We know Zimmerman asked him that? -- and then turned around and walked back to his vehicle?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
|
We know Zimmerman asked him that? -- and then turned around and walked back to his vehicle?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
We know Zimmerman' accosted Martin'. ?
accost = approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively. (Dictionary.com)Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Did Zimmerman ask Martin what he was doing there (it's a multi-ethnic community)? And Martin had no more clue who Zimmerman was than Zimmerman did about who Martin was.
Technically a correct definition ,however the use of the word is designed to deceive . According to testimony it was Martin who approached Zimmerman when he had the option to avoid direct confrontation. Then it was Martin who first 'accosted ' by asking Zimmerman boldly or aggressively why he was following him.
The unedited video makes it clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Technically, no, it's not about deception.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
And if you were black and some heavyset white guy was following you on a dark rainy night, what would you do?
(P.S. We have only one person's word about this.)
He isn't white, that's the deception.
On a dark, rainy night (his face would have looked like the moon) or in a courtroom, you could have fooled me. Latinos are listed as Caucasian in ethnic surveys. Oh, and in Chicago, Latinos and blacks hate each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
can't speak for what a black would do... I would run like hell and do everything I can to avoid a confrontation. But things about Martin that the judge ruled inadmissible tells me that he liked to fight.. he liked to see his opponent bleed .Quote:
And if you were black and some heavyset white guy was following you on a dark rainy night, what would you do?
Breaking – Jury will not get to see Trayvon fighting texts
Hello again, tom:
Yeah, he should have been killed. I would have killed him just because of his hoodie.. Gold teeth - KILL HIM!Quote:
he liked to see his opponent bleed .
Excon
I of course said nothing of the kind.
Hello again, tom:
I didn't say you did.Quote:
I of course said nothing of the kind.
Excon
We all understand, the ones with common sense anyway, the conservative notion of self defense that allow and empowers fearful so called citizens the ability to act outside the law and accepted good behavior and common sense to old west small town justice against anything that they fear, or don't like. I can understand the need to justify such action by completely ignoring the actions of the gun toting vigilante who was the only witness left standing while vilifying his victim because its real simple, if Zimmerman went to jail, then the scab of stupidity, and knee jerk fear would have been ripped off for all to see the true agenda that the gun manufacturers and their law writing political groups on the ones they scare into buying guns and act with false courage the guns brings.
Then conservatives and bought politicians will have to acknowledge they have been riled up and played to sell more gun, and use them. How else can you explain how a bloody nose and some bumps and bruise is a justification to kill a kid? How else can you explain how a kid in a hoodie is a threat that had to be eliminated? How else can you explain the fact that knowing the cops were coming the dumba$$ with the gun was in fear of his life anyway?
How else do you explain the law itself, that gives anyone the right to kill because they were afraid. I guess its not enough to defend home, now we can kill anything we don't like and just say we were in fear, and use the self defense BS to not be responsible. The thug was responsible so we have to make sure he was a thug after you kill him because there was no evidence of being a thug other than his clothes before he was killed.
But there was evidence that the killer was a very flawed self appointed arbiter of what's right and what's wrong, and broke every accepted rule of responsible behavior that led him to kill and get away with it. But it's not surprising at all because that's who the law was written specifically for. Those that act out of fear and stupidity, and encouraged to kill first and plead self defense later. Helps a lot if daddy is a retired judge, and you can get a good lawyer.
But fact remains Zimmerman ain't the hero the right wing paints him to be. But he is the hero he needs to be to the scared fringes who cling to their guns and fears, and simple stupidity. I also understand they will never admit that not even to themselves because its always somebody else's fault when they screw up.
Bottom line, to do the right thing, you have to know what it is in the first place. Something the Zimmermans of the world will never understand, so more will die until they do.
So in other words you would sacrifice justice and the rule of law to advance your political agendas like gun control.
Hello again, tal:
Truer words were never said..Quote:
But it's not surprising at all because that's who the law was written specifically for. Those that act out of fear and stupidity, and encouraged to kill first and plead self defense later.
