This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - aREALgod
Pages: 1 ... 100101102 103104 ... 173
3031
« on: March 19, 2015, 06:11:32 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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
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.
Trayvon 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.
3032
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:59:51 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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
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.
Trayvon 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.
3033
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:51:15 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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 seriously
Chally pls
What have I said that doesn't seem serious?
3034
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:49:38 PM »
3035
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:42:47 PM »
It means kill yourself, faggot.
Up to my 6th bottle of bleach and nothing has happened except me getting big time wood.
Only a fucking faggot freak like you could get a boner to the thought of someone dying, you piece of shit
3036
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:25:58 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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.
3037
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:22:36 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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.
3038
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:13:36 PM »
I don't see anything wrong with this
3039
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:02:37 PM »
UPDATE: I was talking to her about a word to describe a sick taste in someones mouth and while having the conversation and she took another photo of me, and I asked her if she was taking a photo of me and she said yeah, so it seems that it is not something negative.
LOL describing a sick taste in their mouth, and she takes a photo of you? You dipshit, she doesn't want the D, she's making fun of you. But you're one of the most egotistical posters I've ever seen so I'm not surprised you think it's a good thing lol
Have fun being the laughing stock.
I asked her a word to describe it you silly. Sorry that I am not a beta faggot like you that can't get his dick wet.
You project so hard. And I have bad news for ya, I've already had my dick wet. So LOL once again you're all ego no substance
Now you are resorting to lies, pathetic,
The only lie here is you having any chance with this girl.
Nah, I was referring to you getting any, cause you know, you are such a beta that even my mother wouldn't fuck you, and she fucks a lot of guys.
Are your comebacks always this bad, or do you look up the worst comebacks online and use them?
3040
« on: March 19, 2015, 05:01:35 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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.
3041
« on: March 19, 2015, 04:19:40 PM »
You project so hard. And I have bad news for ya, I've already had my dick wet. So LOL once again you're all ego no substance
I swear to God your avatar fits any post you could ever make.
LOL that's great
3042
« on: March 19, 2015, 04:17:15 PM »
UPDATE: I was talking to her about a word to describe a sick taste in someones mouth and while having the conversation and she took another photo of me, and I asked her if she was taking a photo of me and she said yeah, so it seems that it is not something negative.
LOL describing a sick taste in their mouth, and she takes a photo of you? You dipshit, she doesn't want the D, she's making fun of you. But you're one of the most egotistical posters I've ever seen so I'm not surprised you think it's a good thing lol
Have fun being the laughing stock.
I asked her a word to describe it you silly. Sorry that I am not a beta faggot like you that can't get his dick wet.
You project so hard. And I have bad news for ya, I've already had my dick wet. So LOL once again you're all ego no substance
Now you are resorting to lies, pathetic,
The only lie here is you having any chance with this girl.
3043
« on: March 19, 2015, 04:15:10 PM »
UPDATE: I was talking to her about a word to describe a sick taste in someones mouth and while having the conversation and she took another photo of me, and I asked her if she was taking a photo of me and she said yeah, so it seems that it is not something negative.
LOL describing a sick taste in their mouth, and she takes a photo of you? You dipshit, she doesn't want the D, she's making fun of you. But you're one of the most egotistical posters I've ever seen so I'm not surprised you think it's a good thing lol
Have fun being the laughing stock.
I asked her a word to describe it you silly. Sorry that I am not a beta faggot like you that can't get his dick wet.
You project so hard. And I have bad news for ya, I've already had my dick wet. So LOL once again you're all ego no substance
3044
« on: March 19, 2015, 04:11:55 PM »
UPDATE: I was talking to her about a word to describe a sick taste in someones mouth and while having the conversation and she took another photo of me, and I asked her if she was taking a photo of me and she said yeah, so it seems that it is not something negative.
LOL describing a sick taste in their mouth, and she takes a photo of you? You dipshit, she doesn't want the D, she's making fun of you. But you're one of the most egotistical posters I've ever seen so I'm not surprised you think it's a good thing lol Have fun being the laughing stock.
3045
« on: March 19, 2015, 03:15:17 PM »
Nobody 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.
The 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.
Trayvon 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.
Should 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.
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. 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.
Was Zimmerman an unstable character himself? Absolutely. And yet he got off with no charges.
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. After being followed by somebody who could've been a mugger for all he knew.
Trayvon 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.
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.
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).
3046
« on: March 19, 2015, 02:56:11 PM »
Satan Savior
3047
« on: March 19, 2015, 02:35:14 PM »
Straddling, making out, licking, and a very nice blow job. It was very nice looool
lolvirgin
lolmad cuz' your first experience wasn't as good as mine
3048
« on: March 19, 2015, 02:33:34 PM »
FOR
HIM
IT
IS
I don't care. He's wrong for thinking that it's a bad thing.
Edgelord
>denying that Verbatim is 100% correct in every way
>lol
>>>>>>>>>>>Implying
3049
« on: March 19, 2015, 03:56:05 AM »
FOR
HIM
IT
IS
I don't care. He's wrong for thinking that it's a bad thing.
Edgelord
3050
« on: March 19, 2015, 03:34:08 AM »
Straddling, making out, licking, and a very nice blow job. It was very nice looool
3051
« on: March 18, 2015, 11:56:35 PM »
You call that FIT? You're a twig
say that to my face pussy and not online
Fite me irl do u even lift
3052
« on: March 18, 2015, 07:34:09 PM »
I don't see why it needs reviving, Zimmerman acted in self defense and that was determined to be the case.
3053
« on: March 18, 2015, 07:18:11 PM »
Conscientious objection.
Denied.
3054
« on: March 18, 2015, 07:13:21 PM »
I would never join the military.
lol fucking pussy
3055
« on: March 18, 2015, 07:12:21 PM »
You call that FIT? You're a twig
3056
« on: March 18, 2015, 06:17:17 PM »
SJWs are cancer, I can't wait for them to die off. That cover is really cool, too.
3057
« on: March 17, 2015, 09:10:52 PM »
so you're saying she remembers the rape?
Don't you know the cardinal rule? LEAVE NO WITNESSES
3058
« on: March 17, 2015, 09:09:53 PM »
I don't have a legit reason to think of. I may join in the future as part of a medical career though.
3059
« on: March 17, 2015, 09:05:29 PM »
Who is the upset mod who keeps deleting my posts that break no rules?
Because it's fucking spam, you shithead.
>ESPN
3060
« on: March 17, 2015, 08:19:02 PM »
The Army is stupid. I would never join the Army.
lol jelly cuz our boots aren't that awful greenish shade
Das stop making fun of me omg :(
But noelle
it's my job
My dad has this shot glass from his navy days, except the navy line was at the very top lol 
Pages: 1 ... 100101102 103104 ... 173
|
Show Posts
