>>>>>>So if somebody follows me and scares me, I have permission to brutally attack them. Got it.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, but then I'm opposed to Stand Your Ground laws on principle.
>>>>>
>>>>>In this case, Zimmerman provoked the entire incident. He carried a gun while on Town Watch (which I understand is in opposition to best practices). He decided that Martin was suspicious. Despite the recommendation of the 911 operator, he chose to follow Martin.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Trayvon was a thug who initiated the physical confrontation. Anytime you do that you are putting your life in somebody's hands.
>>>>>
>>>>>Martin was a kid walking home from the store. He wasn't the best kid, but he wasn't a thug (as I've now seen a number of people refer to him). He was doing nothing wrong what a bigger, stronger, older man started following him. Is it surprising that this boy, this child, became scared and reacted badly?
>>>>>
>>>>>FWIW, I have now seen suggestions that Zimmerman was, in fact, a thug. Two different women say he assaulted them, prior to this incident:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.thenation.com/blog/175270/domestic-violence-and-george-zimmermans-defense#axzz2ZFBUzMUt
>>>>>
>>>>>Tamar
>>>>
>>>>I agree with you, it is irresponsible to arm civilian persons without any proper training and experience in law enforcement, and most likely without proper security screening and psychological test, and to let them walk on the street with that loaded gun with the command to "fight crime". It's like the worst Western Movie mentality I could imagine.
>>>>The proper way would be to only allow pure self defense weapons, like a taser and perhaps a police stick, and give the command in case of danger to avoid, retreat and ask for backup.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I agree with you, it is irresponsible to arm civilian persons without any proper training and experience in law enforcement
>>>
>>>How do you know this was the case?
>>
>
>
>>I assume this because he was told to not to pursue the suspicious person, instead to stay put and wait.
>
>This is not true.
>
>>Accidents happen because of mistakes. A mistake must have happened, otherwise there would not be a dead person.
>
>It wasn't a mistake. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and brutally beat him. Trayvon said he was going to kill him.

And you were there to hear this? Or are we going on what Zimmerman told EMS/police after the fact?

Look, this was a 'comedy of errors' from the get-go and never should have come to the ending of someone ending up dead. We can 'woulda, shoulda, coulda' the thing to death but it basically boils down to a "he said/he said" case and one of the 'he saids' isn't here to say. I may not agree with the outcome of the trial, but I can understand how the verdict came to be.

Would I be happier if they'd handed down manslaughter? Yes because, to me, it all boils down to "if Zimmerman stays in his car, as was implicitly suggested by the 911 operator with the 'we don't need you to do that', would Martin still be alive? Probably."

At several points in the 'encounter', that night could have ended much differently - and I can assign blame to both sides of it because I do feel that both sides contributed to it - but it all starts with Zimmerman getting out of his car and ignoring the 911 suggestion to not follow.