Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by copperking81
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by copperking81
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
Originally Posted by copperking81
Originally Posted by Jackson_Handy
Originally Posted by copperking81
]

How so?


Well I don't really want to type out all the fact on a phone, but Zimmerman was attacked while he was on the phone with 911, then pulled a gun...after being physically assaulted. The GA guys decided to try and do some sort of citizens arrest for a something? Pulled a gun when the guy wouldn't stop and then blasted him when he went for the shotgun.

They made poor decisions and paid for them. Obviously


Both made a stop. Both were attacked. So are you saying the GA guys shouldn't have had their weapons exposed... that's the difference?


You are missing a glaring difference in the two cases. Review the charges against the Georgia boys and see if one of the charges might be what precipitated the whole affair.


Ok, which one?


False imprisonment is a felony in GA. Under GA self-defense laws there are three circumstances identified in which self-defense is not authorized. Surely this deep into the conversation you have troubled yourself with reading the applicable GA self defense laws right?


So how is that different from what Zimmerman did?


Zimmerman was keeping Trayvon in sight. He was not restricting his movement. He was not falsely imprisoning Trayvon. It's important to note that Florida is not Georgia. State law matters.


So Trayvon attacked Zimmerman for simply keeping him in sight? In the GA guys video, at what point would you say they successfully restricted this movement?