Before ALEC and the NRA, our self defense laws worked just fine.. Nobody was killed who shouldn't have been killed, and nobody was put in danger because of the law. I HATE laws, but that one worked pretty good. Frankly, I see NOTHING wrong with it...
MACHO right wingers would ask, "why should you have to run away?" I would answer, "because he MIGHT have a bigger gun than you".
Excon
Don't call what Zimmerman did justice, nor equate it with the rule of law. Its neither. "Stand your ground" is nothing but a smoke screen to allow scared people to buy guns, use them, and not be responsible for their actions in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
He wasn't defending his home against any threat, he wasn't even competently doing a public service. He was trained like anyone getting a conceal and carry permit to shoot first, and claim self defense, get your gun back, and do it again.
Gun control?? We can't even tighten up accountability to know who has a gun, so again fear derides good common sense, and promotes the notion that somebody is coming for your guns so keep them free flowing and available to the good guys, and bad, and the utterly stupid, and irresponsible, and insane.
That only makes sense to the far fringes of humans.
Dems will sacrifice most anything or anyone to advance their agenda, except their perverts - they sacrifice the victims instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello again, steve:
You're sounding more and more like smoothy every day. That ain't a POSITIVE step.Quote:
Dems will sacrifice most anything or anyone to advance their agenda, except their perverts - they sacrifice the victims instead.
Excon
More proof of what I said. He acted completely within the law. And this trial had nothing to do with SYG . But your side is still harping on that as it has been since day one even though it was never brought up as a legitimate defense. What would you do ; nullfy self defense laws too ? Or maybe you hoped the jury would nullify the law , like they nullified the law when they acquitted Lemrick Nelson Jr. for the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I don't remember if anyone has mentioned this, but what if it had been Martin getting his head pounded into the pavement and Zimmerman who got shot with his own gun after he had pulled it out? That would have been self defense.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
We can speculate until the cows come home.
What ifs are great games on rainy days . The answer is that yes ;IF Zimmerman was pounding Martins face with his fists while straddling him AND hitting his head against the pavement ,then it would've also been self defense for Martin to shoot Zimmerman.
The jury was instructed to follow the stand your ground self defense because he was breaking no laws, (just acting stupidly against accepted procedure for a NW captain) and Nelson was subsequently sentenced to 10 years in prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hope the law catches up with Zimmerman too, and its funny how you lost sight that even with a few acquittals justice was eventually served. But in this case its YOU who defend the killer as Dinkens did before.
wrong the jury was instructed to determine if the ;prosecution proved 2nd degree murder and the additional lesser charges the judge allowed. SYG was never offered as a defense.Quote:
The jury was instructed to follow the stand your ground self defense because he was breaking no laws,
Yeah the Feds later got Nelson of civil rights charges AFTER HE ADMITTED to the killing . He was also arrested on a number of unrelated violent crimes.And no ;I don't think the civil rights charges are legit . All that mattered was that Rosenbaum was killed in cold blood .
Dude, the San Diego Democratic Party knew of sexual harassment allegations of Bob Filner for two years. Obama and his supporters, you included, refuse to take seriously the many scandals, they're 'phony' even though the lies are clear cut and people have died. Planned Parenthood and NARAL showed more concern for 'women's rights' than Gosnell victims and every one of you mock and scorn every time one of the many Obamacare failures is mentioned. You're perfectly willing to disregard the first amendment in spite of its clear enumerated rights and centuries of precedence and history to furnish free contraception to women.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I could on and on but I'm right about this, your collective agenda is more important than our individual rights and what's a few victims as long as the guy in power is toeing the line. Prove me wrong.
I really hope some prominent Democrats are on the receiving end of the first criminal cases after they revoke the Double Jeopardy laws.
Because its not illegal to kill a Democrat thug (a future democrat thug in this case) in self defense... and that was proven in the court of law... time to pull up your big boy and girl underpants and put away the diapers.
Who could have seen this coming after the national lynching of Zimmerman based on lies, half-truths, selective editing, etc...
Quote:
Adams Morgan hate crime was motivated by Zimmerman verdict, police say
By Nicole Chavez and Stefanie Dazio, Published: July 27
A Bethesda man was beaten and robbed early Saturday morning in Adams Morgan by three men who yelled, “This is for Trayvon Martin,” before attacking him, police said.
