Mr. Williams makes a reasonable assumption regarding shooting victim, Trevon (sic) Martin’s, intent and movements prior to the shooting. But I am even more confident of my conclusion that, contrary to his clear implication that Mr. Zimmerman not only “followed” and “confronted” him, but then shot the young man because he believed him to be “a real suspicious guy” the death was a result of an altercation that may have become a matter of survival. This, admittedly, seems to have been a situation that may well have been avoided had a handgun not been a part of the mix.
I think the lesson here is one of civility. If one is armed, he or she has a moral duty to play contemplated actions ahead for various likely results and avoid those most damaging and irrevocable. Similarly those who would chose to exacerbate a situation should do so with the knowledge that, pushed into a tight enough corner, a citizen may do whatever it takes, based upon the threat perceived. The thing for law enforcement and juries to consider is the ease with which someone can be provoked into threatening behavior and then themselves become a victim of premeditated deadly violence.
