Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading).
Quote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.
Nobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.
The fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.
Trayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.
Should Zimmerman have followed him? No.
Should he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.
But there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.
Trayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.
He died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.>taking midget seriouslyChally pls
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbass
Trayvon took an illegal action, end of story.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.LOLExcept he knew damn well it could have ended the way it ended and went looking for trouble. He should be in prison for instigating and creating a situation where a life was lost.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.
Quote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:49:57 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.LOLExcept he knew damn well it could have ended the way it ended and went looking for trouble. He should be in prison for instigating and creating a situation where a life was lost.No.Trayvon Martin had it coming. Stupid kid didn't even know what he was getting into. He was living the thug life, he was shit. Not a good person at all. The fact that Obama said that if he had a son, he would be like Trayvon sickens me.This has nothing to do with race mind you. If Trayvon was white and he still had the same attitude and caused a fuck load of trouble and all the events that happened that day, leading him to his death, I still say good riddance.YouTubeDoes this sound like an innocent kid to you?If I had come across Trayvon Martin face to face, it's pretty obvious that he would want me dead, which in return I'd have to fight for my life, and I'd most likely lose that fight.If he was still alive today he would be charged for murder, I guarantee it.
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 19, 2015, 07:14:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:49:57 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.LOLExcept he knew damn well it could have ended the way it ended and went looking for trouble. He should be in prison for instigating and creating a situation where a life was lost.No.Trayvon Martin had it coming. Stupid kid didn't even know what he was getting into. He was living the thug life, he was shit. Not a good person at all. The fact that Obama said that if he had a son, he would be like Trayvon sickens me.This has nothing to do with race mind you. If Trayvon was white and he still had the same attitude and caused a fuck load of trouble and all the events that happened that day, leading him to his death, I still say good riddance.YouTubeDoes this sound like an innocent kid to you?If I had come across Trayvon Martin face to face, it's pretty obvious that he would want me dead, which in return I'd have to fight for my life, and I'd most likely lose that fight.If he was still alive today he would be charged for murder, I guarantee it.It's so very thuggish to turn and stand your ground against someone who is stalking you in a neighborhood and said stalker is carrying a loaded weapon, which Neighborhood Watch people are not supposed to be carrying anyways."Observe and Report, do not engage".
Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:17:41 PMQuote from: Decimator Omega on March 19, 2015, 07:14:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:49:57 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.LOLExcept he knew damn well it could have ended the way it ended and went looking for trouble. He should be in prison for instigating and creating a situation where a life was lost.No.Trayvon Martin had it coming. Stupid kid didn't even know what he was getting into. He was living the thug life, he was shit. Not a good person at all. The fact that Obama said that if he had a son, he would be like Trayvon sickens me.This has nothing to do with race mind you. If Trayvon was white and he still had the same attitude and caused a fuck load of trouble and all the events that happened that day, leading him to his death, I still say good riddance.YouTubeDoes this sound like an innocent kid to you?If I had come across Trayvon Martin face to face, it's pretty obvious that he would want me dead, which in return I'd have to fight for my life, and I'd most likely lose that fight.If he was still alive today he would be charged for murder, I guarantee it.It's so very thuggish to turn and stand your ground against someone who is stalking you in a neighborhood and said stalker is carrying a loaded weapon, which Neighborhood Watch people are not supposed to be carrying anyways."Observe and Report, do not engage".I don't think he had a choice. Fucking Travyon attacked him.You should only have a gun for your own protection really, because if he didn't, we would be looking at the Travyon Martin trial instead and the dead victim would have been George Zimmerman.
Except it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit.
