He shot him with a Kel Tec? Cheap ass throw away gun.
It started with Earl [Watson], Randy [Foye] and Marvin [Williams]the veteran guys. I thought the young guys did a good job of following their lead getting us off to a good start. - referring to the Jazz/Bobcats game on 3/1/13
Earl, Randy, and Marvin started the first quarter 0-3, scored a whopping zero points, and finished with a turnover in the first quarter.
Your head coach of the Jazz ladies and gentlemen.
I don't know where the legal line is or should be. As far as I'm concerned, morally and ethically, Zimmerman waived his claim to self-denfense when he became the aggressor, pursuing someone who was running away. If he had seen Martin committing a crime, though, I would probably have a different opinion on that.
Regardless of legal issues, what is really morally repugnant about this situation is that it's part of a larger narrative where private property is acquiring more value than human life. Even if Trayvon Martin was a burglar and even if he was looking to steal, do you have the moral right to go shoot him? And let's be honest, you take a gun with you, you're considering shooting someone. Unless you actually believe someone is a threat to your person, what business do you have playing vigilante? I see someone I think has stolen or is about to steal something, I call the police. I don't go looking to shoot them because I think my freaking hub caps are worth more than his life.
It's like this article I read a few days ago - http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/20.../20385281.html
Apparently, stealing two DVD players(that's what...50 dollar value today?) justifies the use of deadly force.
And if you didn't intend to shoot someone, then why did you bring the gun? If you know things might end with someone's death, why would you go down that road at all?