RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN

RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Edwynn -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 7:55:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Then are you saying that any verdict is sound and reasonable no matter how strange and inexplicable it may seem? I hear ya. That's almost like saying that any law passed by Congress is sound and reasonable, no matter how inexplicable it may seem. Some people ...

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 7:56:14 PM)
quote: Then are you saying that any verdict is sound and reasonable no matter how strange and inexplicable it may seem? Yes... or do you see jury nullification as wrong?

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 7:56:57 PM)
This will depend on the senseless murder / acquittal rate. Fox News and co. will have a different slant when a white child is murdered in self defense. This case here does not advance the cause of stand your ground laws. The question is, what will the next case look like, and when will it occur? < Message edited by cloudboy -- 7/12/2013 Murder and self defense are mutually exclusive. Foxes stand will have to be seen when and if it happens. But if the 17 year old is white it will never become a national story.

Marini -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 7:59:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NothingIsTaboo4U I truly want to believe that Mr. Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin in his car, then got out of his car to follow on foot, all he did was ask the kid what he was doing, turned to leave because he was satisfied with the answer and was ambushed by a kid who intended to attack an adult all along after buying his tea and skittles. But .. something tells me that isn't what happened at all. My guess is Mr. Zimmerman forgot that if you try to stop someone from going home, they might come to believe that you intend to do them harm and if they feel threatened, they just might fight back resulting in your skull being cracked. People want to believe that Zimmerman acted in self defense. But folks, when you instigate a confrontation, you are the aggressor. People were screaming about the "race card" being played. But the fact of the matter is this: if Trayvon Martin had been Tracy Martin, a blonde haired, blue eyed teenaged girl, Zimmerman would have been arrested the night of the shooting and the public would be willing to accept that she believed Zimmerman was trying to abduct her, she fought for her life and Zimmerman was wrong for shooting her, regardless of whether she smoked marijuana or had videos of herself talking about fighting. [sm=goodpost.gif] Hiya NIT4U Zimmerman was the initial aggressor and created this entire situation. Zimmerman was confrontational and was a wannabe cop, running around the neighborhood, with a gun that had the safety off. Why was the safety off on the gun? He was ready for action wasn't he? Trayvon decided to confront a man following and chasing him, and that was an unwise and deadly mistake. Here is another scenario, what if Zimmerman had killed a rich influential white politician that had taken a swing at him after being chased around his own neighborhood with a gun? [8\|]

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:00:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Then are you saying that any verdict is sound and reasonable no matter how strange and inexplicable it may seem? Yes... or do you see jury nullification as wrong? There is a place for Jury nullification but only in cases like Jim Crow. That would imply that both OJ trials when they found that he did and didn't do it were fair and just and that both Rodney King trials where they found that the cops both did and didn't do it were fair and just. They cannot be both guilty and not guilty.

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:06:16 PM)
Why was the safety off on the gun? He was ready for action wasn't he? I often carry with the safety off because with some of the firearms because I sometimes carry it left handed and the safety is harder to take off with the left. Some safeties are just clumsy to use. Do you mean to tell me that everyone who carries revolver is looking for trouble? Do you know much about firearms?

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:06:19 PM)
Why not? You think one group cant find someone innocent and the next group find the same one guilty? Look at the divide we have here on this case alone. Or maybe the subsequent trial was better prepared?

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:07:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why not? You think one group cant find someone innocent and the next group find the same one guilty? Look at the divide we have here on this case alone. Or maybe the subsequent trial was better prepared? Our divide here seems to be that I am searching for absolute truth and as you stated before you find truth to be subjective.

Powergamz1 -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:08:29 PM)
Since the only thing I'm defending Zimmerman on is his right to the same trial a white man would get, why would I want to guess what slimy thoughts are rolling through the mind of someone who feels differently strongly enough to lie about the laws? quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 You may have missed the point. I'm all for your right to not carry a weapon. I'm satisfied with the outcome of your adventures. I don't evrn particularly care if you think ZImmerman was a pussy or that cops are pussies, etc. But the fundamental laws on self defense (giving people the right to use weapons) were around long before you could have possibly been 12 or 22. The old dueling codes went away in the 1800s. quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Well, things were different with black powder weapons. Thanks for hearing me out, in any case. Unless you are a LOT younger than you come across to me .. Carrying weapons in Jr. HS or HS was not allowed back in the day, nor 100 or 200 yrs. 'back in the day.' The kids didn't do duels in school 200 years ago. Not at any primary school age. The point that you are missing is that if someone comes out of the experience of being pounded upon and/or bitten by dogs on a semi-regular basis, when there was no protection whatsoever from such attacks, from any corner, and then subsequently 'gets over it,' this same person might, just might, not have the greatest sympathy for some fat blob in a red sweatshirt looking for trouble, and then him saying; "but he hit me, an' it hurt too much, an' my mommy wasn't there, so I had to shoot him, 'cause he hit me." Sorry, but GZ is just a pussy, never been anything other than a pussy, and guess what I think of those defending this pussy? Just guess.

