GGJohn]

3. Typical of your responses.

I find you funny and entertaining Mr. Alleged Calculuz Teacher.

[stone space]

4. What does my employment have to do with anything?

That sounds like some weird sort of personal attack.

[stone space]

6. I haven't even mentioned my employment here in this thread.

You claim to be a calculus teacher,

Why are dragging my real life employment into this thread?

This is starting to get creepy.

[GGJohn]

7. Why do you lie about what other members said in this group? eom.

[stone space]

8. I have lied about nothing. The statement endorsed by Zimmerman's supporters...

...is reproduced in full in the OP.

All 3 clauses of support.

[GGJohn]

9. Yeah you have,

you lied about what I said, you lied about what I said in another thread, along with lying about others in that same thread.

[stone space]

10. That explains your deleted post, then.

you lied about what I said

Did I quote you incorrectly?

[GGJohn]

11. No, again, as usual, you got it wrong.

I didn't want you to alert on it so I deleted it.
And you did lie about what I posted in this thread I started, along with lying about other members in that thread and the subsequent thread you started.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=166018

[GGJohn]

12. If you have any honor at all, you would delete those offensive lies

and delete your thread.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

26. Please tell me 48% of DU did NOT say that about Zimmerman...please

[ileus]

14. Watchout they're going to pull a Canadian girl trick on you.

They're working on setting you up for a ban hammer.


Remember the Canadians!

[beevul]

18. Its all they have left. N/T

[DonP]

22. Yup, 2 more states go constitutional carry, versus one post hide or a ban pretty balanced. LoL

Winning!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

19. Won't they at least wait until...

...after homeroom?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

15. Just so we understand...

...please define murder for us from your perspective.

[blueridge3210]

17. You won't get an honest answer.

This one cannot answer simple questions and repeatedly lies about the statements of others.

[ileus]

13. Easiest poll ever.

[sarisataka]

16. I wasn't aware that person

(whose I name I still refuse to use) was murdered. When did this happen?

His name was left out?... no, it's there. I see it. The very first word.

[Blue_Adept]

20. Jury results

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Letting the jury decide if this is a callout.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri May 1, 2015, 09:29 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Voted publicly and talking about positions taken. Not a callout but a discussion.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is absolute troll bait, someone trying to stir something up. I have a thought-ignore it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: First of all it's not 48% of DU it's 48% of a very specialized group that many if not most people avoid. Secondly it is clearly a call out - particularly when you list the names. This kind of attack needs to stop. El Bryanto


Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: absolutely a call-out - hide it and explain to the poster that you do not do this
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[gejohnston]

21. the older poll

I don't know about anyone else on that list, but I watched the entire trial. One of the other people on the list is a law professor who probably likes guns as much as you do. He also watched the trial.
(1) what laws did he break? Please cite the statute.

(2) what is reasonable act when someone who is larger and stronger than you is sitting on you and punching your face and pounding your head on the sidewalk?

(3) How is Florida's law different than any other state? Better yet, any other country?

(4) When does John Good's perjury trial start? Angela Corey would love to have that evidence and prosecute him.

You do realize that anything you do that would be illegal in the course of saving your life is not a crime don't you? For example, a pizza delivery person sees that he or she was set up to be robbed (by ten dudes with knives and tire chains), throws his or her car in reverse, hits a car, and takes off can not be charged with hit and run.

[blueridge3210]

23. Dont' expect an honest answer.

The OP has a demonstrated phobia regarding facts.

[Human101948]

28. Trayvon Martin had a knife and tire chains?

Do you really believe that Zimmerman did not previsualize (and essentially premeditate) a scenario where he would be "forced" to pull out his gun and shoot "one them?"

[gejohnston]

38. he had fists

which kill two to five times more people than "assault weapons".

visualization is not the same as premeditation. I don't have the slightest fucking clue. All you have are the evidence free emotional rants of prosecutors who violated Florida law and still couldn't get a conviction, and stupid as dog shit bloggers who can't find Florida on the map.

I answer your questions, when are you going to answer mine?

[Human101948]

39. "These punks, they always get away..."

Zimmerman said as he stalked Trayvon. He was going to be the big man and confront this punk.

There was no threat until he stalked Trayvon Martin.

