OK, I am going to go there- George Zimmerman case

What you wrote is probably cheered by a big majority of Christians in this country. It implies, though, that Jesus had good intentions but was really rather naive. Of course we'd like to live peaceful lives, but Jesus never had to face the pressures and problems of modern American life. Benjamin Franklin and others had to put him right! Living in today's world, Jesus would be a nobody, meekly doing the bidding of some "bad guy." Jesus doesn't really know how this world works; with the accumulated knowledge of history, we know better.

 

From the perspective of the court case and the jury's decision, you're absolutely right. Shame on the politicians who show such obvious disregard for the legal process and would prefer to win an emotional victory in the court of public opinion.

 

I didn't write it, Ben Franklin did.
It wasn't Jesus but Isaiah who said "And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. — Isaiah 2:3-4

What Jesus said was that he didn't come to bring peace but a sword.

 

While I strongly disagree with Zimmerman's actions of pursuit and "stalking" a teenager walking around looking at houses, the possession of a gun changed how he responded to the situation. It appears as though he was angry because of past incidents and he might have been scared when there was an altercation. Anger and fear when combined with a gun are not a good combination.

 

I agree with Jakk ( I think that is who wrote it ) TM was attacking GZ and GZ acted in self defense. If TM had not attacked him there wouldn't not have been a fight, or killings. GZ had been one the neighborhood watch before an nothing happened. They even said he called 911 several times alerting the police to different people and tried to use that to say he was a zealot. But not once during those times did he use his firearm.

Embassy- I laughed when I read "he might have been scared when there was an altercation" I am not sure if you have ever had your head pounded into concrete ( I have not) but I am sure fear is a major reaction to it.

 

Well, after reading the responses I think I am in the mindset of - "I don't know what exactly happened so I don't think I can say without a doubt what I believe.

I do, however, think that the media likes to slant things to confuse issues that could be more clear cut.

 

I don't know if you can call it an attack on George Zimmerman when TM was profiled, stalked, and chased by an angry person with a gun. Race had a very big role in this incident.

 

He was not profiled, chased or stalked. GZ never brandished his gun prior to the actual shooting. The FBI and the Sandford police have both investigated and said it was not racial. I watched the entire trial and I cannot see any evidence anywhere that points to he was profiled because of race, chased and stalked. There is just no evidence that backs that up.

The media has hyped this up from day 1. If you didn't get your facts from the trial and evidence, and got it from the main stream media, then you have a skewed version of the facts.

 

He was suspected because of crime from other African-American youth in the area. Following a youth in a car is stalking. TM was a kid walking and looking at houses. How is that suspicious behavior if he was not profiled? Getting out to follow him while armed with a gun is chasing him with a gun.

I don't watch or listen to main stream media.

 

Show me in the court transcripts where it says he followed him in the car. He had parked his truck and followed him on foot. Just because he had a gun concealed doesn't mean he was chasing him with a gun. If he had it out, in his hand and was showing it to him, then I would say he is guilty as sin. But that is not the case. In the entire time he followed/kept an eye on him, he never once took his gun out of the holster or showed it to anyone.

If he wanted to intentionally shoot anyone, he could have done so and then called the police.

 

You can hear the prosecution state that he followed him in his truck in the opening statement. Chasing him with a concealed gun is chasing him with a gun, imo. You don't have to have a gun drawn to chase someone with a gun. He had a powerful weapon at his disposal that he used on a minor.

 

He had the gun with him, but TM didn't know it. So TM wouldn't be fearful of the gun, he didn't know was there. I bet if TM did know it was there he wouldn't have jumped GZ.

 

Aggie, exactly. Thousands of crimes are stopped just by the criminal knowing/seeing the victim has a firearm. I think if TM knew his intended target (proven in court that he lay in wait for GZ to get off the phone and out of the truck) he would have hurried his butt home instead.

But this was not the case. Neither was any of the other cases where GZ called police because of suspicious activity in the neighborhood. In 4 yrs of living there, he never once pulled a gun on anyone.

 

And... the Prosecution said/speculated on a lot of things that were incorrect. You need to listen to the follow up statements and what the evidence proved, not just the statement of the person trying to put him behind bars.

 

Only God knows what really happened and it's His place and only His to judge what happened. The details we all know, we know because of how the media has reported it to us. Unless we were actually, physically in that place, we don't know what happened nor will we ever.