United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Breaking: Man Shoots At George Zimmerman In Florida (UPDATED)
Source:
TruthInMedia.com
URL Source: http://truthinmedia.com/george-zimmerman-shot-in-florida/
Published: May 11, 2015
Author: Annabelle Bamforth
Post Date: 2015-05-11 18:15:19 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 10399
Comments: 50
Update, May 11th, 2015, 3:28 p.m. Eastern: Zimmerman’s attorney, Don West, told the Associated Press that Zimmerman was injured, but clarified that he was not hit by a bullet; Zimmerman was hit by shards of glass entering the vehicle after the window was shot. According to West, Zimmerman’s injuries are minor and he may know the person who shot at him. Lake Mary, FL- Florida news station WKMG-TV reports that George Zimmerman was shot in the face on Lake Mary Boulevard, near Rinehart Road, in Lake Mary on Monday. Lake Mary police have not yet provided details about what exactly led to the shooting, but acknowledged that there were two vehicles involved in the incident. Lake Mary police spokeswoman Bianca Gillett told CNN that the shooting appeared to originate from a road rage incident, according to ABC15. WKMG reporter Erik Sandoval tweeted a photo of a Honda Ridgeline truck, believed to be owned by Zimmerman, with a bullet hole in the passenger side window: — Erik Sandoval (@ErikSandoval) May 11, 2015 Updates will follow as more information is available. Poster Comment: It's getting so that a White Hispanic can't even drive down the road without getting shot at.
Bullet hole in George Zimmerman's passenger window. @local6news pic.twitter.com/PnGcbPhwXV
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-9) not displayed.
.
.
.
#10. To: hondo68 (#5)
Conflicting theories. If he knew the shooter, it's probably not road rage. I wonder if his girlfriend is shooting at him now? Since Zimmerman is a known shooter/gun carrier - it may make people shoot first for fear of their lives. It's a paradox - once you have a rep as a shooter it seems people shoot at you more per every gunslinger movie I ever saw.
He was justified by a trial of his peers to use DPF. It was called self defense. Don't be so weak and liberal. We all are gonna die someday. Some people make choices that speed that along... even if that makes your heart bleed.
Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
He was justified by a trial of his peers to use DPF. That does not mean he is not a killer. You can be a killer in the right or in the wrong.
Actually what Jesus said was this: Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:51-52)
Actually, what Jesus said was this: "…pantes gar hoi labontes machairan en machire apoiountai", which is to say "all indeed those having taken sword by sword will perish". Which is to say 'All who take up the sword will perish by the sword", which is expressed very well by the colloquial "Live by the sword, die by the sword", which is not a "false doctrine" at all, but a statement of fact out of the mouth of the Son of God. If people don't like it, they should change their minds and hearts and knuckle under to the in-your-face authority of God on the matter. Or ignore God and go about using force, and then end up being haunted by the use of force against one's self, like Zimmerman is experiencing.
No. He was talking about that one instance. Not a doctrine of if you live by the sword you will did by the sword. If that is what he said then he would be a liar. Because everyone who has "lived" by the sword has not died by the sword.
Yes. In that one instance. Not anyone who ever takes up a sword forever.
What we call "death", Jesus called "falling asleep". Death - the final thing, the real thing - is getting thrown into the Lake of Fire at final judgment. On the last page of Scripture Jesus twice lists who will be going into the fire, and phonein - slayers - figure in both lists. So actually, he was talking about everybody who picks up weapons to go kill people, and actually, all who take of the sword do perish because of that, and are thrown into the flames. The law may acquit a man of a killing, but that doesn't help him if the justification of men causes him to believe that he is justified before God and causes him to not repent his killings. It's a fearful thing to fall unrepentant into the hands of the living God who twice promised that those who slay will be thrown into the fire and die. He's no liar. It's just that people who love the idea of the use of violent force have decided to parse what God said in order to justify what is in fact toxic to them. The perverts do the same thing with sex: justify, spin, justify, but alongside phoneis - slayers - in those lists of the doomed are also porneis - the sexually immoral. It's perfectly obvious when they twist and turn to justify what cannot be justified. It's always obvious to people not in the thrall of a sin to see the sin on others. Many men are in the thrall of violence, however, and are blind to the fact that killing other men is a sin every bit as deadly as sticking their dicks in them. Live by the sword, die by the sword, whether of steel or of pork.
