Taaaa-Daaaa he's back, in living color

[Tool-Slinger]

The way I see it is Zimmerman put himself in that situation by getting out of his car to follow Martin Brian

No need to chase that boy down and continue to scare him and aggravate the situation.... Corny

While I agree following Martin was a dumb move, I think it is fully within Zimmerman's legal right to do so.

[Brian GC]

The way I see it is Zimmerman put himself in that situation by getting out of his car to follow Martin Brian

No need to chase that boy down and continue to scare him and aggravate the situation.... Corny

While I agree following Martin was a dumb move, I think it is fully within Zimmerman's legal right to do so.

Just because something is legal does not make it reasonable or prudent.

Reasonable supercedes legal in any court of law.

[glennac]

Just because something is legal does not make it reasonable or prudent.

Reasonable supercedes legal in any court of law.

The main thing here is "Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". Now he is not guilty of anything here IMHO except not following your advice. Thank you, thank you very much

[Tool-Slinger]

Just because something is legal does not make it reasonable or prudent.

Reasonable supercedes legal in any court of law.

I agree Zimmerman following Martin was not prudent or reasonable. I figure that was dumb, basically, and yes that dumb move enabled whatever following events to take place.

However:

Reasonable supercedes legal in any court of law.

No. It does not.

[corny]

The main thing here is "Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". Now he is not guilty of anything here IMHO except not following your advice. Thank you, thank you very much

Glenn.... I put up that "Another Gas Station Shooting" thread so we could all agree on something..... you need to go over there and make a post.....

please

Put a suggestion down....something like you and the boys would have done to that old goober back in the 50s and or 60s....lol

Something involving gasoline.....and a bucket of fried chicken.

Anyone remember back when you could go to KFC and other places and they would give you those little packages with the towelette that you could clean your hands with if you were eating your chicken with your hands... ???

I can still remember the fresh clean smell of those little towels

Guess they save a few bucks doing away with them.....but they were a nice touch back then.

[Brian GC]

The main thing here is "Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". Now he is not guilty of anything here IMHO except not following your advice. Thank you, thank you very much

Not acting reasonably leading up to the loss of life has landed many people behind bars.

[jmac00]

Just because something is legal does not make it reasonable or prudent.

Reasonable supercedes legal in any court of law.

since when??? The Rule of Law, beats "reasonable" and common sense everytime

[Brian GC]

since when??? The Rule of Law, beats "reasonable" and common sense everytime

You guys are way off on this one. Reasonability is everything in the courtroom.

Example: Taking your eyes of the road which leads to the loss of life. Is it legal to take your eyes off the road, yes. But when it leads to a loss of life it is at least liability and or manslaughter.

Your turn. When has acting recklessly, unreasonably and legally which leads to the loss of life made acceptable in the courtroom?

[Brian GC]

Not acting reasonably leading up to the loss of life has landed many people behind bars.

How about counting all the scuba divers you took out before leaving the dive site?

[jmac00]

You guys are way off on this one. Reasonability is everything in the courtroom.

Example: Taking your eyes of the road which leads to the loss of life. Is it legal to take your eyes off the road, yes. But when it leads to a loss of life it is at least liability and or manslaughter.

Your turn. When has acting recklessly, unreasonably and legally which leads to the loss of life made acceptable in the courtroom?

you want to make up my mind. Is it reasonable or Unreasonable??? anytime you act recklessly that involves hurting others you have committed a crime. whether it was "reasonable" or not .

If you take your eyes off the road (using your example) that comes under reckless driving and/or distracted driving, either way, if it results in harm to others your guilty of a crime. Reasonable or unreasonable has nothing to do with it......next

[Brian GC]

you want to make up my mind. Is it reasonable or Unreasonable??? anytime you act recklessly that involves hurting others you have committed a crime. whether it was "reasonable" or not .

If you take your eyes off the road (using your example) that comes under reckless driving and/or distracted driving, either way, if it results in harm to others your guilty of a crime. Reasonable or unreasonable has nothing to do with it......next

You just make this stuff up as you go along don't you?

Next - the scuba scenario. While you are at it maybe you could differentiate between reasonable and reckless? They aren’t the same thing.

[Tool-Slinger]

You guys are way off on this one. Reasonability is everything in the courtroom.

Example: Taking your eyes of the road which leads to the loss of life. Is it legal to take your eyes off the road, yes. But when it leads to a loss of life it is at least liability and or manslaughter.

Your turn. When has acting recklessly, unreasonably and legally which leads to the loss of life made acceptable in the courtroom?

You can perhaps make a manslaughter charge argument, but Z was charged with murder anyway. I would pin that manslaughter charge on the actual confrontation. Sketchy at best.

It is not illegal to investigate suspicious activity in your hood. Legal trumps rationale, we see that everyday.

[jmac00]

You just make this stuff up as you go along don't you?

Next - the scuba scenario. While you are at it maybe you could differentiate between reasonable and reckless? They aren’t the same thing.

your confusing Reasonable and Rule of Law.

The only time reasonable come into it is in: A Reasonable person would.....

or if the law suite is about property: You should take Reasonable care of .......

In your "scuba scenario" (im going to assume your talking about a charter) IF a charter boat captain left someone or multiple persons behind the District Attorney would have to decide (1)if a REASONABLE PERSON, such as the Capt acted with Reckless disregard for his passengers.

Seeing as your left this wide open. There are far to many variables. Such as was there a medical emergency that made the Captain leave someone behind, Was there a weather event happening that forced to captain to leave people behind. Where the people that were left behind the result of an extended search after they failed to report back to the boat and they were assumed dead. Did the Captain ever call the Coast Guard in such an emergency.