azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Citizen's are allowed to make citizen's arrests but that's not what Zimmerman was trying to do. He was following Martin until the cops arrived because he was tired of them always getting away. If he was intent on killing Martin, he would not have ran the risk of getting killed or knocked out himself and he wouldn't have involved the cops.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

If he was intent on killing Martin, he would not have ran the risk of getting killed or knocked out himself and he wouldn't have involved the cops.That's very likely true. But, it is weird that this situation ever occurred.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Since we agree that is likely true and he is innocent until proven guilty can you see why the charge of murder is so ridiculous in this case?
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Should he be charged with anything?
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

No because I don't think he committed any crimes.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

I agree with this because Florida law says you aren't supposed to be arrested at all when acting in self defense. BUT, wasn't Trayvon innocent until shot dead. Zimmerman killed someone. At least if he is found innocent in court we can close the case and justice will be insured.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

If Zimmerman was hunting the victim down like you said he would not have let Martin get any shots in that could have got himself knocked out and his gun taken away by Martin and used against him.Here is the timeline: Zimmerman calls police and is told to stay put, Zimmerman goes after Trayvon any way, Trayvon starts hitting Zimmerman, Zimmerman shoots and kills Trayvon in "self defense".So, we know Zimmerman went after Trayvon, so we know for sure that Zimmerman did let Trayvon hit him even though he knew that Trayvon was there.He only followed him and possibly confronted him and those are not crimes.He followed Trayvon when he wasn't supposed to. So, if they came in contact with each other it is because he hunted Trayvon. You could say the gun made him feel brave and maybe even stupid but that doesn't make him a murderer.The fact that he killed someone makes me want to call him a murderer. I do believe that Zimmerman was in danger when he shot Trayvon, but I don't believe Trayvon is responsible for putting Zimmerman in that dangerous position.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

You have part of the timeline wrong. Zimmerman was not told to stay put. he was told that it wasn't necessary for him to follow. The dispatcher was not there so he or she could not possibly determine that for their self. We also don't know that Zimmerman "let" Martin hit him. It looks a lot more like he was jumped. If he was "hunting" Martin why would his gun be in his holster? You contradicted yourself again by calling him a murderer after you said he didn't break any laws.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

He broke the laws of nature. He had the tactical advantage on his prey and allowed the prey to get him first. He deserves another beating.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Ok I thought you were going to be serious now you are just being stupid.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

I was trying to be serious until you tried to say that a dispatcher saying not to go after a guy was different than the dispatcher saying stay put. You started it.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Then you are naïve and you just came across as stupid. The dispatcher was not there and because he wasn't there he could not have known for sure whether it was necessary for Zimmerman to follow or not. Things could have gone completely different in ways that would have made Zimmerman a hero and the dispatcher couldn't have known the difference. Zimmerman doesn't relinquish his right to make decisions for himself just because the dispatcher said that they "don't need" for him to follow.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Then you are naïve and you just came across as stupid. The dispatcher was not there and because he wasn't there he could not have known for sure whether it was necessary for Zimmerman to follow or not.Zimmerman is not a cop. And because of people like you who think that if he had been acting like a cop (gun out, making himself noticeable) that would show his guilt, an innocent person was killed.Things could have gone completely different in ways that would have made Zimmerman a hero and the dispatcher couldn't have known the difference.There is no way that in this instance that Zimmerman could have been a hero. Trayvon was not doing anything wrong, and would have continued doing nothing wrong all the way home.Zimmerman doesn't relinquish his right to make decisions for himself just because the dispatcher said that they "don't need" for him to follow.If Zimmerman wanted to kill Trayvon, would he listen to the dispatcher or not?
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Ok, now you are back to being stupid. You have no way to prove Martin was completely innocent when Zimmerman had the injuries that he had. And it is stupid to believe that Zimmerman would have taken the beating that he did with a plan to use that as a reason to shoot Martin in an act of self defense.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Let's say that no one got shot. Let's say that Trayvon beat up Zimmerman, knocked him out, then police showed up and arrested Trayvon. Now, Trayvon is on trial for assault, and he claims self defense. Is there any evidence to suggest that Trayvon would not be found innocent?
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

