Zimmerman found not guilty

I like everyone else was appalled .

However , it is not my problem .

Sorry about repeating myself - didn't mean to - put it down to the heat? I also meant to write that Obama said a son of his would probably have looked like Trayvon.

I am beginning to wonder of my laptop has a mind of its own

Nonu - I can't believe you are being serious when you say "a little bit of racism...." - ironic, yes?
I have read through this thread, taking in all the heat that is being generated and the animosity which runs contrary to any form of humanitarian sense of justice, when I believe we are or should be all appalled at an unarmed black man being shot for being in a "white" district where apparently he had no right to be - what is that all about for a start? If black people are not allowed to walk through so-called white areasi, what is that but institiutionalised racism? Zimmerman is half Hispanc - therefore definitely not "black" and not an officer of the law, but Neighbourhood Watch so an armed vigilante from the sound of it. That sounds like a recipe for disaster in itself.
I believe that President Obama said that if he had had a son instead of his daughters, that so would probably have looked like Trayvon - does being black in a hoody that make it right to shoot first? Of course not. The evidence was flimsy at best. Saddest comment of all though I am afraid, Nonu is "That is not my problem though , I do not live there "

Martin did, and died.

Yes the hurricanes , i think there may well be a little bit rascism in several parts of the U S A.

That is not my problem though , I do not live there .

And the hurricanes. But racism would be even worse for me.

I would not mind having a villa in Florida , except for the biters in the everglades of course !!!

Yes, jura, but we honestly can do no more than wonder. It is speculation. However, I'm really glad I don't live in Florida.

Bags I agree, just speculation. And yet,, think about it, honestly, and perhaps that law might not work for a young black man in Southern US States. I truly wonder.

River....
As was I.

Under this"stand your ground law" he should have got off in the same way that Zimmerman did.

President Obma must be so pissed off about this after all the trying to get gun law reform through that he did.

America seems to be without hope.

Nobody has answered, jura, because nobody knows for sure. We can all speculate, make a guess (informed or otherwise).

If that had happened Granjura, then Martin would have had a hard time proving that he took Z' s gun and shot Z in self defence. I think.

It all comes back to their stupid gun laws.

So being black, wearing a hoodie and walking in a predominantly white neighbourhood is a valid reason for being pursued and confronted is it deserving? Zimmerman wasn't "approached" by Martin - it was the other way round.

Deserving there is a huge difference between protecting your family and yourself, using force if necessary(which I would have done without hesitation to save my family's life, but not property perhaps) and what happened there. Zimmerman was the one armed, the one that followed Martin even though he was told by police not too - Martin was freaked out and should have ignored Zimmerman, but he didn't. He was no angel I am sure, but he didn't deserve to be shot for being young and black and wearing a hoodie- because he fitted the stereotype. There was wrong on both sides, but initiated by Zimmerman, partly because he was racist, and partly because he was a wannabe vigilante- and he was armed with a concealed weapon, Martin was not.

Nobody has answered yet - had Martin been able to get hold of Z's gun, in self defense and according to 'stand my ground' law, and shot him -
would he have walked? According to Florida law, which the jury followed to acquit Z, he should have? But would he - or would he be on death row by now?

Deserving there is a huge difference between protecting your family and yourself, using force if necessary(which I would have done without hesitation to save my family's life, but not property perhaps) and what happened there. Zimmerman was the one armed, the one that followed Martin even though he was told by police not too - Martin was freaked out and should have ignored Zimmerman, but he didn't. He was no angel I am sure, but he didn't deserve to be shot for being young and black and wearing a hoodie- because he fitted the stereotype. There was wrong on both sides, but initiated by Zimmerman, partly because he was racist, and partly because he was a wannabe vigilante- and he was armed with a concealed weapon, Martin was not.

Nobody has answered yet - had Martin been able to get hold of Z's gun, in self defense and according to 'stand my ground' law, and shot him -
would he have walked? According to Florida law, which the jury followed to acquit Z, he should have? But would he - or would he be on death row by now?

Btw - "Nuff said, was I right?
Or should I have said," enough said,and am I proven correct"?"

What was the question again?

Well, I've got my Game of Thrones to read. Did the ironing first thing.

Bye bye Deserving.

deserving none of us is spoiling for a fight - just trying to express opinions on a controversial case.

P.S.
Can't play all day,as some appear to be able to do, ironing to do in spite of the heat.
Lets see who imagines they are,"some"

Zimmerman was the one doing the approaching.

Nuff said, was I right?
Or should I have said," enough said,and am I proven correct"?
The majority of people ,In a recent survey said they had some form of weapon or other deterrent in the home ,often by the bed , and would not hesitate to use them if necessary, and leave it to the court to decide if a reasonable amount of force had been used. At least, if it was proved that excessive force was used, they would be alive to appeal. Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing right, a couple of Katanas strategically placed about the house would not come amiss.
Be honest, when you are approached by an elderly lady, someone of apparently your own age and gender, are you as apprehensive as an approach by a hoodie, a gang of youths , who appear to be wearing, possibly gang colours? Granted you may have misconstrued,but the initial fear is palpable.

Could we have that again in Queen's English?

Oh for God's sake!!!

Have the guts to say what you think, don't try to get lost in the incessant, prattle of others, don't complain if you don't understand english, or at least much of it. Refrain from referring to other blogs, that you just happen to have come across,as if you aren't being nasty, and the contents are not just what you are thinking.
Mog... you'll find that some,will complain about you to HQ, feeling they have been slighted, because something you have said, in general, or in innocence, that appears to relate to them. Not at all aware that you couldn't care less about them or their recently acquired opinions.Opinions tailored to fit in with the niceties they associate with the majority.
As for the subject, I haven't bothered to read much that has been said earlier, Attack that if you will, but if it is that in the area concerned their are few, if any blacks, and most of the crime is proved to be committed by the aforesaid, and that many are gun carrying, and do not worry about using them it is quite natural to get you retaliation in first.
If that assumption is wrong then elsewhere is the place to look, but the jury thinks otherwise. Do we trust the jury or not?
It makes you think when you hear some of the things that have been espoused here.