Point taken, but we're still in the investigation and allegation stage of the game. Granted the media has made a circus of this. They've tried and convicted Zimmerman on pure wild eyed speculation. No real surprise there, as they have an agenda. Race Baiting Inc. has jumped on the bandwagon. No real surprise there either. They have an agenda too. Mama Martin is looking for some jackpot justice. Disappointing, but again not really surprising. Makes it tough not to stereotype when people act in such a stereotypical way. But a question still remains. If a guy, in this case Zimmerman, is hounding another guy, Trayvon, and then the houndee turns and starts whipping some ass, is it really self defense when the hounder shoots and kills the houndee? At this point I'd say Zimmerman was looking for some shit, found it in Treyvon, things escalate as they usually do, and we know the rest. Little Trey is a long ways from what he's being portrayed as in the media, but I'm not yet convinced this is a righteous shoot. Time will tell. Only thing I know for sure is that just about everyone involved has sunk to the lowest common denominator, which sadly comes as no surprise either.
Get used to it. The last non drug using president was Bush senior. It isn't a big deal, the majority of young people have tried marijuana and other drugs and I'd guess many have also tried beer. Rumors are that all the presidents had pre martial sex, god save our country.
I understand your point. It would seem that it all turns on the prior interaction between them. It does not seem right that someone can provoke a fight, then pull a gun, but I don't think following someone and perhaps asking what they are doing is provocation. It's hard to understand how an incident like this becomes first, a racial controversy, then a national story so quickly. Clearly it has exploded in the faces of the dirtbags who were lining up to exploit it, but I doubt they will give up. Rodney King was a punk too, and they made him into some sort of national hero or at least icon, and ruined several cops lives over a few unnecessary baton blows.
I doubt people who blast Zimmerman for "provocation" have ever been in a real fight before. I've had people say all kinds of shit to my face, including death threats (while not brandishing a weapon), and you cannot haul off and pound the life out of some toss on words alone. You have got it totally backwards. Following somebody, talking to somebody (ie "provoking a confrontation" in Liberal-speak) is not grounds for physical assault. Not the least in America, where free speech is protected under the 1st amendment. There is no case here. If Zimmerman threw the first punch or push, he's guilty. If Treyvon attacked first, he's guilty (and dead). All that matters is who initiated the physical assault. Everything prior to that is meaningless and protected under the 1st amendment. That's why when black "youths" get all up in your face and call you honkey or whitey or whatever, you can't take out your piece and blow their heads off. It's free speech. Yes, it's a verbal confrontation. Deal with it. People can say whatever they like, save death threats or libel, and even then, its difficult to prove in a court of law and get restitution. This pussy mentality that so-and-so "provoked" somebody else to commit an egregious assault by words alone flies in the face of personal accountability and the rule of law. People are accountable for their actions. Words do not mean squat. If some black guy follows you for a couple blocks, then approaches you and initiates a conversation, you actually think for one second you have the legal right to take out your piece and blast him? .... Seriously....
Damn, what's the world coming to? What's the latest official interpretation of the Supreme Court's so called "fighting words"?