That depends on what Zimmerman's testimony might be, what the witnesses say and what the evidence supports.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Just say no dude. Trayvon is innocent until proven guilty. The phone call Zimmerman made to police shows that Zimmerman saw him first and confronted him. Zimmerman would probably lie no matter what and Trayvon would be innocent because there is no evidence.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

You have not provided any proof of your claim that Zimmerman confronted Martin. We only have what the witnesses and evidence shows and it supports Zimmerman's claims that Martin attacked him first.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Yes I did. Zimmerman saw Trayvon and called police. So we have established that Zimmerman knew about Trayvon. We also know that Zimmerman was far enough away that he could have avoided Trayvon. Trayvon came into contact with Zimmerman, therefore Zimmerman confronted Trayvon. We don't know if he got physical, but them coming into contact is absolutely Zimmerman's doing.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Zimmerman calls police and is told to stay put, Zimmerman goes after Trayvon any way, Trayvon starts hitting Zimmerman, Zimmerman shoots and kills Trayvon in "self defense".this is the real timeline: Zimmerman sees a black hooded teenager who he knows to be a criminal and appears suspicious. Zimmerman calls the police like a good watchman. Zimmerman is told that he doesn't need to follow Martin. He does any way. Martin calls his girlfriend. He turn to confront Zimmerman causing a scuffle to break out. Martin get Zimmerman on the ground by breaking his nose. He then continues by hitting his head into the ground over and over again until Zimmerman rolls over just liitle. Trayvon sees the gun on Zimmermans hip and begins to reach out with his hand. Zimmerman realizes this and grabs the gun. He fires his weapon. the wound was fatal and killed Martin. THIS IS SELF DEFENSE because only one shot was fired.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Zimmerman sees a black hooded teenager who he knows to be a criminal and appears suspicious.As it turned out, he was not a criminal, so Zimmerman did not know that.Zimmerman calls the police like a good watchman. Zimmerman is told that he doesn't need to follow Martin. He does any way.Good, good, vigilante justice.Martin calls his girlfriend. He turn to confront Zimmerman causing a scuffle to break out. Martin get Zimmerman on the ground by breaking his nose. He then continues by hitting his head into the ground over and over again until Zimmerman rolls over just liitle.We have no idea what happened after the phone call and before Treyvon starts attacking Zimmerman, Zimmerman may have provoked it.Trayvon sees the gun on Zimmermans hip and begins to reach out with his hand.No one knows this for sure. Zimmerman is the only one who witnessed this, and if he doesn't say that, no self defense case.Zimmerman realizes this and grabs the gun. He fires his weapon. the wound was fatal and killed Martin. THIS IS SELF DEFENSE because only one shot was fired.He should never have been in the position where he needed to fire his gun, and now someone is dead.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

personally I would have shot the kid the second he started hitting me, but Zimmerman let the kid beat on him. I didn't say how the scuffle started but it started. Plus Martin was criminal and was known so Zimmerman saw him in the middle of the night. Just cause we know the facts now doesn't mean that he didn't look suspicious then.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Martin was not committing criminal acts, and Zimmerman did not know Trayvon to be a criminal. Therefore, it sounds like it was cold blood?
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Apparently, Zimmerman had a reputation for calling the police over every little thing. Martin was walking home from the store and I assume Zimmerman was making him feel a little uneasy following him around and watching him, so the kid probably confronted him; I would have done the same thing. Martin had a bag of skittles and a soda... Zimmerman had no right to shoot him.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Zimmerman had a broken nose and cuts to the back of his head. Martin had every right to confront Zimmerman and demand to know why he was following but when he went physical, he gave Zimmerman a legitimate reason to defend himself.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

What makes you think Zimmerman didn't start the fight? Sure, he had scratches and a broken nose but maybe that's because Martin was just a better fighter. People seem to forget that Zimmerman also has a violent background. He had a restraining order on him for domestic violence and he even had to complete a program for violent offenders after he pushed a police officer.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