I notice that Z has had several other run-ins with the same perp over the last year. This story is leaving out a lot of info about them both. There is a lot more to this story. It isn't some unknown guy just shooting at Z; they've had run-ins and maybe some stalking before. As I've said many times, Z should receive only narrowly construed support from the Right. He's a loose cannon and a lib voter. We shouldn't make a hero out of him over the Trayvon stuff.
I don't get how this man became a cause celeb on the right. He stalcked a young person first - he initiated the events of that night by following someone. Was his head being beaten into the ground? Probably - but did not Trayvon not have a right to also stand his ground against someone who is following him - if a stranger is following you in a vehicle it is initiating a hostile act. Also, Zim was not neighborhood watch in any form. Neighborhood watches wear identifying clothing and car markings - if not any rapist can claim he is a neighborhood watch and stalk women and detain them. I think there was a case a decade or so ago where a woman refused to pull over for an unmarked police car with an non uniformed police officer inside because of that - there were cases of rapists pulling that stunt. I think a lot of people in America are fed up on black urban culture - black males in particular - that they got their jollies from the notion a 'young punk' got killed. The black leaders - if there are any left - should realize that the precieved behavior of blacks also contributes to hostility against them as a people. Not fair and not right but that is reality for minorities of all stripes and colors - just ask Italians who still labor under the mafia smear - even though some Italians who ar enot mobsters play off on it the way non gangbanging blacks play off on the gangsta culture.
We should limit his heroism to the Trayvon stuff. I think most do.
Meaning you have every right to then run between buildings, lie in wait in the bushes, then jump out, sucker punch the guy, and beat his head bloody against the sidewalk. That's called self defense. If he responds by shooting you, that's first degree murder.
It is fair and it is right -- assuming you don't want to be a victim. Whites didn't create this "perception" problem. Blacks own that. They're the gang bangers. They're the ones who go out "wilding", who steal from stores in a mob, who play the "knockout" game, and who commit a disproportionate share of all the crimes.
It is not a right not to be followed. Stalking must include some indication or history of menace. We don't have a right not to be followed by a peaceful person (or a cop) even if we don't like it. He was head of the neighborhood watch and a main organizer of it and the main contact person with the local police for the watch group. There was a rapist a few years back in Georgia, I think. He had a rig with convincing light display and a fake siren. After it happened a few times, the women would not longer stop for a cop with lights/siren except at very public and well-lit places like a convenience shop or truck stop where they felt safe. The cops even told the public not to pull over at the roadside but to proceed to a public lighted area to stop for a policeman. Georgia has a lot of police impersonators, it seems. I think this is the guy they were after, not sure if they ever caught him. The man handcuffed and put her in the back of his vehicle, where he sexually assaulted her. He did not display a gun, police said. The vehicle, which may have been a Ford Crown Victoria, had blue lights on the interior of the windshield. The victim does not remember seeing lights on the outside of the vehicle, police said. The car had vinyl seats but no prisoner cage. The man is described as a white man in his 30s or 40s who is between 5 feet 5 inches and 5 feet 8 inches tall with a medium build. He has gray or white short hair and a dark-colored shorter beard. Police said the fake officer was wearing sunglasses, a dark-blue, long-sleeved uniform with no patches, a gold star-shaped badge, a gold name tag with numbers on it and a "police belt" with handcuffs and a baton with a handle, possibly a PR-24 style. The victim did not see a radio or gun on the belt. Carrollton police are asking drivers to be look out for the vehicle. Drivers who believe they are being pulled over by someone who may not be a police officer should call 911 and drive to a well-lit location before stopping, police said.
I said it initiated a hostile act - you don't have a right not to be stared at but if someone is staring at you it is a hostile act. So Zimmerman - who is not a patrol of any kind - no windbreaker saying he is NW nor any markings on his vehicle - starts to stare and follow a kid at night. That is a hostile act.
He was head of the neighborhood watch and a main organizer of it and the main contact person with the local police for the watch group. At that time he was not in that capacity if true - and he did not follow protocal. I have read zero accounts that at any time he identified himself as a NW to the person he killed.
