George Zimmerman may not be legally guilty, but is he morally guilty?

Asked by: Ameliamk1
  • The Sin Behind Murder

    When someone is murdered another person should be charged. I understand that zimmerman was protected under the stand your ground law, i get that. However, the fact is he killed someone. N employer should know this. The neighbors should know this. Everyone that he comes in contact with should know that he is a murderer. If this case hadn't have been so publicized the vast majority of people would never know that he took someone's life. The fact is he committed a crime and he should have been charged with something. I would've even been okay with voluntary manslaughter. I would just like the record to show that he, in fact, did commit a horrible crime (because if you do it once you may do it again). Actually, I have a new idea for a law. If you kill someone they tattoo that person's name to your forehead, that way everyone can see what you have done.

    So now that I have succeeded to write this long without answering the question I will explain the rest. On top of being legally guilty he was morally guilty. Zimmerman took away someone's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore he has committed a moral crime.

    Posted by: hrh8
  • Use common sense

    The neighborhood watch manual in Florida specifically states that you are not supposed to pursue a suspect. Although he was legally aquitted, with good reason, the fact remains that his actions diverted from what was agreed to and ended up killing a teenager with his whole life ahead of him.

  • The jury messed up. He is morally guilty and the world knows it.

    Except for the oblivious others.

    Zimmerman provoked and shot Trayvon. Trayvon did not even have a weapon! Zimmerman was ORDERED to stay in his car and not shoot. Trayvon was clearly a distance from Zimmerman because of LACK OF BLOOD AND DNA on Zimmerman's gun at the moment. They may have tussled, but Zimmerman was the one who pursued him FIRST. Zimmerman had no reason to shoot except for his stupidity, racism, and inability to think. Trayvon had a family and his own hopes and dreams. Zimmerman must bear this guilt to his grave.

  • No evidence to support any moral wrongdoings -

    This case is a clear cut self-defense. All evidence presented in court leads to one conclusion: George Zimmerman fired at Treyvon Martin on the basis of self defense, after Martin attacked him. The death of a teen is a true tragedy, but we must not allow the media to allude us in believing Treyvon Martin was an unarmed kid walking with a hoody. He was not a kid, he was a six foot 2 fully developed male who violently attacked George Zimmerman. If people actually watched the closing arguments and evidence presented in court, you would see that George Zimmerman's account is accurate. The notion that George Zimmerman committed a moral wrongdoing by leaving his car and following Martin was the event that sparked the whole debacle. However, following someone is not a illegal or moral wrong in any sense. It is actually morally correct and logical considering the history of crimes in the gated community he lived in.

  • Just drop it

    George Zimmerman is innocent. Legally and morally. The fact that he is not guilty legally was proven by the jury's verdict. Morally however, is a different story. I believe that he is innocent, but that is a matter of the individual person's morals. Zimmerman did not discriminate, he simply answered a question regarding race. Zimmerman would have gone after anyone who was in that particular wrong place at that wrong time. Zimmerman only shot the thug after Trayvon tackled him, beat him, called him a white a** cracker, and reached for Zimmerman's gun. Trayvon would have killed Zimmerman and he would have gone to jail without question if Zimmerman did not shoot him. I call this self defense.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.