If you don’t shake your head at some of the memes created by liberal social media, you are not paying close enough attention.
The problem is the two cases are not similar…at all. In the case of George Zimmerman, at the time he pulled the trigger, his attacker was smashing his head into the pavement. All the evidence, and all the witnesses corroborated Zimmerman’s account of the event. Unfortunately, only local media reported the facts of the case as they became available. The national media, however, grossly misreported the case and created an image of a white man stalking and hunting an innocent black teenager as he was merely walking home.
While I can fully agree that a 20 year prison sentence may be harsh, the facts of the case are wholly different from that of Zimmerman’s. Marissa Alexander was apparently in an abusive relationship. Her and her husband were in a verbal altercation. Alexander left the home and went into the garage where she retrieved a handgun from her car. She then pointed the gun at her husband and fired a “warning shot” into the wall.
Alexander was found guilty because she was out of harms way and then returned making her aggressor. She didn’t have a duty to retreat, but she did. If she had the gun on her person and shot at her husband, she would have a valid defense under Florida’s controversial law.
Progressives tend to look at only outcomes and not the circumstances involved, thus they are easily drawn in by slogans such as expressed in the above meme.
Sifting Reality 
I shake my head at just about all the memes republican or democrat out there. They rarely compare apples to apples.
I’m going to try and stay away from the ones just taking a jab at the other side and focus on distortions of facts, like the one above.
Yes, it can be difficult to compare cases like these, but what we take away is clear; if you’re going to fire a weapon you’re better off killing your target.
Circumstances: Zimmerman didn’t have to confront Trayvon in the first place and used his weapon when he was getting his ass handed to him. Alexander felt threatened, but because she didn’t have her gun on her and had to go get the weapon in another room, she loses the right to “stand her ground” and firing 3 warning shots is worthy of 60 years in prison.
Got it – always carry your gun and shoot to kill when you feel provoked. I feel safer already.
That’s your problem, and every other liberal’s problem, Z. Zimmerman didnt confront Martin!
According to every witness, all the physical evidence, and Zimmerman’s injuries the story happened thusly:
George Zimmerman noticed someone wearing a baggy hooded sweatshirt with the hood up walking through the neighborhood late in the evening. This seemed suspicious because of a multitude of break-ins in the homes in the area. Zimmerman called the police to report the incident. He only exited his vehicle when asked by the dispacher his location. Zimmerman sees Martin and begins to follow him because he didn’t want him to get away before the police arrived. When the dispacher asked if Zimmerman was following the person, he answered “yes”. The dispacher said “we don’t need you to do that” to which Zimmerman answered, “OK” and began to return to his vehicle. On his way back to his vehicle, Martin confronted him and asked why he was being followed. A struggle ensued which escalated into a fight between the two. Eventually Martin gained the upper hand and was straddled on top of Zimmerman reigning blows onto his face and body. At some point Zimmerman’s jack rode up his body exposing his holstered firearm. Martin said to Zimmerman “you’re going to die tonight”. It was at this point Zimmerman believed Martin was reaching for, or was about to reach for his firearm. Zimmerman drew his weapon and fired once into Martin’s body.
Alexander’s mistake was returning to the house, at that point she wasn’t standing ground but pursuing. Had her husband followed her to the garage she wouldn’t be in jail, had she had her gun on her she wouldn’t be in jail.
And in every state, I believe, “warning shots” are illegal.
I’m well aware of the Zimmerman story. I live in central Florida.
Zimmerman followed Martin despite the dispatcher’s request. I don’t dispute Zimmerman’s right to defend himself, but he shouldn’t have left his vehicle in the first place. Someone died as a result of two people not able to have a conversation.
As for the Alexander case, she would have been better off killing Gray. Dead men tell no tales and she would have been justified by the “stand your ground” law with no one around to rebut her. Instead, she’s looking at a possible 60 years.
No, Zimmerman ONLY got out of his vehicle when the dispatcher asked him his location and where Martin was heading. When the dispatcher asked if he was following Martin he said yes and returned to his vehicle when the dispatcher said he didn’t need to. That’s when Martin, not Zimmerman, initiated a confrontation as testified by Martin’s friend who was on the phone with him at the time. Nice try.
In Alexander’s circumstance, if Alexander killed Gray, it would be murder…given the circumstance.
The dispatcher did not instruct Zimmerman to get out of his vehicle. Again, I don’t dispute Zimmerman’s right to defend himself, but he shouldn’t have left his vehicle in the first place. Someone died as a result of two people not able to communicate.
I don’t understand why you’re intentionally trying to be so difficult here, John. If you love the idea of being able to shoot someone just because you feel threatened, just say so. I’m just saying that you’re better off killing them because all you have to do is prove is that threat was real.
why shouldnt he have left his vehicle?
The is no justice at all if you get jail time for firing a warning shot.
state’s reason that it’s dangerous. you dont know where the projectile will go.
they believe, as do I, if you even have to draw your weapon, it is only because you are in such danger that you need to use lethal force right then and there.