Visualization is premeditation. When you fantasize about using your gun to shoot some bad guy you are premeditating shooting that somebody. I've done it, and if you're honest you will admit you've done it. What made it bad in Zimmerman's case is that he needlessly provoked the situation.

P.S. -- I don't sit at my computer all day long. So I apologize for taking too long to reply.

[gejohnston]

41. irrelevant

there was no stalking, and that is equivalent to "should have worn that dress". The only reason assholes on MSNBC and Kos use the term is for emotional effect. Stalking has a specific meaning. Running to see where someone is going your own fucking neighborhood is not it.
This is the important part that there is no dispute based on the evidence presented in court:
forensics and three eye witnesses proved Martin was sitting on top of Zimmerman and doing a "ground and pound". One of the witnesses placed Martin as the initial aggressor. Zimmerman screamed for help for 40 seconds until he fired the shot. That would have been a legal self defense everywhere on this planet. Imagine someone fists hitting your face and getting your head bounced off the sidewalk for 40 seconds.

Those are the undisputed facts proven in court. None of the other shit is relevant.
Also, no visualization is not legally premeditation. Also, it has to be proven in court. They could not prove that, or any other evidence of a crime. I don't give a rat's ass what some dim bulb blogger or dishonest talk radio host claims. That includes complete moron and Armenian genocide denier Cenk Uyger.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/premeditation/

[Human101948]

42. Wow! Talk about being all over the place...

I can't even follow have of that rant.

Let's just say that we have divergent viewpoints. You can say you won the argument and I won't say another word.

Yep! You won!

[blueridge3210]

43. Hardly all over the place.

He rebutted your claims of stalking and premeditation.

Yes, you and he have divergent viewpoints. His viewpoints are fact based; not the rants of internet pundits.

I would agree, he won.

[gejohnston]

44. my viewpoint is very simple

It is based on the facts and evidence presented in court. Nothing else. I sat through the trial and saw it all first hand.
This is the important part:

forensics and three eye witnesses proved Martin was sitting on top of Zimmerman and doing a "ground and pound". One of the witnesses placed Martin as the initial aggressor. Zimmerman screamed for help for 40 seconds until he fired the shot. That would have been a legal self defense everywhere on this planet. Also, the lead investigator told the jury that there was no evidence that contradicted Zimmerman's claim.

I detest intellectually incurious, stupid, and dishonest pundits and bloggers. It doesn't matter if they work for Fox, MSNBC, Redstate, Kos, TYT or anyplace else. I don't care how these low IQ assholes want to redefine "stalking" or "premeditation". They are simply wrong.

[57_TomCat]

45. The point is this...

After being knocked down by Martin, Zimmerman was on his back with Martin on top being assaulted by Martin with the assistance of a concrete sidewalk being used as a weapon by Martin. Zimmerman shot him off. Justifiable homicide.

Zimmerman did not do anything illegal or outside what another reasonable person might have done. The media frenzy made it a racial circus. The facts however won out.

I still think Zimmerman is slightly lower than whale manure on the scale of good people in the worl but in that single incident he was legaly justified.

I agree Zimmerman could have made different choices. So could Martin. In the end we had no winners. That is a very true statement about life. Often unfair and with no winners.

[virginia mountainman]

24. I stand by my vote then..

And I stand by it now...

You must clearly have a very poor understanding of florida law, and know nothing about the evidence presented at the trial?

OR, you may just have an axe to grind?

Which is it?

[virginia mountainman]

31. uhmmm, Yea...

You clearly don't even know what the definition of "murder" is..

I thought you was a professor?

[GGJohn]

51. LOL.

He got locked out of his own thread.
How ironic is that?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

32. I suggest that it is illogical to oppose that which you're unable to define. n/t

[sarisataka]

33. Are you?

Are you opposed to all murder or only certain kinds of murder.

Is a POC defending themselves in a hate crime murder?
Is a woman stopping a sexual assault murder?

You have never responded to these questions by posters.

Is summary execution murder?
You have not stated opposition to that when asked.

It seems your "opposition" is very circumstantial.

[GGJohn]

46. And there you go lying again.

JUST PLZ STOP!!!

