George Zimmerman Verdict

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    In response to APpats21's comment:

     

    GZ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty. That's because there were no witnesses so it boils down to a he said she said thing. Problem is, one of the sides is dead. That doesn't mean he's innocent, just that there isnt enough evidence to convict him. The prosecuters really messed up that one. They aimed too high.

    Anyways GZ isn't a stand out guy. Digging up his myspace shows he was a racist (http://theurbandaily.com/2514888/george-zimmermans-myspace-page-resurfaces-with-racist-and-criminal-comments/) and that he also has a violent background (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11808013-george-zimmermans-criminal-records-revealed). Either way you boil it down, the kid would still be alive if he listened to the dispatcher and didn't leave his car. He caused this. Would you be fine with an older man following you around when you were 17? I doubt it.

    I must say i'm disgusted by the people who are overjoyed that GZ is innocent (not you guys). Most of them are racially fueled and see it as one less black man on the streets. It really shows how disgusting people are. Im Puerto Rican and have faced racism my whole life and even though it is not against me or Hispanics, i hate to see another race put down by their skin color.

     

     


    Hey AP, ever heard of the phrase "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"? This is not just a saying, this is a fact according to the law. GZ went into the trial, even after he admitted to shooting TM as "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY." Don't be confused by all of this BS, dialogue. GZ was charged with Murder and at that point the State is required to PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that GZ is guilty. They didn't and the jury ruled "NOT GUILTY". The fact is, GZ WAS NEVER NOT INNOCENT. This means that "NOT GUILTY" only validates that GZ WAS ALWAYS INNOCENT in the COURT'S EYES. Not Guilty = YOU ARE INNOCENT, STILL. GZ was ruled "STILL INNOCENT" by the JURY. Make sense?

     


    Um - you mean the FBI hasn't looked at GZ blogs? Really?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to APpats21's comment:

     

    GZ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty. That's because there were no witnesses so it boils down to a he said she said thing. Problem is, one of the sides is dead. That doesn't mean he's innocent, just that there isnt enough evidence to convict him. The prosecuters really messed up that one. They aimed too high.

    Anyways GZ isn't a stand out guy. Digging up his myspace shows he was a racist (http://theurbandaily.com/2514888/george-zimmermans-myspace-page-resurfaces-with-racist-and-criminal-comments/) and that he also has a violent background (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11808013-george-zimmermans-criminal-records-revealed). Either way you boil it down, the kid would still be alive if he listened to the dispatcher and didn't leave his car. He caused this. Would you be fine with an older man following you around when you were 17? I doubt it.

    I must say i'm disgusted by the people who are overjoyed that GZ is innocent (not you guys). Most of them are racially fueled and see it as one less black man on the streets. It really shows how disgusting people are. Im Puerto Rican and have faced racism my whole life and even though it is not against me or Hispanics, i hate to see another race put down by their skin color.

     

     


    Hey AP, ever heard of the phrase "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"? This is not just a saying, this is a fact according to the law. GZ went into the trial, even after he admitted to shooting TM as "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY." Don't be confused by all of this BS, dialogue. GZ was charged with Murder and at that point the State is required to PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that GZ is guilty. They didn't and the jury ruled "NOT GUILTY". The fact is, GZ WAS NEVER NOT INNOCENT. This means that "NOT GUILTY" only validates that GZ WAS ALWAYS INNOCENT in the COURT'S EYES. Not Guilty = YOU ARE INNOCENT, STILL. GZ was ruled "STILL INNOCENT" by the JURY. Make sense?

     

     

     


    Um - you mean the FBI hasn't looked at GZ blogs? Really?

     

     

     


    I know, OMG ITS A CONSPIRACY!!!!! Yeah, its so obvious what the agenda is here. The lies and fabricated deceit are so typical...........INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Dude was always INNOCENT. Period. Don't start with RACISM. I am multi-racial and have personally experienced prejudice and bigotry in the past, BUT I AM So TIRED OF THE BS ALREADY. Times have been and are rapidly changing for the better and folks who want to hold onto the past will only continue to suffer as a result of their own mentally forced oppression.......POTUS IS BLACK, for God's sake. 