I would like to see what evidence if any there is to support the claim that Zimmerman initiated the physical contact with Martin. Why would Zimmerman while carrying a gun physically provoke a fight with a guy who might also have a gun or knife? I sometimes carry a gun myself. I have a permit. I would never lay hands on someone and give them a chance to get my gun and use it against me and if I were Zimmerman, I wouldn't have assumed that Martin was unarmed either. Everything points to martin getting the jump on Zimmerman.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Did Zimmerman throw the first punch? Maybe not, but I do believe he brought it on himself. He's following a kid around who is carrying a bag of skittles and a soda. Did he really think the kid was going to go do a B&Eon his way home from the store? On top of all that, the kid was on the phone with his girlfriend at the time of the shooting. She heard Zimmerman say "what are you doing" and Martin ask him "why are you following me". The police dispatcher specifically told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle but he ignored her and went after Martin himself. He provoked the fight, maybe not physically but he is still at fault for ignoring the dispatcher.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

If you could show how a Crime Watch member's investigating a curiosity and observing and reporting to police is the same thing as "provoking" someone, then go ahead and make your case. Zimmerman didn't break any laws by disregarding the dispatchers wishes and by following someone who he thought might be "on drugs" and up to no good.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

If you could show how a Crime Watch member's investigating a curiosity and observing and reporting to police is the same thing as "provoking" someone, then go ahead and make your case.He's a member of the neighborhood watch; not a police officer. He didn't just "observe and report", he actually confronted Martin despite the fact that the police dispatcher told him to remain in his vehicle. He may not have broke any laws by going against the dispatchers orders, but as a result he ended up killing a 17 year old. However you look at it, Zimmerman provoked Martin. Martin didn't approach Zimmerman; it was the other way around.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

You have some things wrong. The dispatcher only told Zimmerman that he didn't "need" for him to follow Martin and Zimmerman was already out of his car at that point. He ended up killing Martin in an act of self defense. That is true but you have not proved that Zimmerman actually "provoked" Martin.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

You have some things wrong. The dispatcher only told Zimmerman that he didn't "need" for him to follow Martin and Zimmerman was already out of his car at that point.You're right. The dispatcher DID say that he didn't need to follow Martin, but anyone with common sense would know that she was telling him to back off. He ended up killing Martin in an act of self defense. That is true but you have not proved that Zimmerman actually "provoked" Martin.He provoked Martin by following him and confronting him. He should have stayed back and let the police handle it. The kid was walking home. What crime did George witness? Whatever happened after Martin asked him "why are you following me" is under speculation, but I think Zimmerman spooked Martin and got a strong reaction out of him.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

The dispatcher was not in a position to evaluate the situation so when she says she doesn't need for Zimmerman to follow the suspect it's only from her own perspective. Zimmerman was concerned that Martin was going to get away so the dispatcher's "need" was at least in Zimmerman's view. If you think Zimmerman "provoked" Martin then I wonder if you think Martin also provoke Zimmerman when he was circling Zimmerman's car while he was stopped and on the phone with the dispatcher.Everything still supports Zimmerman's claim that he was only following and reporting and that Martin initiated the physical contact.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

I'm assuming your opinion of "a suspicious person" is the same as Zimmerman's. In that sense, you and Zimmerman both deserve the death penalty for inhumanity more so than a 17 year old unarmed minor did.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

No, there's no way he will be convicted of anything, not even manslaughter. They dont have nearly enough evidence and the prosecution's only on-scene witness gave a SHIT testimony full of dishonesty and stupidity that completely fucked them over.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Oh you mean the honest testimony of the teen that was on the phone with Trayvon moments before he was killed? You mean the one that said Trayvon said "This dude is coming at me". Does that sound like Trayvon was approaching Zimmerman? NO! Regardless, Zimmerman approached Trayvon thinking he (Trayvon) was a threat, when obviously he was not (this is proven). The only threat at that time was mother nature, and Zimmerman. Zimmerman made a poor choice to follow the Trayvon. Trayvon showed no suspicion. Zimmerman made a poor choice as a wannabe vigilante.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

No! I meant that black chick who was fucking up her testimony over 2 days...
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the phone conversation is going to be used as evidence.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: Yes

Yeah, pretty sure it was omitted because sound expert couldn't identity who screamed.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

I literally just made this debate.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