You may consider it hostile or rude but it isn't illegal. Otherwise, hot women would have guys arrested constantly for staring at them in a creepy way. In a free country, you have the right to stare. It was at night so Trayvon couldn't have seen if Z was staring or not. He could see a vehicle that seemed to be following him slowly. But Trayvon was also idling around in an area with a lot of recent burglaries which is suspicious behavior. Z did not have to have a magic windbreaker or ID or anything else. Very few neighborhood watch programs have anything like that and the police don't encourage that. Mostly, these watch programs are people watching out a window of a house or car, snapping a few photos (yes, that's also legal), and being alert to strangers and suspicious behavior. That includes some perfectly legal staring at suspicious people too.
You have some very strange ideas of the watches as some kind of police auxiliary with uniforms and conduct rules. I've never heard of any PD operating such a watch program. Maybe GI knows of such watch programs. I think the vast majority of watch programs are as I described them above. None of them include badges or uniforms. They're just volunteer eyes and ears for the actual police.
When Zim got out of his vehicle it is a resonable assumption that the followee is feeling under threat.
It is as simple as wearing windbreakers that state NW and those magnetic stick on on cars. And they call into the police ahead of time so that the patrol can know who is out there if they happen upon them.
That is not a reasonable assumption in any way. Trayvon took off and eluded Z entirely. Trayvon eluded Z and made it all the way back to the patio of his mom's townhouse but then left the patio and returned to the end of the condo building to the bushes which is where he jumped Z and got shot. If Trayvon was feeling threatened, returning to those bushes was not reasonable. And he also didn't call 911 to report he was being stalked either. Let's say some guy is jogging down the street. You happen to be heading to a house in the neighborhood but you're early so you're driving about 10mph to kill a few minutes. The jogger thinks you're stalking him. Then as he gets near his home with you not far behind (having "followed" him for the last block or so), you stop your vehicle to get out and go to his neighbor's house. So should the jogger have a right to feel you stalked him, pull out his CCW pistol and blow you away? Of course not. Not even in Stand Yer Ground Floriduh. You need to read up a bit more on probable cause and reasonable assumption of menace. Also, how neighborhood watches actually operate.
You actually know personally of neighborhood watches with patrol vehicles and official windbreakers? I've never seen them. The most I've ever seen are little stickers for NW for your windows or doors, sometimes they have little NIMBY lawn signs up in a neighborhood for NW, to try to encourage burglars to pick another neighborhood. It's about like putting up security service stickers or signs on the property. Can you produce any evidence that Z's neighborhood watch had official windbreakers or that they had NW magnetic signs for their doors and that they coordinated their "patrols" (which I haven't even heard of before) with the local PD? Can you substantiate any of that?
I know of many and helped form a few. I've never heard of any type of uniform or identifier for NW... and every NW program I've been involved with never condones or suggests any member apprehend or confront anyone. They are to watch and report.
Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on. Robert Kennedy
I do. Also, does not Trayvon have a right to stand his ground against an adult man following him at night?
I've never heard of any type of uniform or identifier for NW... and every NW program I've been involved with never condones or suggests any member apprehend or confront anyone. They are to watch and report. I have known a few in Long Island where if they are patrolling on foot and with a car they do have some sort of tshirt or stick on. This is in a high car theft area of LI and having civilians patrol at night with flashlights without some sort of identifier may be taken the wrong way.
Those are the only kind I'm aware of. If a PD starts handing out jackets or mag-signs, some yahoo thinks he's deputized and your PD is liable for what they do. Also, the watch guys themselves could become a target if a violent gang was in the area and wanted no snitches around. There was some group in the big cities years back that was like a neighborhood watch. They had jackets and, I think, berets. I can't recall their .org name though but I think it was ____ Angels. They would patrol in pairs in dangerous neighborhoods in places like NYC or Chicago. Also on subways. I think they disbanded or faded away. There are some small C.O.P. groups which are called Citizens On Patrol and some other names. Their national website is down and seems untended. I notice they have a group in Texas with several PDs still supporting these groups. A quote from their defunct website: 'Citizens On Patrol are also referred to as "Citizen Observer Patrols", "Community Action Patrols", "Police Auxiliary Citizens Team", "Retired Senior Volunteer Patrol", "Volunteers In Policing", "Volunteers On Patrol", as well as other names. Citizen Patrol groups have been in use within the United States for over 20 years. The number of individual Citizen Patrol Volunteers within the United States is estimated to be over 75,000 with groups in every state of the nation.' I really doubt they have 75K active members if they can't keep a puny static website running. We should also keep in mind that recent shooting by that rich old cop wannabe who shot that guy who was already subdued on the ground: "Oops, I shot him. I'm sorry". Now he's saying he confused his taser with his handgun so they should let him off. But he's out on bail and took his whole family off on a big Caribbean jaunt. I dislike any use of "cop" other than for actual police so I don't like this idea right off the bat. I did, however, enjoy Police Academy 4: Citizens On Patrol. It should have won the Oscar for best picture.