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    It's already been proven Martin out ran Zimmerman and was close to his house. Martin turned back and went after Zimmerman at that point. Martin has a share in the blame too. Just as much as Zimmerman getting out of his car is a mistake, Martin turning and fighting instead of properly assessing the situation and either talking or continuing to flee a man that he obviously could get away from was a way to avoid the confrontation too. You are completely correct that it depends on the circumstances and as I said if you are sure you can get away by fleeing, which in Martins case he could, you should or if you have the oppurtunity to flee you should. But fleeing instantly isn't always the right choice and sometimes is not possible at that moment. The stand your ground laws protects a person from moments in which fleeing adds danger to yourself or another individuals or is impossible at that moment. It's not meant to be a law that encourages you to charge towards danger.

     


    In some ways, this weighs against Zimmerman, since Martin ran away and only turned (assuming he turned--we only have Zimmerman's story) when Zimmerman continued to chase.  Martin may very well have been terrified by Zimmerman's persistant pursuit and unsure he could get away.  I know I'd be freaked out by some guy pursuing me this vigourously.  Oddly, you're arguing against fleeing on one side and saying it's better to stand one's ground, but condeming Martin for ceasing to flee and confronting his pursuer.  Zimmerman initiated the pursuit, however, and the contact so I see him as most responsible for what ensued.  Martin very legitimately could have been frightened and if we are to allow people to make judgments about whether or not to use force when scared, I don't see how we can say Martin had no right to punch, but Zimmerman was well in his rights to shoot Martin through the heart. 



    Actually I'm not. I said that if you absolutely sure you can out run your persuer you should. And if you have to oppurntunity to flee you should. But, you should have all three options available depending on situation. You should only stand if you think that's your only choice or the likelyhood of you getting hurt increases during the flee. Martin could out run Zimmerman and could flee in safety as it was shown he was close to his house. He instead decided to turn and fight when his first instinct to flee was correct. But, even after having the ability to flee safely he still had the second option to turn and ask what Zimmerman he wanted. Zimmerman however, once attacked and on the ground, could not flee nor did he have the second option of talking with Martin. At that point Zimmermans options were limited to fighting or risking greater injury in an attempt to flee. Again it's not black and white and the situation dictated possible responses and in both Martins and Zimmermans case they both chose the wrong options in the end

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    WOW! 

     

    First - you can of course defend yourself if you are threatened. All those folks who want to play wild west are preaching JUST THAT when they talk about pullng out a gun before they have been shot. That is quite a claim.... SO - does a young girl who is followed insesantly by a large adult male have to wait till she is being attacked in order to use at least her hands to defend herself? Really? REALLY? No. sorry. NO.

    Second - your own words of "equal force" are interesting. How does a very skinny kid's hands equal the force of a gun? ANd there were ZERO life threatening injuries to Zimmerman. ANd in fact there were ZERO significant injuries to Zimmerman. The fact that Zimmerman was both a woos and a baby does not allow him to use deadly force where others like Babe or someone else could not. Equal force.... interesting.

     

    A threat which justifies responding with a physical attack must be a threat to cause serious bodily harm or worse. Following somebody and asking questions isn't such a threat nor even a threat at all.

    Equal force simply means you don't club somebody over the head with a 2x4 that merely shoved you. There is no need to fear life threatening injuries to use deadly force. A reasonable fear of grievous injury is justification enough. You don't have to wait until you are grievously injured to use force to prevent it. Any jury would consider being down on the ground and being pummeled with fists by an attacker as justification to use deadly force.

     

     

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from fatsam72. Show fatsam72's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    ... Those that do not, those that hold the pain and betrayal inside and somehow manage to resist violence — these citizens are testament to a stoic tolerance that is more than the rest of us deserve. I confess, their patience and patriotism is well beyond my own.

    Behold, the lewd, pornographic embrace of two great American pathologies: Race and guns...



    d@mn, that's good...

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheTinMan. Show TheTinMan's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    A threat which justifies responding with a physical attack must be a threat to cause serious bodily harm or worse. Following somebody and asking questions isn't such a threat nor even a threat at all.

    Equal force simply means you don't club somebody over the head with a 2x4 that merely shoved you. There is no need to fear life threatening injuries to use deadly force. A reasonable fear of grievous injury is justification enough. You don't have to wait until you are grievously injured to use force to prevent it. Any jury would consider being down on the ground and being pummeled with fists by an attacker as justification to use deadly force.