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:12:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Why was the safety off on the gun? He was ready for action wasn't he? I often carry with the safety off because with some of the firearms because I sometimes carry it left handed and the safety is harder to take off with the left. Some safeties are just clumsy to use. Do you mean to tell me that everyone who carries revolver is looking for trouble? Do you know much about firearms? Apparently this man was ready for actions as well... thankfully the students who found his gun were not... http://www.kptv.com/story/20386317/boy-finds-gun-in-movie-theater-during-hobbit-field-trip

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:13:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why not? You think one group cant find someone innocent and the next group find the same one guilty? Look at the divide we have here on this case alone. Or maybe the subsequent trial was better prepared? Our divide here seems to be that I am searching for absolute truth and as you stated before you find truth to be subjective. You will never have the absolute truth in this case.

Marini -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:14:23 PM)
Bama, I know very little about firearms. I know that if I take a loaded gun and start chasing people around my neighborhood tonight that I feel, might look "suspicious", I could end up in a load of trouble. I know that much.

Powergamz1 -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:16:04 PM)
DingDingDingDing!!!!! Anyone who doesn't think that this was a possibility with Mr. Martin, is treating him like a cartoon character instead of a human being. Invincible doesn't make him right or wrong, but it would be a very natural part of any sequence of events similar to this... (And match DeeDee's earlier statements). quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi We were taught to go to the closest house with lights on and knock on the door if we saw anyone following us. I can't say if I would have done that if it had happened because it never did. If I had been a guy and in decent shape, I probably would have confronted him but I was an idiot back then and thought I was invincible.

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:24:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why not? You think one group cant find someone innocent and the next group find the same one guilty? Look at the divide we have here on this case alone. Or maybe the subsequent trial was better prepared? Our divide here seems to be that I am searching for absolute truth and as you stated before you find truth to be subjective. You will never have the absolute truth in this case. It should still be the goal. And just as I would say if Martin was on trial the benefit of the doubt has to go to the defendant.

Powergamz1 -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:25:18 PM)
You would be right. And that is probably why firearms training and junior college classes often mention the hazards of doing exactly that... such as getting shot by a passing cop or other CCW holder who thinks the first person to wave a gun must be the bad guy. The 'safety off' offers no real proof of intent, as mentioned before anyone who carries a revolver can have one bullet under the hammer, and no external safety... because they are made that way. The various ways of carrying a pistol have their advocates and detractors, so I wouldn't read a lot into that. Most likely scenario is that Zimmerman toddled along occasionally tugging at his pants, as even the small KelTec will ruin anyone's svelte figure. He may have grabbed for it when going down, it may have shifted around in the struggle, I doubt that anyone but him will ever know. quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Bama, I know very little about firearms. I know that if I take a loaded gun and start chasing people around my neighborhood tonight that I feel, might look "suspicious", I could end up in a load of trouble. I know that much.

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:28:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why not? You think one group cant find someone innocent and the next group find the same one guilty? Look at the divide we have here on this case alone. Or maybe the subsequent trial was better prepared? Our divide here seems to be that I am searching for absolute truth and as you stated before you find truth to be subjective. You will never have the absolute truth in this case. It should still be the goal. And just as I would say if Martin was on trial the benefit of the doubt has to go to the defendant. If we had both sides..... If we had not already been lied too.... If we could ask T.... There are too many unknowns still.

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:33:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Bama, I know very little about firearms. I know that if I take a loaded gun and start chasing people around my neighborhood tonight that I feel, might look "suspicious", I could end up in a load of trouble. I know that much. But you don't know, by your own admission about things like carries means premeditation, not having the safety on means you are looking for action. I always carry often without the safety on particularly revolvers since very few have them and hope to God that I never have to shoot anything that's not at a range. I have been forced to run people off my property who would never back down to a overweight 60 year old because I was armed. The question, and as far as I am concerned is who started the violence and as questionable as you may find the evidence that Martin did there is none that Zimmerman did. Following doesn't justify violence talking doesn't only violence does. Keep in mind that Zimmerman doesn't have to prove that is was self defense the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't.

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:37:04 PM)
If we could ask T.... I wish we could, then he would be alive and he might be on trial, in which case I would have to give him the same benefit of the doubt.

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:41:21 PM)
I give anyone the benefit of a doubt when I dont think they are lying.

Edwynn -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 8:42:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Since the only thing I'm defending Zimmerman on is his right to the same trial a white man would get, why would I want to guess what slimy thoughts are rolling through the mind of someone who feels differently strongly enough to lie about the laws? OK, thanks. Now that I'm informed that I have 'slimy thoughts,' I can see that you are reaching out, here. Your efforts are heartening, no question. And I didn't even speak of any laws, but you, my good friend, have nevertheless pointed out that I lied about something I never even mentioned. That's what friends are for.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625