Of course he does. But Trayvon has no right to assault or kill Z if Z presents no credible threat to him. Do you understand the concept of a public sidewalk? We all have the right to use them.
Nonsense - you hit someone till they can't be a threat.
Keep saying "Nonsense" as they arrest you for assault and menacing. It isn't about whether Z or Trayvon had a right to be on a public thoroughfare in proximity. It was about who threw the first punch and who was going for the other guy's gun in a fight. And who was on top throwing punches. You want for some reason to justify Trayvon's attack on Z. You keep circling back to it.
The guy who follows you and then gets out of the car to follow you on foot at night throws the first proverbial punch - because he initiates the events.
Really? So if you get out of your car at night and walk near another pedestrian on a public sidewalk but without displaying any malice or threat, they have a right to beat the crap out of you? It's a silly argument you're offering.
It's a silly argument you're offering. Walk near? The guy was stalking - it's not like he went for a walk and was absent minded and got within a few inches from his victim. Following someone in a car is a threatening act. They teach kids about that all the time in school - stranger danger - car abductions, etc. Zimmerman displayed child abductor traits from the outside looking in. Following a teenager at night by car, then by foot,,,
Not a crime. Trayvon told the chick he was chatting on the phone that he thought Z might be a perv at one point. Which argues that he attacked Z thinking he could roll a queer for quick cash or whatever. He told her this on the phone from his mother's patio, before he went back to the bushes to attack Z.
Or he thought Zim was a rapist/child abductor.
You really have drank the whole pitcher of Kool-aid over Saint Traybon.
Don't discount ISIS. They live by the sword.
Or he thought Zim was a rapist/child abductor. What if he thought he was a out of work clown, who wanted to eat George Zimmerman with some fava beans and a nice Chianti? Maybe he thought GZ was a moon rock! Ya, then he could definitely attack him!
Ya, okay now I get it. Da Trayb jus' be defendin' against da setchually preverted moon rocks.
You like following boys at night in your car?
Aw, c'mon, who doesn't?
So actually, he was talking about everybody who picks up weapons to go kill people, and actually, all who take of the sword do perish because of that, and are thrown into the flames. You're doctrine seems made up with flaw in my humble opinion. I think Jeuses was making one statement about one incident. He was. You are saying anyone who ever takes up the sword and lives by it will surely die. SPiritual death. What if they repent? That makes your doctrine false imo. Or repentence isn't good enough if you "live by the sword". Just calling it like I see it.
According to [attorney] West, Zimmerman’s injuries are minor and he may know the person who shot at him police spokeswoman Bianca Gillett told CNN that the shooting appeared to originate from a road rage incident
#11. To: Pericles (#9)
He is a known killer
#12. To: GrandIsland (#11)
He is a known killer
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#6)
#14. To: goldilucky, A K A Stone (#13)
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
Which is to say 'All who take up the sword will perish by the sword",
#16. To: goldilucky (#13)
Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:51-52)
#17. To: A K A Stone (#15)
(Edited)
No. He was talking about that one instance. Not a doctrine of if you live by the sword you will did by the sword. If that is what he said then he would be a liar. Because everyone who has "lived" by the sword has not died by the sword.
#18. To: GrandIsland, Vicomte13 (#2)
#19. To: TooConservative, GrandIsland, Vicomte13 (#18)
As I've said many times, Z should receive only narrowly construed support from the Right. He's a loose cannon and a lib voter. We shouldn't make a hero out of him over the Trayvon stuff.
#20. To: TooConservative (#18)
"We shouldn't make a hero out of him over the Trayvon stuff."
#21. To: Pericles (#19)
"if a stranger is following you in a vehicle it is initiating a hostile act."