    The problem I have here, Babe, is that we only have GZ's account of the "questioning" -- or "confrontation" depending on your view--and we cannot know what TM thought or felt.  There is a huge difference in the situations between someone pulling up next to you and saying "Hi, I'm the neighborhood watch captain.  Is everything OK?" and someone following you, coming up from behind, making it clear they were carrying a weapon and saying "Hey, Boy, where do you think you're going?"

    I accept the verdict because there is no "other version" than GZ's, and there is no clear forensics to contradict him.  But that doesn't necessarily mean that I believe his entire story.  The key to this entire thing is how that altercation began, and we only have GZ's version.  I don't have to believe him, but there isn't any other evidence to convict him, either. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In many legal codes you would still have a duty to retreat if possible before killing--and even a duty to retreat before the point the conflict escalated.  



    Kind of hard to retreat when somebody has you on the ground and is pounding on you.

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to TheTinMan's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

     

     

    A threat which justifies responding with a physical attack must be a threat to cause serious bodily harm or worse. Following somebody and asking questions isn't such a threat nor even a threat at all.

    Equal force simply means you don't club somebody over the head with a 2x4 that merely shoved you. There is no need to fear life threatening injuries to use deadly force. A reasonable fear of grievous injury is justification enough. You don't have to wait until you are grievously injured to use force to prevent it. Any jury would consider being down on the ground and being pummeled with fists by an attacker as justification to use deadly force.

     

     



    The problem I have here, Babe, is that we only have GZ's account of the "questioning" -- or "confrontation" depending on your view--and we cannot know what TM thought or felt.  There is a huge difference in the situations between someone pulling up next to you and saying "Hi, I'm the neighborhood watch captain.  Is everything OK?" and someone following you, coming up from behind, making it clear they were carrying a weapon and saying "Hey, Boy, where do you think you're going?"

     

     

    I accept the verdict because there is no "other version" than GZ's, and there is no clear forensics to contradict him.  But that doesn't necessarily mean that I believe his entire story.  The key to this entire thing is how that altercation began, and we only have GZ's version.  I don't have to believe him, but there isn't any other evidence to convict him, either. 

     

    [/QOUTE]


    We can only go by what we know. There wasn't enough evidence to convict him. I agree. There were witnesses who saw the shooting and from what they saw the shooting was justified. Whether something occurred before that which would have justified TM's attack, and therefore negated GZ's right to the use of deadly force, we just don't know.

    My greatest concern in this discussion has been about persons making claims that someone following somebody and asking them questions is a justifiable threat to physically attack. From what I have read on the matter that would be an extremely iffy proposition to sell to a jury.

     

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from threejak. Show threejak's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    Florida and "Stand Your Ground Laws" have recently been "reviewed" and apparently the folks in Tallahassaee think they are just fine and dandy......Instituted in '05 and proud as can be.....

    Be curious to see how this next case coming before the courts works out for the cheerleaders.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2012/11/29/man-killed-florida-teen-loud-music-alters-story-fit-stand-ground.html

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to threejak's comment:

    Florida and "Stand Your Ground Laws" have recently been "reviewed" and apparently the folks in Tallahassaee think they are just fine and dandy......Instituted in '05 and proud as can be.....

    Be curious to see how this next case coming before the courts works out for the cheerleaders.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2012/11/29/man-killed-florida-teen-loud-music-alters-story-fit-stand-ground.html




    Looks like that case will largely hinge on whether there was a shotgun brandished or not. Police say no, but it could have been removed from the scene. Looks like this shooter has an uphill battle on his hands to me.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

     

     

     

    Just a few questions...

    So if I live in an area that has crime and the cops aren't stopping it, that I am suppose to stay in my house and do nothing? go outside with just my bare hands? Or do I let it become like Chicago?

    If I am describing some one I see in the neighborhood who is acting strange to me and I call 911 and they ask me to describe the person - I am not to say what color that person is?

    I can legally carry a gun but i am never supposed to use it?

    Maybe GZ  should have carried a TASER instead? maybe not?

    Do you realize that this neighborhood is mixed racially?

    Did you know that a very high % of Blacks have used the Stand Your Ground Defense?

    Does anyone ever think that GZ, thinking TM might be a criminal, that GZ just might think that the criminal might also have a gun? (something the prosecutors couldn't imagine)

    Has it been lost that GZ was not in his car when the 911 operator - asked GZ where the suspect was, then in a little bit told GZ it wasn't a good idea to follow and GZ said OK and stopped?