I never thought I would say this, but I actually agree with Glenn’s statement.
Dont get me wrong, I dont think Alexander should be in jail. I’m even OK with her firing a warning shot even though I dont think people should.
I’m just saying Zimmerman’s case and her’s are not even close, and theres a legal reason she was found guilty. That reason being she retreated, was not being followed, got a gun, and returned to danger.
As someone who has actively participated in a Neighborhood Watch program, I can tell you that you are to observe and report – not confront and engage.
Zimmerman didnt confront, martin did, martin engaged. He got out of his vehicle to report Martin’s location, not to confront him.
C’mon – let’s think about this. Even if you got out of your vehicle to observe someone’s location because they were now out of view, how far away was Martin? Did Zimmerman have an opportunity to retreat? Was he ambushed? If Martin was running towards Zimmerman in a threatening manner, why wouldn’t Zimmerman have drawn is gun then?
The point is that Zimmerman did not need to get out of his vehicle and follow Martin. Period. The dispatcher told him he didn’t need to follow Martin while he was following Martin, but Zimmerman felt compelled to continue to do so and this went beyond his duty as a neighborhood watchman. The confrontation could have been avoided if Zimmerman would have followed the dispatcher’s instructions.
thats where youre wrong. When the dispatcher told him he didnt need to follow Martin, he stopped and returned to his vehicle.
As for the Alexander case, even if she went into another room to get the gun, she could have simply stated she had the gun within reach and used lethal force when she was threatened. Who’s going to prove her wrong? Because she didn’t actually want to kill the man, she fired warning shots and now faces serious time. While she might have been morally correct, she would have been better off legally if she would have killed him.
no, she obviously didnt need to shoot at all. Pointing it in his direction, as he stated, was enough to make him leave.
So you think Zimmerman was ambushed? Did he not have the opportunity to avoid the confrontation? Was Zimmerman right behind him on the walkway or was he at distance when you say he was returning to his vehicle?
Martin’s friend, whom he was on the phone with essentially testified that Martin told her he was going after the “creepy ass cracker” who he thought was following him to find out “what was his problem”.
So yes, Zimmerman was confronted and attacked after attempting to return to his vehicle.
Pointing a deadly weapon in his direction in Florida is aggravated assault, a third degree felony and punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
As for Zimmerman, the confrontation could have been avoided if he had not left his vehicle in the first place. Was it illegal for him to leave his vehicle? No, but the events that followed were a direct result of this decision. Again, the duty of neighborhood watch is to observe and report. By the definition of current laws in the state of Florida, Zimmerman was rightly found not guilty, but it’s unfortunate that a life was lost that night when there are so many other ways that evening could have gone.
To address your “liberal meme” issue, I think these stories simply illustrate the need for society to review the current laws.
to what degree was Martin at fault?
If I fired a warning shot, it would be in the ground in front of the person – ergo I’d know where the round went. That’s a BIG “if”. I don’t believe in warning shots; if I am in danger, while I’m firing a warning shot the other person may have already moved more towards me with whatever weapon he has.
The law which gives a 5-year jail term is unjust.
John you can’t believe the CREEPY ASS CRACKER part and not believe the part before when she spoke on how Trayvon said someone is watching and following him. Do you believe her entire testimony or the bits and pieces that compliment your argument?
Kullorless
That’s right, to Martin, it appeared as though he was being followed. That’s not disputed. What is disputed is why. Zimmerman didn’t exit his vehicle until he began losing sight of Martin and the dispatcher asked Martin’s location, so Zimmerman got out to see where he was going.
When the dispatcher said he didn’t need to do that, Zimmerman replied “OK” and stopped following and returned to his vehicle. You can even hear it on the 911 tape. When Zimmerman is following, you can hear him breathing heavier than normal, after being told he didnt need to follow, and he replied OK, his breathing went back to normal.
Wow. John relates the Zimmerman situation as it happened, and Z still purposely distorts it.
-The dispatcher has no authority to tell Zimmerman what to do. This was acknowledged by the dispatcher himself.
-Zimmerman has every right to exit and enter his vehicle at any time as he chooses.
-The fact that Zimmerman didn’t draw his weapon as soon as Martin appeared (while Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle) shows the notion that he intended or hoped to shoot someone is the ridiculous notion it is.
-Zimmerman left his vehicle to confirm his own location, not Martin’s.
As more comments came in, I must restate my understanding. Zimmerman left his vehicle to confirm his own location so as to direct the cops. This is how I recall the conversation between him and dispatch going. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
As to the meme, note the words above Zimmerman. It says he murdered someone. He did not, except if one wishes to defend a kid who tried to beat the crap out of someone. If we’re to expect that Zimmerman somehow did something wrong by merely leaving his vehicle, how much more wrong was Martin for daring to lay knuckles on a total stranger when he could have run for home and removed himself from scrutiny by entering the place where he was welcome?
