phreddy wrote:

Em wrote:

Point of points - Mr. Martin did not pull Mr. Zimmerman out of his car and start a fight, Mr. Zimmerman pursued, left his vehicle and eventually engaged Mr. Martin.  Mr. Martin was unarmed and felt threatened, Mr. Zimmerman had a round in the chamber.  Seriously what more is there to be said?

For many of you this whole case is more about guns than race or stand your ground, or self defense.  If you believe that we should not have the right to bear arms, then anything that happens between an armed person and an unarmed one becomes the fault of the armed one.  In your logic, Zimmerman, or anyone for that matter, who is carrying a weapon is asking for trouble.  It's like blaming the raped woman for wearing a short skirt. 

Zimmerman had every right to carry that pistol and to watch and report suspicious activity in his neighborhood.  Trayvon Martin had every right to keep walking back to his dad's house, but he decided instead to attack Zimmerman.  I'm sorry he died, but it was his own doing.

Only Zimmerman is left alive to tell the story, we have a one sided version of the story from the shooter who willfully left his vehicle with a loaded weapon and shot a boy through the heart.  You go how you like with it, there is a dead boy and a shooter who has proven to be a professional loser; go how you will with it.  If anything the only solid fact we have is that Mr. Zimmerman shot young Mr. Martin through the heart.  Mr. Martin is now dead forever.

Off her meds again.  I always love how someone can complain about content on a forum and not provide any on a regular or even infrequent basis.  Tourist.

Emmeran wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Em wrote:

Point of points - Mr. Martin did not pull Mr. Zimmerman out of his car and start a fight, Mr. Zimmerman pursued, left his vehicle and eventually engaged Mr. Martin.  Mr. Martin was unarmed and felt threatened, Mr. Zimmerman had a round in the chamber.  Seriously what more is there to be said?

For many of you this whole case is more about guns than race or stand your ground, or self defense.  If you believe that we should not have the right to bear arms, then anything that happens between an armed person and an unarmed one becomes the fault of the armed one.  In your logic, Zimmerman, or anyone for that matter, who is carrying a weapon is asking for trouble.  It's like blaming the raped woman for wearing a short skirt. 

Zimmerman had every right to carry that pistol and to watch and report suspicious activity in his neighborhood.  Trayvon Martin had every right to keep walking back to his dad's house, but he decided instead to attack Zimmerman.  I'm sorry he died, but it was his own doing.

Only Zimmerman is left alive to tell the story, we have a one sided version of the story from the shooter who willfully left his vehicle with a loaded weapon and shot a boy through the heart.  You go how you like with it, there is a dead boy and a shooter who has proven to be a professional loser; go how you will with it.  If anything the only solid fact we have is that Mr. Zimmerman shot young Mr. Martin through the heart.  Mr. Martin is now dead forever.

He destroyed two lives that night.  Mr. Martin and his own.  Since Neighborhood Watches can, apparently, now initiate confrontations and use deadly force if said confrontation doesn't go their way, why shouldn't I just shoot any NW persons that trespass on my property?

Roger_That wrote:

Free the bound periodicals!

I'd forgotten rcade has enough on us to have us shot into the orbit of Uranus.

As to Zimmerman's character, 'splain this.

phreddy wrote:

Zimmerman had every right to carry that pistol and to watch and report suspicious activity in his neighborhood.

Yes he did have those rights, and he did do those things. It's what he did afterwards that caused the problems.

Dmtdust wrote:

Off her meds again.  I always love how someone can complain about content on a forum and not provide any on a regular or even infrequent basis.  Tourist.

You're thinking of it the wrong way, think of it as an art form.

http://www.amazon.com/Florida-Zimmerman … son+george
~~

Funny what turns up when you dig a bit.  Is any of this true?  Thanks,
D

http://rollingout.com/culture/george-zi … d-arrests/

Dmtdust wrote:

Off her meds again.  I always love how someone can complain about content on a forum and not provide any on a regular or even infrequent basis.  Tourist.

I wasn't complaining.

Dmtdust wrote:

Oh wait.  Even when the DM shows up with the Stats (and it is a RWR if there ever was one)  It goes to prove something is stinky about the situation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … rdict.html

Perhaps this is because young black males commit an inordinate amount of violent crime against whites.  I need to find the stats, but white on black crime is miniscule compared to the reverse.  As I recall, the black murder rate is about 6 or 7 times that of whites.

Emmeran wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Perhaps this is because young black males commit an inordinate amount of violent crime against whites.

Actually black on black crime is far more prevalent than black on white - but then again what the hell does this have anything to do with Zimmerman's superhero fixation?

Just another Phreddy strawman, hoping to change the subject to one he thinks he can win at.

Last edited by Tall Paul (2013-07-17 01:53:11)

The jury must be of the defendant's peers, not the victim's. 

It annoys me that so many want 'justice' from this court.  A criminal court is NOT a court of 'justice'... it is a court of law - the defendant either broke the law, or he/she didn't.  The victim receives no 'justice' here.  If you want justice, go to a civil court and file a tort.

I've been pre-occupied since I started this post, but let me say this:

George Zimmerman WAS right to profile!

As Fnord loves to point out, blacks are like 10-12% of the population, but commit a large percentage of violent crime.  (Especially black-on-black crime, but you will NEVER hear that from the MSNBC race pimps.)  Also, modern-day "black culture" is nothing more than a glorification of thugs and thuggery.  What is especially disgusting is that white liberal journalists give us a pass instead of holding us to a higher standard.  Modern day black America has never been called out to look at themselves in the mirror.

To conclude, if stupid niggers and nigglets don't want to get themselves profiled, stop acting like thugs and glorifying thuggery.