    Does any one think that GZ called 911, knew the cops were coming and then went out to kill the black? Really? or do you think like the prosecutors?

    The facts show that TM lost GZ thru the houses and 4 minutes after the last TM phone call that then TM and GZ met again?

    Does anyone seriously believe that TM couldn't run faster then GZ?

    Do you realize TM could have been home in a minute or less?

    Isn't it possible that Miss Jentile put the fear of a Gay Rapist in TM's head and that could be why TM beat the hell out of GZ?

    Did you know the prosecutors hid evidence - like data on TM's cell?

    Since we know that the cops can track cell phone movements , why don't we have that evidence? or is this more stuff that the procesutors have hidden?

    Did you know that GZ thru lawyers tried to convey their sorrow to the Martins in the very beginning and the TM lawyers refused to allow it?

    Aren't the Media, the race hustlers and the Pols responsible for this whole trial getting out of hand? Aren't they the only winners in this whole mess?

    When did we become mob rule? with the NAACP ,Sharpton, Jackson demanding a criminal charge with out probable cause ? - just like the 1st trial?

    Wouldn't that mean that every shooting between races would have to be tried by the FEDS? - or only when a black gets shot? as the Justice Department seems to do

    Did you know that the TM family has already received $1M from the Homeowners ASSoc?

    Who doesn't believe that this is and was a tragedy? Rhetorical question I hope

     

     




    What is this "become like Chicago" crap?  Some people are clueless. I lived there for 5 years, never had one issue.   Every big city has their fair share of brutal crimes. 

     

     

    Please leave home and travel and get some culture and context before babbling about things you know little about. You sound ridiculous.

    Bottom line is Zimmertool thinks he is a cop, initiated a confrontation because the cops weren't there within 2 minutes and he took matters into his own hands, wielding a firearm in the process.

    See, our legal system is about money.  Racists donated to Zimmertool's cause, thrilled that a black kid is dead, and off he goes with no accounatbility in murdering a child.  Super.

    Babe probably donated to his cause with his King James at the ready at Magnolia Manor.

     


    Russ, this post is outrageous, nonsensical, and simply inflamatory. Come on man, don't let folks push you off the deep end like this. Yo don't need anymore negative PR, Dude.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to fatsam72's comment:

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    ... Those that do not, those that hold the pain and betrayal inside and somehow manage to resist violence — these citizens are testament to a stoic tolerance that is more than the rest of us deserve. I confess, their patience and patriotism is well beyond my own.

    Behold, the lewd, pornographic embrace of two great American pathologies: Race and guns...

     



    d@mn, that's good...

     




    No it isn't.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to RallyC's comment:


    Russ, this post is outrageous, nonsensical, and simply inflamatory. Come on man, don't let folks push you off the deep end like this. Yo don't need anymore negative PR, Dude.

     



    Why are you trying to reason with this idiot? He has proven hundreds of times that he is incapable of doing that.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:



    You're wrong. The defense acknowledged he left his car, which means he intiated the confrontation.



    No, you're wrong liberal zombie brain. GZ is violating no law leaving his car. Nor is he violating anything by watching TM's public activities or approaching him to ask questions.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from fatsam72. Show fatsam72's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    [/QUOTE]


    No it isn't.

    [/QUOTE]

    Babe, you are channeling your inner Monty Python:

    "Yes it is!"

    "No it ISN'T! Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says."

    While I also agree wholeheartedly with and obliquely referenced Simon's sentiment, I was referring to the writing.  Which in my opinion is d@mn good.  "testament to a stoic intolerance...", "Behold, the lewd pornographic embrace of two great American pathologies..."  That's good stuff.  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     


    Russ, this post is outrageous, nonsensical, and simply inflamatory. Come on man, don't let folks push you off the deep end like this. Yo don't need anymore negative PR, Dude.

     

     

     



    Why are you trying to reason with this idiot? He has proven hundreds of times that he is incapable of doing that.

     



    Babe, All I can do is try. If he decides he likes the way things have been for so long and conitnues to go in this direction, then I will step back. All I can ask is that you give him a chance if he's willing to show restraint in areas that push buttons. I won't do this for long. How 'bout it Russ? 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to fatsam72's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:




    No it isn't.

    [/QUOTE]

    Babe, you are channeling your inner Monty Python:

    "Yes it is!"

    "No it ISN'T! Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says."