#22. To: Pericles (#19)
"behavior of blacks also contributes to hostility against them as a people. Not fair and not right"
#23. To: Pericles (#19)
I don't get how this man became a cause celeb on the right. He stalcked a young person first - he initiated the events of that night by following someone. Was his head being beaten into the ground? Probably - but did not Trayvon not have a right to also stand his ground against someone who is following him - if a stranger is following you in a vehicle it is initiating a hostile act.
Also, Zim was not neighborhood watch in any form.
I think there was a case a decade or so ago where a woman refused to pull over for an unmarked police car with an non uniformed police officer inside because of that - there were cases of rapists pulling that stunt.
Carrollton police said a dark-colored, four-door vehicle with dark tinted windows and blue lights pulled over a female driver between the Valley View Lane and Valwood Parkway exits between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. last Thursday.
#24. To: TooConservative (#23)
It is not a right not to be followed.
#25. To: TooConservative (#23)
(Edited)
Also, Zim was not neighborhood watch in any form.
#26. To: Pericles (#24)
I said it initiated a hostile act - you don't have a right not to be stared at but if someone is staring at you it is a hostile act.
So Zimmerman - who is not a patrol of any kind - no windbreaker saying he is NW nor any markings on his vehicle - starts to stare and follow a kid at night.
#27. To: Pericles, GrandIsland (#25)
At that time he was not in that capacity if true - and he did not follow protocal. I have read zero accounts that at any time he identified himself as a NW to the person he killed.
#28. To: TooConservative (#26)
You may consider it hostile or rude but it isn't illegal.
#29. To: TooConservative (#27)
You have some very strange ideas of the watches as some kind of police auxiliary with uniforms and conduct rules. I've never heard of any PD operating such a watch program.
#30. To: Pericles, GrandIsland (#28)
When Zim got out of his vehicle it is a reasonable assumption that the followee is feeling under threat.
#31. To: Pericles, GrandIsland (#29)
It is as simple as wearing windbreakers that state NW and those magnetic stick on on cars. And they call into the police ahead of time so that the patrol can know who is out there if they happen upon them.
#32. To: TooConservative (#27)
Maybe GI knows of such watch programs
#33. To: TooConservative (#31)
(Edited)
You actually know personally of neighborhood watches with patrol vehicles and official windbreakers? I've never seen them.
#34. To: GrandIsland, TooConservative (#32)
know of many and helped form a few.
#35. To: GrandIsland, Pericles (#32)
I've never heard of any type of uniform or identifier for NW... and every NW program I've been involved with never condones or suggests any member apprehend or confront anyone. They are to watch and report.
#36. To: Pericles (#33)
Also, does not Trayvon have a right to stand his ground against an adult man following him at night?
#37. To: TooConservative (#36)
But Trayvon has no right to assault or kill Z if Z presents no credible threat to him.
#38. To: Pericles (#37)
Nonsense - you hit someone till they can't be a threat.
#39. To: TooConservative (#38)
It was about who threw the first punch
#40. To: Pericles (#39)
The guy who follows you and then gets out of the car to follow you on foot at night throws the first proverbial punch - because he initiates the events.
#41. To: TooConservative (#40)
Really? So if you get out of your car at night and walk near another pedestrian on a public sidewalk but without displaying any malice or threat, they have a right to beat the crap out of you?
#42. To: Pericles (#41)
Following someone in a car is a threatening act. They teach kids about that all the time in school - stranger danger - car abductions, etc.
#43. To: TooConservative (#42)
Trayvon told the chick he was chatting on the phone that he thought Z might be a perv at one point. Which argues that he attacked Z thinking he could roll a queer for quick cash or whatever
#44. To: Pericles (#43)
#45. To: A K A Stone (#16)
Yes. In that one instance. Not anyone who ever takes up a sword forever.
#46. To: Pericles (#43)
#47. To: Dead Culture Watch, Pericles (#46)
Maybe he thought GZ was a moon rock! Ya, then he could definitely attack him!
#48. To: Dead Culture Watch (#46)
#49. To: Pericles, Dead Culture Watch (#48)
You like following boys at night in your car?
#50. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
What we call "death", Jesus called "falling asleep". Death - the final thing, the real thing - is getting thrown into the Lake of Fire at final judgment. On the last page of Scripture Jesus twice lists who will be going into the fire, and phonein - slayers - figure in both lists.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]