The incident is being investigated as a hate crime and robbery, according to D.C. police spokesman Araz Alali.
Three black men approached an adult white male from behind while he was walking in the 1700 block of Euclid Street NW at 1:26 a.m. Saturday, police said.
Two of the men threw the victim to the ground and kicked him, Alali said. The three perpetrators then took the victim’s iPhone and wallet and fled.
The victim suffered minor injuries and declined medical attention, authorities said.
“There is no pattern in these types of crimes. These attacks are outrageous; we are doing everything in our power to see that they certainly don’t occur. If they do occur, we are going to aggressively investigate them and bring people to justice,” Alali said.
Oh please, equating a mugging to the Zimmermann trial? What's your point? If Zimmerman hadn't been vilified this guy wouldn't have been mugged at 1:30 AM walking alone?
If indeed he was robbed by 3 black guys. I mean hard to imagine 3 guys beating up somebody and them not going to a hospital. Just saying.
Three blacks targetign and singling out a white guy to rop and beat... THAT defines a hate crime...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Not one hispanic guy defending himself against one block punk thug who thought he was assaulting a white guy.
What a screwed up world when a white guy can't defend hisself, you would think the black guys were running the country, now... wait a minute there...
He was a victim of opportunity for robbery, nothing to do with hate. He was alone so wasn't singled out because he was white, but because he was alone. That's what criminals do.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
He wouldn't be the first white person to say a black guy did it now would he? Don't be so quick to swallow everything hook, line, and sinker. Or embellish without facts as you are prone to do consistently.
Well... after hearing about what a racist Zimmerman was for defending himself against a black attacker for how long now...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Then any attacks on a non-black by a black equally have to be assumed is a hate crime.
I didn't open that can of worms up... they did... and they can't have it both ways.
Don't you just hate the way people get the facts all screwed up, it's a crime
I forgot the link, WaPo, but dude, what part of plain facts do you not get? You're always shooting the messenger, me, when I;m just relaying the news. I didn't write it.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
"Adams Morgan hate crime was motivated by Zimmerman verdict, police say"
"A Bethesda man was beaten and robbed early Saturday morning in Adams Morgan by three men who yelled, “This is for Trayvon Martin,” before attacking him, police said.
You calling the cops liars?
Uh oh, Zimmerman was pulled over in Texas for speeding - AND he was packing heat!! The media is all over this. Even the Daily Mail is on it...
He got off with a warning. But he is guilty of being "white and Hispanic" and carrying a gun, though I can't imagine why anyone with such a target on his back would want to carry a gun.Quote:
The gun in the glove box is legal in Texas, and police routinely ask motorists if they have weapons in the car, Brooks said. He said the entire stop lasted less than five minutes.
'It wasn't for super-excessive speeds, they just got him on regular speeding,' said Brian Brooks, city manager of Forney, Texas, about 25 miles southeast of Dallas, where Zimmerman was stopped.
'It's a pretty routine stop except for the fact that it was George Zimmerman.'
Zimmerman, 29, who is white and Hispanic, was found not guilty of murder and manslaughter on July 13 in Florida after a racially charged trial in the shooting of Martin in February 2012. Thousands of people demonstrated across the United States after the verdict.
Didn't know it was possible the exceed the speed limit in Tx.
Hello tom:
It's true. Perry doesn't enforce the laws of his state, and you make light of it... But, let Obama do the same thing, and he's a bad bad man...
You're not fooling anybody, though.
excon
Yes sir it is, especially in Estelline. 75 on the interstates is plenty fast to drive but that's only in open country, which we have a lot of to traverse. It's pretty much 60 mph or less once you hit city limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I did not know Perry was patrolling the streets.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The latest in the honest conversation on race in this country...
Charlie Rangel: Tea Party Is ‘Same Group’ Of ‘White Crackers’ Who Fought Civil Rights
How is that "white crackers" is somehow not supposed to be a racial slur?
I'd like to call Charley a thing or two since he wants to toss around slurs... and it won't be crooked criminal... if he's man enough to toss them around... then he's man enough to be on the receiving end of them too.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:18 AM. |