Quote from: Decimator Omega on March 19, 2015, 07:19:45 PMQuote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:17:41 PMQuote from: Decimator Omega on March 19, 2015, 07:14:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:49:57 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 06:03:26 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:53:38 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:46:13 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:23:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 05:20:39 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 04:27:12 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PMQuote from: challengerX on March 19, 2015, 07:28:17 AMQuote from: Madman Mordo on March 19, 2015, 06:57:02 AMNobody denies Zimmerman's criminal history, dude.They seem to have a hard time recollecting a grown man's crimes but they're really eager to go after a teenager who got into fights and smoked weed. QuoteThe fact of the matter is all of the evidence absolutely attests to Trayvon initiating the brawl.Not denying that, but in his mind he was protecting himself from some guy who's following him around. QuoteTrayvon died in the sense that he attacked Zimmerman first, and that Zimmerman reacted to the situation as anyone else should, in self defense.After he followed him for no reason at all. It was racial profiling and paranoia. QuoteShould Zimmerman have followed him? No.Which is my point. You don't go looking for trouble when you're carrying a gun. There's an extremely high probability of you having to use your gun when you could've avoided the whole situation. And in most courts he would've gotten into serious trouble for following someone while armed behaving like a vigilante. Neighborhood watch or not, it's the wrong move. QuoteShould he have ignored the operator (who's advice is not legally binding I might point out) who told him not to follow Trayvon? No.Which has been used against black people on trial in a negative manner of they don't listen to the operator. Yet people sounded like a broken record repeating this over and over about how it isn't legally binding. No, it isn't. But you know why they say this? So the police department isn't liable, and so you don't put yourself or others in harm's way and wait to let the professionals handle business. QuoteWas Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely.And yet he got off with no charges. QuoteBut there's no question of a doubt that all of the empirical evidence points to Trayvon as the one who threw the first punch.After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew. QuoteTrayvon didn't deserve to die because he was innocent wittle black child which was constantly permeated throughout the media.No, he died because some dude thinks he's a vigilante and racially profiles people. QuoteHe died because he was, as you amiably point out, part of the gang culture that gets so many black males killed and/or incarcerated in contemporary America.He was part of a gang? Where's the proof for that? He was a troubled kid who got into fights at school and was labeled a thug. I never said he was a thug, I said even if he was one did he deserve to be gunned down in the street? No. You're twisting what I'm saying. He wasn't walikg around throwing up gang signs of flashing a pistol. He bought iced tea and skittles from a convenience store and was on his way back to the house he was visiting. Zimmerman went after him because he was black. I take no issue with him calling the cops, because there were a lot of break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch, or the captain I believe. But following him and creating a situation where using his weapon to defend himself would most likely be an inevitability? That's inexcusable and he should be sitting in prison for it. A woman that fired warning shots with a gun in her home to defend against her husband was sentenced to several years in prison, and Zimmerman kills a guy after following him because he's paranoid and he walks? Come on now. It's not even about race, it's about how fucked up the justice system is and how having excellent lawyers and friends in the police department will get you out of a murder. Because that's exactly what it was.Challenger, cases aren't decided by what you THINK is right, but what is the law. And in the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon, there were no laws broken by EITHER individual up until the physical altercation. Then, at that point, it would come down to who initiated the assault, and in this case it was Trayvon. Thus, Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It does not MATTER that he followed Trayvon, it was not illegal to do so. It does not MATTER that he disobeyed the recommendations by the 911 dispatcher, it was not illegal to do so. As well I should point out it's not normal to just punch someone that you think may or may not be following you - that is assault. In the end, Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman and he acted in defense of his own life. Case closed. Zimmerman might not have been the most outstanding citizen but that cannot be held against him, and likewise Trayvon was definitely not a fucking angel like the media spun him to be (and used photos of him when he was younger, disgustingly misleading). He shouldn't have followed him. Any responsible individual that carries a weapon knows not to go looking for trouble.It was not illegal for him to do so, though. And following him does not mean he was looking for trouble.Trouble/confrontation/whatever. Don't argue semantics. It's not illegal, but it created the whole situation.Trayvon confronted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Don't argue bullshit - it wasn't illegal for him to do what he did. What WAS illegal was Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman. You seem like one of the types who wants to try people based on emotions rather than laws and logic.Nope, it's the facts. He followed and questioned somebody who wasn't doing anything illegal. If anybody was in the wrong, it was Zimmerman.Those aren't facts, those are your horribly misconstrued interpretations of the events. Are you trolling or just delusional? There is nothing wrong in the eyes of the law with Zimmerman's actions - it was completely within his right to follow Trayvon and talk to him if he wished. What was not within the bounds of the law was Trayvon's assault on Zimmerman. Case closed, and one less stupid thug is on the streets.And 50 years ago there was nothing wrong in the eyes of the law if you hung a black man from a tree. Zimmerman instigated. End of story.Fifty years has no bearing on today lol dumbassExcept it proves the law is not always correct. Especially since at the same time if this case a woman was arrested and sentenced to several years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband to protect herself. Yet Zimmerman killed somebody and walked. It's bullshit. QuoteTrayvon took an illegal action, end of story.He did, but Zimmerman instigated.Who cares? The system is not fool proof, but its better than your bullshit idea of trying someone based on emotions and knee-jerk reactions. I bet you were one of the idiots calling for Wilson to be thrown in jail even though he had a right to fair trial. Zimmerman did not instigate Trayvon to act in an illegal manor. Both were well within their rights doing what they were, the point in which there was a violation of law came