    While I also agree wholeheartedly with and obliquely referenced Simon's sentiment, I was referring to the writing.  Which in my opinion is d@mn good.  "testament to a stoic intolerance...", "Behold, the lewd pornographic embrace of two great American pathologies..."  That's good stuff.  

    [/QUOTE]


    It is good writing even if its substance was suspect.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

     

     


    Russ, this post is outrageous, nonsensical, and simply inflamatory. Come on man, don't let folks push you off the deep end like this. Yo don't need anymore negative PR, Dude.

     

     

     

     

     



    Why are you trying to reason with this idiot? He has proven hundreds of times that he is incapable of doing that.

     

     



    Babe, All I can do is try. If he decides he likes the way things have been for so long and conitnues to go in this direction, then I will step back. All I can ask is that you give him a chance if he's willing to show restraint in areas that push buttons. I won't do this for long. How 'bout it Russ? 

     




    Rally, the rest of us have been trying to get this nutjob to talk reason for years to no avail. Maybe you'll have better luck. I doubt it.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    Look at Babe.  Many here are old man white Republican types who are very likely bigots as well and don't admit it or play off like they aren't.  It's the truth.  Behind his comments is a bigoted old, VERY CONSERVTIVE grumpy man.



    More ravings from the nutjob.

     

    I complain about the disproportionate conviction rate of blacks for drug offenses, support all anti-discrimination laws, am against the death penalty, call for an immediate end to our wars, believe drugs should be legalized, support background checks for firearms in my state, support national health care, oppose Guantanamo incarceration and oppose the Patriot Act and NDAA.

    That doesn't sound like your typical "very conservative" person to me dum bass. Face it, I'm just not a political ho like you and decide each issue on it's merits rather than toe the party line. In the past I've been a registered Democrat, Republican and am now Independent.

     

    Another day, another bludgeoning of the VI. You are simply incapable of being right about anything.

    (you spelled conservative wrong goofball)

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    What are you talking about here? Could it be that I've made such strong points, you're cornered and are a little embarrassed?

     

     

     



    You've NEVER made a strong point here. Not once. You making sense here is merely a fantasy in your mind.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    All I would have needed was the confession he left his car if I am on that jury and it's Murder 2. See ya, minimum 10 years.

     



    Yet more proof that you are not only insane, but a danger to the people around you.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     


    Russ, this post is outrageous, nonsensical, and simply inflamatory. Come on man, don't let folks push you off the deep end like this. Yo don't need anymore negative PR, Dude.

     

     

    How is it inflammatory? I'll be honest with you...My dad is a raging right winger and it's become embarrassing. He also thinks most blacks are up to no good, criminals, etc. 

     

     

    There is a clear tone by some here on this thread that would indicate they're bigots as well, and I just don't think that is a good way to lead your life.  

    Look at Babe.  Many here are old man white Republican types who are very likely bigots as well and don't admit it or play off like they aren't.  It's the truth.  Behind his comments is a bigoted old, VERY CONSERVTIVE grumpy man.

    I will say on the flipside, the black people who are marching and protesting wouldn't be out there if Martin was Asian, White, or Hispanic.  So, their racial intentions aren't innocent either here.  This isn't necessarily about race, but the racists want it to be.  That's my issue with some of the comments I am reading here.

    It should be about fact, reality and principle. The fact is, this tool (Zimmerman) thought he was a cop and has the right to approach a kid, asking questions and deciding himselfly  how to handle a situation. THAT in itself should be flat out ILLEGAL to do in our society.  Period. No debate.  The fact Zimmertool did that and is not held accountable tells any tool with a gun he can do the same thing in this country, and that's wrong. Flat out wrong and not defensible.

    The reason people keep babbling about Chicago (that city has been top 3 in murder rate for like 80 years) is because Obama is from there and Obama is black.  Gee, let's blame Obama for 80+ years of South Side violence in Chicago during the Great Recession not created by Obama! Yay!

    Otherwise, why do people keep mentioning CHicago when murder and crime come up in a discussion?

    I live in a city, where per capita, no lie, it has to be top 5 in the country with crime and murder with the segregrated part of this city. Great little city to live in, but it has its dark side, which all cities pretty much do.   Do people reference this city (Durham, NC) as a high crime city? Nope. It's always Chicago or Detroit.  What about New Orleans? LA? Dallas? You can't even go dowtown in Dallas, it's so limited due to safety issues.

