Prosecutors: This wasn't the first blow-up for Florida theater shooter Curtis Reeves

[magical thyme]

139. I don't consider Zimmerman correctly decided, but that is Florida law not mine

as I wrote earlier, I am not writing from a legal standpoint. But according to Florida law, there were 2 separate confrontations and it doesn't matter who initiated the first one; whereas it may matter who initiated the one that ended in murder. I consider the 70 year old guilty of murder, even though the 40 year old initiated the second confrontation that ended in his being murdered. But I don't believe the 40 year old confronted him in self-defense. I think he did so to be a bully.

I consider Zimmerman guilty of murder, not only because I don't believe his story but because even if Martin did initiate the 2nd confrontation, based on personal experience in being stalked, followed and harassed, any assault he may have made was self defense.


I do believe that from a societal standpoint, that is from a "how to play nicely with others" standpoint, the 40 year old owns his own behavior.

I don't believe wasn't murdered for texting his daughter (and whether she was 3 years old or 30 is frankly irrelevent, albeit 3 years old makes for a more emotional plea).

He was murdered for engaging in a totally unnecessary and preventable confrontation with a stranger who also happened to be a gun nut, and helping to escalate that confrontation. Had he not gotten up from his seat and confronted a nut with a gun, he would still be here.

I find it interesting that you fault the one for approaching a stranger and daring to ask or demand that he stop texting, but you don't fault another person for approaching a stranger and asking and then demanding whether he just went to complain to the manager. I say they were *both* equally wrong for confronting a stranger and making demands instead of polite requests and then giving it up. I say had the younger man not chosen to start the second confrontation, he would still be here today. Instead, he is dead. And the man who killed him, regardless of who started any confrontations, is guilty of murder.

Let me put it this way. If you believe the young man was free of blame, by all means confront strangers who have behaved badly toward you in the past and demand to know whatever of them. Throw food on them too. And live (or die) with the consequences. They will be legally and morally responsible for their part. That doesn't mean you don't own your part of your own death. You are morally responsible to protect yourself. He had a responsibility to himself, his wife and his 3 year old daughter to protect himself. He abdicated in that responsibility in a totally avoidable confrontation with a gun nut.