And then to try to draw some kind of comparison between the two cases to further pretend a murder took place? Or maybe it’s trying to draw a comparison between the consequences of actions taken by a “white Hispanic” and a black woman, as if there is some racial component that indicates some form of “institutional racism”. It’s typical distortion to prove what doesn’t exist.
Appeared as though? This debate can go on and on. I will say that I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman (who describe himself as a non violent person) struggled with a teenager but was willing to fight ANYONE (his own words) in a Celebrity Boxing Match. Doesn’t matter if it was for charity or not his attitude toward that fight (that was cancelled) doesn’t match the person he describe himself to be.
Doesn’t the fact that Zimmerman didn’t pull his weapon even while in the middle of the fight, give us a clue to his want or not to shoot? Not until his jacket shimmied up his torso exposing his holstered gun, and Martin saying “you’re going to die tonight” did Zimmerman draw his gun and shoot, only once. Only one shot,
Good job. It’s hard being so patient with liberals.
Martin saying “you’re going to die tonight”
Since Martin was already killed by Zimmerman, this expert testimony as to what Martin allegedly said came from whom? Oh, that’s right: The guy that killed him. Convenient.
The facts remain pretty solid: IF Zimmerman had not followed this kid around, the kid would not have thought he was a creepy ass cracker. The night ended as it did because of Zimmerman’s actions. There is zero indication that Martin was out to harm a “creepy ass cracker,” it only happened, by all appearances and testimony, BECAUSE of Zimmerman’s stalking.
Why isnt it IF Martin didnt circle back around instead of going to his fathers house which was right near him, and IF martin didnt want to confront Zimmerman, and IF martin didnt jump Zimmerman, and IF martin wasnt pummeling Zimmerman’s face and smashing his head into the ground, Zimmerman would have had to shoot him.
Seems one sided.
Since every aspect of Zimmerman’s version of events was confirmed by other witnesses and the physical evidence, why is it a stretch to believe Martin said “you’re gonna die tonight”, especially since he was on top of Zimmerman straddling him pounding his face and head?
Maybe Martin should have used peaceful means, Dan?
If Martin was on top of him pounding his face when Zimmerman shot him, why is their audio of him begging for his life?
It is also true, I must note, that probably (probably), if Martin had avoided the man relentlessly stalking him for no apparent reason – if Martin had remained non-violent himself, he probably would still be alive (if, indeed, Martin turned violent after being stalked for no good reason, as the evidence seems to at least hint at).
But Zimmerman was the adult, Martin was the kid. Zimmerman was the stalker, Martin was reacting to being stalked. This may not be technically murder, but it certainly can be blamed on Zimmerman’s actions and poor decisions in the first place. By evidence at the trial and since the trial, Zimmerman seems to be a hothead trying to “prove” his manliness with stalking and carrying a gun, rather than just being a responsible adult male.
~Dan
Dan the slanderer and bearer of false witness, which makes him an unmitigated hypocrite. He purposely uses an inappropriate term to label Zimmerman. “Stalker”? Then every neighborhood watch person is a stalker as they are purposely watching out for troublemakers in their desire to police their own neighborhood.
“No good reason”? What the hell is wrong with you? (Rhetorical question. I know the answer already.) Zimmerman’s neighborhood had been victimized by burglaries numerous times. Martin’s manner and dress raised Zimmerman’s suspicions. Burglars had not been apprehended at that point and Zimmerman had a previous incident where he felt his actions allowed another kid to get away. He had plenty of good reason to try to keep track of where Martin was once he called police.
I find it outrageous that given Zimmerman’s history up to that point, compared to Martin’s (suspended from school, caught with stolen goods, caught with pot, his overall gangsta-wanna-be behavior) that anyone would suggest that Martin’s death would not have happened if Zimmerman didn’t act as he did. He did nothing either wrong or beyond the rights of a citizen of his community, neighborhood watchman or not. Martin’s death is the result of his actions alone, as his were those that were not proper, from the manner in which he walked home in the rain, to his reaction to believing someone was following him. His actions and behavior that night were stupid. Stupid people die in stupid ways. He died trying to be a bad-ass.
All of you who are defending Zimmerman…. you honestly think, if a black man w/ a loaded gun, followed a white, unarmed teenager home and ended up killing him, that he would be able to claim he was “standing his ground” and be declared NOT guilty? Maybe that happens somewhere, but NOT on planet Earth.
Do you honestly believe that all white people are dishonest racists who would disregard facts in order to contradict an honest claim of standing ground by a black man? In the course of discussion of this case, another was brought up that was exactly what you’re suggesting. A black man killing a white kid, one of three that were acting in a threatening manner. His story was similar to Zimmerman’s and he was just as justified. Unlike some, we are looking at the known facts of the Zimmerman case and his story pans out better than the fairy tale preferred by race baiters.