    Finally, it's also HIGHLY comical to me, that Babe has called you Rusty here for months and he's now trying to align with you, acknowledging you are in fact a different person. lol

    So, be careful who you aling with here. He's a cuckoo bird.

     



    Russ, Babe has obviously been around for some time. He has a legit perspective on these issues. Just because he and others including myself are looking from the perspective of what the Court system has been forced to do and adjudicate, and agree with the decision that was made BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, FACTS AVAILABLE shouldn't make you and others upset. You said in your above post:

     "It should be about fact, reality and principle. The fact is, this tool (Zimmerman) thought he was a cop and has the right to approach a kid, asking questions and deciding himselfly  how to handle a situation. THAT in itself should be flat out ILLEGAL to do in our society.  Period. No debate.  The fact Zimmertool did that and is not held accountable tells any tool with a gun he can do the same thing in this country, and that's wrong. Flat out wrong and not defensible."

    Here's where your argument is criticall flawed:

    Fact, reality and principle cannot be lumped together and simultaneously used to interpret information when addressing this issue. FACT AND REALITY are what is physically proven and are unchangeable constants, while PRINCIPLE is SUBJECTIVE to an individual person's preferences, judgments, and experiences in life. PRINCIPLES vary from one neighborhood and culture to the next.  You imply that "fact is, this tool (Zimmerman) thought he was a cop". How can you say what you think GZ was thinking and on tip of it insist it is a fact? None of us can read minds. What you mean is what you think GZ was thinking. You imply that GZ does not have the right to approach a kid, asking questions and deciding himselfly how to handle a situation. FACT IS GZ does have the right to ask questions under recent circumstances and there is NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE that GZ tried did anything illegal in handling the suituiation. The entire paragraph is BS but it is waht your arguemnt has been from the beginning. I have seen you argue points in the past without using such crap and weak rhetoric. The FACTS PROVED THAT GZ IS STILL INNOCENT. YOU CAN DEBATE IT, BUT THEJURY AND THE DECISIN SPEAKS THE TRUTH AS WE KNOW THE FACTS. It really is that simple.  Eveyone is going to speculate and I don't like what GZ did. Too bad for me too.........................

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

     

    Just a few questions...

    So if I live in an area that has crime and the cops aren't stopping it, that I am suppose to stay in my house and do nothing? go outside with just my bare hands? Or do I let it become like Chicago?

    If I am describing some one I see in the neighborhood who is acting strange to me and I call 911 and they ask me to describe the person - I am not to say what color that person is?

    I can legally carry a gun but i am never supposed to use it?

    Maybe GZ  should have carried a TASER instead? maybe not?

    Do you realize that this neighborhood is mixed racially?

    Did you know that a very high % of Blacks have used the Stand Your Ground Defense?

    Does anyone ever think that GZ, thinking TM might be a criminal, that GZ just might think that the criminal might also have a gun? (something the prosecutors couldn't imagine)

    Has it been lost that GZ was not in his car when the 911 operator - asked GZ where the suspect was, then in a little bit told GZ it wasn't a good idea to follow and GZ said OK and stopped?

    Does any one think that GZ called 911, knew the cops were coming and then went out to kill the black? Really? or do you think like the prosecutors?

    The facts show that TM lost GZ thru the houses and 4 minutes after the last TM phone call that then TM and GZ met again?

    Does anyone seriously believe that TM couldn't run faster then GZ?

    Do you realize TM could have been home in a minute or less?

    Isn't it possible that Miss Jentile put the fear of a Gay Rapist in TM's head and that could be why TM beat the hell out of GZ?

    Did you know the prosecutors hid evidence - like data on TM's cell?

    Since we know that the cops can track cell phone movements , why don't we have that evidence? or is this more stuff that the procesutors have hidden?

    Did you know that GZ thru lawyers tried to convey their sorrow to the Martins in the very beginning and the TM lawyers refused to allow it?

    Aren't the Media, the race hustlers and the Pols responsible for this whole trial getting out of hand? Aren't they the only winners in this whole mess?

    When did we become mob rule? with the NAACP ,Sharpton, Jackson demanding a criminal charge with out probable cause ? - just like the 1st trial?

    Wouldn't that mean that every shooting between races would have to be tried by the FEDS? - or only when a black gets shot? as the Justice Department seems to do

    Did you know that the TM family has already received $1M from the Homeowners ASSoc?