BTW: Don't any of you whites tell me you wouldn't profile if you saw a young black man in a hoodie coming at you; I'm black and I profile.

Something else: if Rachel Jeantel had been any other race than black, she would have been the butt of icanhascheezburger-type memes all over the net, but no one has yet to make fun of that piece of black trash.

Last edited by AladdinSane (2013-07-17 12:11:42)

Erm.... Disinfo.

RANT (cont.):

Rachel Jeantel explains it all to you

In the third part of Piers Morgan‘s extensive, exclusive interview with Trayvon Martin‘s friend Rachel Jeantel about her testimony in the George Zimmerman trial, the host asked his guest if there was anything she wished she’d said on the stand. Jeantel answered with one word: “Nigga.”

Jeantel explained to Morgan that “the whole world say it’s a racist word” but the version of the word that she testified Martin had used in reference to Zimmerman, spelled “n-i-g-g-a” doesn’t mean what most people think it means. It doesn’t mean a “black male” as Morgan assumed, she said, but rather any kind of man, including “Chinese” for example. Morgan helpfully pointed out that that’s the version rappers use in their music.

Again, it took a patronizing white liberal in Piers Morgan to help her out.

LATE NIGHT EDIT:

Which, naturally, would lead to this.

Last edited by AladdinSane (2013-07-17 23:52:00)

Emmeran wrote:

See, I hate that bit and view it as double jeopardy.  The idea that you were/weren't convicted and now we can go to another court and take away everything you have and will ever have just doesn't seem fair.

Two different Courts and two separate rules of evidence.  Just ask O.J.

Thanks Dusty!  That may be the stupidest concoction I've seen yet.  We're always in the market for some stupid here.

Baywolfe wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

See, I hate that bit and view it as double jeopardy.  The idea that you were/weren't convicted and now we can go to another court and take away everything you have and will ever have just doesn't seem fair.

Two different Courts and two separate rules of evidence.  Just ask O.J.

I know, I know - but really it seems to be a trifle unfair; I'm just not completely comfortable with the concept.

Soooo.... can we slowly lower Zimmerman into boiling oil now?

Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

And now we'll have to start profiling 6-year-old black bastards, too!

And another 6-year-old nigglet tries to be a bad-ass:

A responding officer reported that one of the accused children, later identified as a 6-year-old Chalais Ramey, walked toward him and grabbed his gun with both hands in an attempt to remove it from the holster.

The culture of violence, spawned by thug nigger rappers continues...

Last edited by AladdinSane (2013-07-17 23:12:35)

AladdinSane wrote:

And now we'll have to start profiling 6-year-old black bastards, too!

And another 6-year-old nigglet tries to be a bad-ass:

A responding officer reported that one of the accused children, later identified as a 6-year-old Chalais Ramey, walked toward him and grabbed his gun with both hands in an attempt to remove it from the holster.

The culture of violence, spawned by thug nigger rappers continues...

So, why has this become the norm in many black households?  It didn't just appear, what historical context did it emerge from?

Dmtdust wrote:

AladdinSane wrote:

And now we'll have to start profiling 6-year-old black bastards, too!

And another 6-year-old nigglet tries to be a bad-ass:

A responding officer reported that one of the accused children, later identified as a 6-year-old Chalais Ramey, walked toward him and grabbed his gun with both hands in an attempt to remove it from the holster.

The culture of violence, spawned by thug nigger rappers continues...

So, why has this become the norm in many black households?  It didn't just appear, what historical context did it emerge from?

Try having *zero* positive male role models in their lives, courtesy of the welfare state that values only women and children (with men being excess and expensive baggage).

All valid points but you are still just avoiding the obvious facts of what actually occurred.  The most damning point is that none of us would have done any of the things that Zimmerman did.  We wouldn't have done them because nothing good could have possibly happened...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/ … me=topNews

phreddy wrote:

You're wrong about this Em.  I have done something similar many times.  When I see someone suspicious cruising my neighborhood, I check them out and have even confronted people on occasion if they pull up in front of a neighbor's home when they are not there.  My neighbors do the same.  We live in a rural area where someone could empty your house and no one would notice.  I do what Zimmerman did.  I ask, in a nice manner, what they are doing there.  I may say, "Are you looking for Jim and Susie?  They aren't home, "  Fortunately, I have never been attacked, but had I been, I would not think twice about using deadly force if I believed my life was in danger.  I can't understand why you would think this is unusual behavior.  If you are attacked for simply asking a stranger to your neighborhood why he is there, the only conclusion you can reach is that this person is a criminal and is up to no good.  Trayvon is the only one who committed a crime that night.  It was a bad decision on his part to start that fight.

You are accepting the shooters version of the story, the shooter who is well known for following people around and pestering the police.  The only other evidence we have is a witness on the phone saying the kid said "Get off of me".  Take that as you will one person is dead and the other has a few minor scratches.

One was a punk kid on the way home from the mini-mart and the other was a loser who with a record of hunting trouble and has actually been picked up a few times.  Factually speaking Mr. Self-Appointed-Hero only had stay in his car and follow the kid at a discreet distance and would have seen the kid open the door to his fathers house with a key.  Martin wasn't a stranger he actually lived in that neighborhood and before living there stayed with his father on various occasions. Getting out of the car with a loaded gun and confronting the kid was stupid, senseless and it caused someone's death.  Remember - the cops were on their way and remember Martin had every right to be there and every right to Stand His Ground when being stalked.

Frankly I could give a shit about Trayvon Martin however Zimmerman getting away with murder is in no way good for the rest of us.  This is a bizarre case but I don't see how you can even begin to side with Zimmerman, what he did just doesn't make any sense overall.  This guy wasn't you or I looking after our neighbors house, Zimmerman is a flat out weirdo...