yeah but it's still not an excuse to attack him. that's creating a self-defense situation which as far as we know, was what zimmerman was doing.
Zimmerman was the one who created a self defense situation, no doubt. I wouldn't hesitate if I felt threatened to take the initiative if I felt I was being followed and I was exposed to an assault. And if following someone isn't illegal, it should be. I can't think of any good reason why someone would want to follow someone else. It's obviously a provocative act. I'm pretty sure the LAW refers to it as stalking. And who's to say George Zimmerman didn't try and detain Trayvon thereby creating a confrontation. He definitely indicated he didn't want this guy to get away. he already had the cavalry on it's way, he had a gun on him, he was confident the guy was up to no good. I have no doubt George tried to detain Trayvon, and it went awry.
And even if Trayvon was the one who initiated the conflict. The immediate question would be WHY? The only reasonable answer to this is that Georges suspicious actions led him to feel threatened. If you are going to put fear into other people either by stalking or acting suspicious, it is only reasonable to assume they may be out to harm you. That is the whole basis of stand your ground, if you have a reasonable fear that someone is going to harm you then you can do whatever it takes to prevent them from doing so. I find it perfectly reasonable that Georges actions caused a teenage boy to feel afraid for his well being and I wouldn't have a problem with someone taking pre-emptive action in such a circumstance. As it turned out, Trayvon had every right to fear George, he ended up being his killer. George created a threatening situation that gave someone else little choice but to react to it, the only person standing there ground was Trayvon.
Like I said, when I am out walking if someone was following me, I would find this highly suspicious, why else would someone want to follow you other than to harm you. I can't think of any good reason to follow any stranger. And the very last thing I would do if I suspected someone was up to no good is to follow them. Why on earth would anybody risk a confrontation with someone who was up to no good. Not that I believe Trayvon initiated the assault, but if someone was following me and I felt threatened, I wouldn't hesitate to assault the person. You don't get a second chance in dangerous situations to make a different choice.
The whole situation seems absurd to me, I live in a Country where the mere carrying of a weapon in public will see you locked away for a long time, let alone playing neighbourhood watchmen. Even that concept of civilian watchmen is bizarre, that's why we have a Police force. Over here, if people have any issues they ring the Police. What good can a watchmen do against serious criminals, and as this case highlights, it actually increases the potential for criminality.
And Georges reasoning for suspecting Trayvon in the first place is borderline schizophrenic. He said "It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about" and "looking at all the houses". How that translates to suspicious behaviour is beyond me, what does he expect someone to do whenever caught in the rain, start sprinting and look directly at the ground. I could think of anything more normal when walking than looking about. You have to look somewhere, and other than looking at your feet as you were walking, there would be no way Trayvon could have not been looking at the houses as he walked by them. It's more than likely George is an extremely paranoid individual, exacerbated by powerful psychiatric drugs and exposure to some recent criminal activity that led him to distort reality. George had a history of regularly ringing 911 (about 50 times apparently), and he would report children as young as 7 that were simply riding their bikes. None of Georges emergency calls ever led to the discovery of a single crime.