[blueridge3210]

48. It's all he has. (nt)

[Human101948]

29. Well you certainly have an axe to grind...

Guns above all...including letting irresponsible people like Zimmerman carry guns around which they are itching to use.

[virginia mountainman]

36. yea?!

Please explain your statement... Provide evidence to prove your "claims". If you can't... Please retract your false charge

[Human101948]

40. You certainly are a cheerleader for more and more guns...

One only has to review your prodigious posting. I would say that's grinding away.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

50. So, anyone who champions civil rights is grinding an axe?

[virginia mountainman]

52. still no proof or retraction?

[JimDandy]

27. A majority of the 48% were gungeoneers

which answers the "why"?

Not nice to call out DUers by name for posts/polls, though. Isn't that against SOP?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

30. Jury results...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172166391#post20

...look conflicted. Some jurors believe it's a call out. One of 7 jurors said not a call out; two of 7 said it is a call out. The rest didn't explain themselves other than one who puzzlingly characterized it as troll bait, voted to leave and said to ignore it.

Overall, it's informative.

[upaloopa]

34. That poll does not represent DU's opinion

It is the opinion of those who responded and since it is not a random selection poll it is meaningless statistically speaking.

[davepc]

35. Why do we keep having threads about that waste of oxygen?

The dude got off, let it fucking go.

[Eleanors38]

37. I don't support the OP, either.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. Seeing as you would label defense against sexual assault to be murder perhaps you aren't the

person to facilitate this discussion.

[GayPleb]

49. Would I be guilty of murder?

Here is an except of a CCW experience I had. Please tell me if it is murder.

My pistol, I believe, has saved my friends and I from a violent encounter only a few years ago. I carry a pistol because my profession DOES NOT make me popular with criminals and may require travel into economically distressed areas to tend to victims and witnesses. While my profession is not a police officer or prosecutor, I am a Victim and Witness Services Coordinator for the County's DA's office.

The department I work in provides basic psychological support (until they get cleared for a licensed therapist), court assistance, transportation, and emotional / physical assistance in / out of the courtroom.

Needless to say, it does NOT make the employees popular with the defendants, when we consul victims and witnesses of violent crime from highly emotional states to where they can testify effectively.

My license came with training from the DA investigators, the PD firearms instructor, a private course, and regular classroom time. As the the background check, that was a foregone conclusion.

Coming back to my narrative, I had decided to visit a gay couple in the gay "district" of my city. When had a great meal and decided to walk our was back, through a park instead of calling a cab. As we neared the park, a car of immature young 20 year old's crawled by the four of us: me , my boyfriend, and the other gay couple. I believe that the reason attention was payed to us is because it was a cold night and we were holding each other (arms draped) as we walked.

Continuing, the car came to a crawl and the window opened up, Out came the word F----T and a beer bottle landing nowhere near us. Not wanting to ruin a good night filling out a police report amid "other" reasons it was universally decided to ignore it until the work week where I could report it at work.

As we exited the park, following our walk, the same car pulled up and stopped. Out come four drunk but very fit 20 somethings. We tell them to leave us alone and attempt to walk away but another beer bottle (empty) lands near us. As we turn two of them had grabbed additional beer bottles and were beginning to throw them at us.

At this point I unholstered my CCW pistol and pointed it at the violent group. Now call me a tech nerd but my pistol does have a strobing light and laser on it. The pistol temporary blinds them and I direct the laser towards the center mass of the individual that seemed less intoxicated.

The once hostile confrontation immediate deescalates as the less intoxicated person grabs the beer bottles from the hands of the two other individuals and telling me they don't want any trouble.

Needless to say a good night ruined and no hanky panky as dessert.

Now, had my state been very restrictive (less freedom) in relation to whom it gives CCW permits to (in some states, I would not have "good cause" / NYC, SF, or LA) I could have had to spend the night at the ER either holding my partners hand or being in the hospital bed myself.

Now in your world, if I saw the assailants continue on the process to throw beer bottles at the group and I could I have shot them or would I be guilty of murder?

[NaturalHigh]

53. Glad you were okay.

Just FYI, though - the poster to whom you replied is now locked out of this thread, so he can't answer. It would make a great OP, and I'm sure you would get plenty of comments, most supportive, some not.