It was a miss understanding gone horribly wrong Zimmerman saw Trayvon and thought he looked like he was up to no good, started. Making trouble in his neighborhood. he got i one little fight and his mom got scared and...okay ill stop but seriously how can you expect me to resist making that joke? but any way Zimmerman called 911 then confronted him. Trayvon having been approached by a strange man at night probably thought the man meant him ill will and attacked him. Zimmerman now being attacked by a boy whom he already thought was up to no good now pulls his gun and shoots killing Trayvon in self defense. What's the moral of this story? Guns are great for personal defense but if you see suspicious behavior (and provided no one is in immediate danger) it's best to report it and let the professionals Handel it.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

Considering all the evidence I know about so far, it doesn't seem likely that Zimmerman did anything but defend himself. I think Martin could have even gotten away if he'd had a mind to, but instead he decided to confront Zimmerman... perhaps if Martin had known Zimmerman had a gun, he would have bailed. Or perhaps he'd be the one on trial instead. Who knows.Due to a lack of convincing evidence I'd have to acquit Zimmerman. Do I like what happened? No. But there's no sense crying over it.
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

I picked this side because it has the most votes and I want to be on the winning side ;)I also don't know what the question is so I have no idea what "No" means ;)
Debate: George Zimmerman Vs Trayvon Martin CASE
Side: No

If you want to see my original argument it is at the very top of the page but I have to say this is anybody else remembering the black version of the KKK putting a 500,ooo dollar award for Zimmerman's death. Zimmerman was not found guilty of anything the night it happened and it should have stayed that way but with people protesting in the streets they took Zimmerman in for trail to suppress the people of America.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

There was not enough conclusive evidence in this trial to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was guilty. The investigators failed to collect enough evidence before arresting Zimmerman. This is why we should not allow media speculation to get in the way of due process.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

He was told to stay in the car and he disobeyed. Hell yes, he is guilty. Slavery is alive and well.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

I am kinda tired of people claiming that zimmerman would not have gotten the same verdict if he was a black man accused of killing a white person. Does no-one else remember the OJ simpson trial. That trial was much better put together and he still got off.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

Exactly! That's what I told people and people got pissed because I had a reasonable argument.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

He didn't disobey. He was advised to stay in the car. Advised! He didn't go out there and have in his heart that he was going to kill Trayvon! He wasn't racist! Your word deeply frustrate me and it's hard for me to talk to you calmly. Do you not understand that this was just a self defence case that was mangled with by the media? The prosicution used the only thing they could use, emotion. Not Law and evidents, emotion.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

Actually, he was told that he didn't need to follow Martin. I had also thought he was told to stay in the car, until I read the 911 call transcripts.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

What do you mean? He broke no law. Of cource he didn't need to follow him! He made a mistake, but he didn't murder Trayvon. Trayvon Martin didn't deserve to die. No one won!
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

Why are you arguing with me? Did I ever say my opinion on the topic? No. All I did was tell you what the dispatcher really said.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

Well... my bad.... sorry...Everyone makes mistakes. or did I.....
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

Sorry. Who is the slave in this case?
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

Trayvon. .
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

How was he treated as a slave? It doesn't make any sense.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

Dana is just throwing the race card. Nothing more.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

Yeah that's all she can do. She doesn't have ANY good arguement against Zimmerman. George is not racist, he didn't do anything illegal, he just is a victim of the media.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

What does Slavery has to do with anything? Oh I see, pulling the race card .
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

I love how you cons cry race card when someone points out obvious racism.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

What obvious racism? A Mexican killed a black. They are both minorities.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

The correct term is ethnocentrism as we are all one human race. My religion teaches this and I am more than willing to back up my claims with proof.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: No

The correct term is ethnocentrismThen you should have used it instead of "racism".Please provide proof, there was no ethnocentrism, they are both minorities. The media made it about skin color.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

You are right. I should. I think I was tired. One minority can be ethnocentrist against another.
Debate: George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the death of Travon Martin was he guilty?
Side: Yes

True, but you are talking about slavery and the minority on trial was not responsible for slavery. Isn't it ethnocentric to only be interested in this case because Trayvon is black? Bringing up that he is black would also be ethnocentric. But, if you are like me and outraged that Trayvon was a kid with skittles and soda, it isn't ethnocentric. So, the media is ethnocentric, not the courts.