when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. You are arguing that it would be okay to beat the shit out of someone just on the fact you suspect they may be following you, out of paranoia. That is not a lawful act.If someone were to follow me and he and I were to talk and then I begin an attack, I would be at fault. At no point is it lawful to attack somebody based on paranoid delusions, of which you certainly are delusional. You should read your own statements carefully. You have admitted Trayvon committed the illegal action and Zimmerman did not. The story ends there, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. Case closed.But it's ok for him to follow Trayvon because he suspects something when he was advised not to?He was armed. He knew if it came to a physical altercation he would use his gun. And a life was lost because of that. If he wasn't well connected and buddies with the police with one hell of a lawyer he'd be in jail. Trust me.It was absolutely within his rights to follow him, you are not bound by what a dispatcher operator tells you to do. You imply Zimmerman was looking for a physical altercation, which would be wrong - and just because a physical altercation may take place it does not insinuate the use of the firearm every time. And no, I don't trust you at all, after many of the fallacies you've argued. You say Zimmerman instigated the situation which would imply legal wrong doing, but he did not do anything illegal. It came down to the conduct of both individuals at the confrontation and Trayvon failed to be a well conducted citizen. You should trust ME, since I've talked to and know people far more qualified on matters like these. In the end, Zimmerman defended himself and absolutely had reason to use lethal force.LOLExcept he knew damn well it could have ended the way it ended and went looking for trouble. He should be in prison for instigating and creating a situation where a life was lost.No.Trayvon Martin had it coming. Stupid kid didn't even know what he was getting into. He was living the thug life, he was shit. Not a good person at all. The fact that Obama said that if he had a son, he would be like Trayvon sickens me.This has nothing to do with race mind you. If Trayvon was white and he still had the same attitude and caused a fuck load of trouble and all the events that happened that day, leading him to his death, I still say good riddance.YouTubeDoes this sound like an innocent kid to you?If I had come across Trayvon Martin face to face, it's pretty obvious that he would want me dead, which in return I'd have to fight for my life, and I'd most likely lose that fight.If he was still alive today he would be charged for murder, I guarantee it.It's so very thuggish to turn and stand your ground against someone who is stalking you in a neighborhood and said stalker is carrying a loaded weapon, which Neighborhood Watch people are not supposed to be carrying anyways."Observe and Report, do not engage".I don't think he had a choice. Fucking Travyon attacked him.You should only have a gun for your own protection really, because if he didn't, we would be looking at the Travyon Martin trial instead and the dead victim would have been George Zimmerman.We still don't know the whole story, because Zimmerman chose to be a wannabe cop that night and ended up killing someone because he decided to stalk them.Trayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.
We still don't know the whole story, because Zimmerman chose to be a wannabe cop that night and ended up killing someone because he decided to stalk them.Trayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.
Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:23:46 PMTrayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.You don't have the right to start beating the shit out of somebody just because you feel threatened.
Trayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.
Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:37:20 PMQuote from: Arm The Mob on March 19, 2015, 07:33:13 PMQuote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:23:46 PMTrayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.You don't have the right to start beating the shit out of somebody just because you feel threatened.Oh, you were there at the scene of the crime and know that Trayvon started it?I suppose you were there yourself and can confirm that Zimmerman just walked up and physically assaulted the Martin.We know for a fact there was a physical altercation. Martin was shot up close on top of Zimmerman.Now, because we are reasonable people who are capable of reasoning, we can reason that Zimmerman would not physically assault Martin because he was carrying, and if he wanted to hurt him he would have just shot him. Zimmerman just deciding to physically attack Martin is a silly notion.
Quote from: Arm The Mob on March 19, 2015, 07:33:13 PMQuote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:23:46 PMTrayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.You don't have the right to start beating the shit out of somebody just because you feel threatened.Oh, you were there at the scene of the crime and know that Trayvon started it?
holy crap this dead case apparently isn't so dead.......
Because a fucking twig like Trayvon ended up getting 200+pound Zimmerman off his feet and onto his back and successfully pinned him down.I guess I'm supposed to also understand Zimmerman meant it when Trayvon kept him pinned, while covering Zimmerman's mouth, while reaching around for Zimmerman's gun. Guess I missed Trayvon's third arm.
Quote from: Azumarill on March 19, 2015, 07:41:02 PMQuote from: Arm The Mob on March 19, 2015, 07:33:13 PMQuote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:23:46 PMTrayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.You don't have the right to start beating the shit out of somebody just because you feel threatened.id say the same about shooting and killing, but i guess fists are much more dangerous and have more long-lasting effects than gunfire.Are you literally retarded?Zimmerman shot while being physically assaulted, that constitutes a clear and immediate threat and put Zimmerman well within his legal and moral rights to respond with force. He didn't just draw his gun and start shooting at the poor little baby boy. Zimmerman drew and fired while he was on the ground. We can reason based on this that he drew while he was being attacked, because if he already had the gun out and Martin rushed him, Martin would most likely have been shot before reaching Zimmerman and there would be no signs of an altercation. Of course, if he had the gun out already, Martin wouldn't have rushed anyway, because he wasn't suicidal, just stupid.In my opinion Zimmerman showed extreme restraint during the actual confrontation. Most people would have drawn when being rushed. That said, he was a fucking idiot for getting himself into a confrontation at all, and should probably be charged with some form of negligence.
Quote from: Arm The Mob on March 19, 2015, 07:33:13 PMQuote from: Voro 'Cinotai on March 19, 2015, 07:23:46 PMTrayvon was within his rights. He was being stalked and felt threatened.You don't have the right to start beating the shit out of somebody just because you feel threatened.id say the same about shooting and killing, but i guess fists are much more dangerous and have more long-lasting effects than gunfire.
Yes, I am reviving the Trayvon discussion, because fuck you I feel like it