    Who doesn't believe that this is and was a tragedy? Rhetorical question I hope

     




    What is this "become like Chicago" crap?  Some people are clueless. I lived there for 5 years, never had one issue.   Every big city has their fair share of brutal crimes. 

     

    Please leave home and travel and get some culture and context before babbling about things you know little about. You sound ridiculous.

    Bottom line is Zimmertool thinks he is a cop, initiated a confrontation because the cops weren't there within 2 minutes and he took matters into his own hands, wielding a firearm in the process.

    See, our legal system is about money.  Racists donated to Zimmertool's cause, thrilled that a black kid is dead, and off he goes with no accounatbility in murdering a child.  Super.

    Babe probably donated to his cause with his King James at the ready at Magnolia Manor.

    ****************
    Yes - Chicago or Detroit or Oakland or "anywhere" where people cannot go out in their own community. The point is that people - just like you,  have the right to protect their property when the cops don't - I guess you didn't live in the south side of Chicago where the gangs are. Maybe you should try visiting there,  or better yet live there? Maybe you would want a gun against the bloods and the crypts. Maybe a borderline area like Sanford doesn't want to tip over. But i guess you have lived every where and know everything - I guess you are against the Chicago black man who sued to get a carry permit and won - i am happy he didand if he needs to use it I will be on his side

    And Yeah Dershowitz must be a racist too. Cause he said that this was a non racial deal - simple self defense - AS well as more than a few black civil rights lawyers, the Sanford police, DA, and now the FBI has said this was a non racist event. There was never

    - and as i said if they were to get the moving locations of both their cell phones - we could answer some questions

    And maybe you listened way too much to the incompetent and unethical prosecutors. Yelling "liar liar pants on fire" isn't evidence

    TM didn't need to die - but he wasn't the 12 yo saint that has been made of him - Try listening to RJ - maybe you will find out that TM was "whoopin up" on a "boy rapist". Maybe you can look at his cell phone pix. maybe his record.  And never to say he should be shot for any of that- but if you are part of making a bad decision - sometimes even more bad sh** happens - and he has his share in this fiasco

    So I guess all these people who support the jury decision and thus GZ are not racist against Hispanics - or should i say White Hispanics -only blacks

    I  notice you decided not to answer any of the other questions-

    look Rus - you have to learn not to be Holier than Thou. Just because someone doesnt agree with you doesn't mean they haven't been out in the world,nor does it make them racist - And exactly where was and is La Raza?

    And I guess When Nancy Grace comes out says GZ went out for Tacos - that isn't racist

    As long as we have the Race Baiters, Pols and Media ginning up crap nothing will ever be solved and quite frankly for their part Afro Americans will have to start long a just a little into a mirror 

    As Sydney Portier (son) said to Ossie Davis (father) inGuess who's comeing to Dinner

    " You look at yourself and see a Black man , I look at myself and see a man"

    and that has nothing to do with other any other race

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    I now know why I moved to Florida. I remember all these Salem Witchhunt types when I lived in New England. The only word that ever comes from a massholes mouth is Guilty,Guilty, and Guilty! Then when a jury of six women come back with a verdict of Not Guilty, they continue to argue the case, as if what they have to say in the matter is the end all of discussions! As for the NAACP and every other member of the Black Caucus declaring a racial hate crime has occurred, what utter nonsense! A Peruvian isn't a WASP! So now I guess it was the nation of Peru who caused the ever ailing Black American to struggle against the inhumanities towards the Black Americans ! For all those who scream an injustice has occurred,and that you are embarrassed to be an American crap speak, quick hurry down to the local Department of Imigration and declare your intentions of leaving the USA by means of renouncing your citizenships, because a jury in Florida has decided after much deliberation that the guy was simply exorcising his right to defend himself in a manner that may have saved his life. Sorry you feel so offended by this case, you all should examine your own perspectives on self preservation. Good luck in the new country you choose to move to, but don't pick Peru!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: George Zimmerman Verdict

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    On principle alone, he has to go to jail. Murder 2, 10 years.  When you get out, maybe earlier on good behavior, you can move on and maybe lecture young people on the dangers of carrying guns and engaging strangers on the streets when you aren't licensed to be doing that in first place.

     



    Ahhh, wacko, they don't send people to jail "on principle". Otherwise you would be serving a life sentence. LMAO@U

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share