Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

In my foreign land, murder is OKFollow

#177 Mar 25 2012 at 12:52 PM Rating: Default
****
7,861 posts
catwho wrote:
Apparently Zimmerman was a serial 911 abuser, with 45 calls placed since he started working as a neighborhood watch patrolman in September 2011.

He once called 911 because a 7-9 year old black boy was walking down the street, alone. His official reason for calling? The child was "unaccompanied."

Shoot, when I was that age I was permitted to walk about 2 miles unsupervised (down to the local driving range) and bike the full area of another 5-6.

When you were a child, times were different. Predators weren't as brazen as they are now.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#178 Mar 25 2012 at 4:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
I'm not sure that's true. I think the difference lies in the news cycle and the immediacy of information.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#179 Mar 25 2012 at 4:28 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,911 posts
Kastigir wrote:
When you were a child, times were different. Predators weren't as brazen as they are now.

Yeah that's wrong.
#180 Mar 25 2012 at 4:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,373 posts
I think her parents were just hoping for a predator to come by.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#181 Mar 25 2012 at 6:16 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Kastigir wrote:
catwho wrote:
Apparently Zimmerman was a serial 911 abuser, with 45 calls placed since he started working as a neighborhood watch patrolman in September 2011.

He once called 911 because a 7-9 year old black boy was walking down the street, alone. His official reason for calling? The child was "unaccompanied."

Shoot, when I was that age I was permitted to walk about 2 miles unsupervised (down to the local driving range) and bike the full area of another 5-6.

When you were a child, times were different. Predators weren't as brazen as they are now.


I hate to tell you this but that cherry sucker you got from the free candy van wasn't a sucker. Smiley: wink
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#182 Mar 25 2012 at 9:35 PM Rating: Decent
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,160 posts
At this point the only thing we know is a black teenage male is dead. All of the assumptions each of you have made as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman or Martin is just conjecture, nothing more. Beyond that, Obammy inserting himself into the discussion is, like most of what he does, none of his business and typical overreach by a slimy politician.
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#183 Mar 25 2012 at 10:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Totem wrote:
All of the assumptions each of you have made as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman or Martin is just conjecture, nothing more.

Oh, thank God. Here I thought this was the court-appointed jury and we were doing it all wrong.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#184 Mar 25 2012 at 10:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel wrote:
Totem wrote:
All of the assumptions each of you have made as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman or Martin is just conjecture, nothing more.

Oh, thank God. Here I thought this was the court-appointed jury and we were doing it all wrong.
I wonder what this discussion would look like if the Sanford PD actually did an investigation.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#185 Mar 25 2012 at 10:25 PM Rating: Good
To all of those surprised by gbaji's take on this:

This is a guy who thinks rape isn't rape unless you leave a mark. Is stalking someone, then shooting them when they take issue with it really that much of a stretch?
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#186 Mar 26 2012 at 4:09 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,633 posts
It's not rape if you yell surprise.
____________________________
Mistress Darqflame wrote:
Sorry, anything representing or remotely resembling a ***** is a nono.
gigasnail wrote:
i'm lighting the freak signal here, sara help me out ~
Redding wrote:
Same ol' Sara now with 50% less hidden *****
#187 Mar 26 2012 at 7:14 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Totem wrote:
At this point the only thing we know is a black teenage male is dead. All of the assumptions each of you have made as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman or Martin is just conjecture, nothing more. Beyond that, Obammy inserting himself into the discussion is, like most of what he does, none of his business and typical overreach by a slimy politician.
We know the cause of death of the black teenage kid. He was shot by Zimmerman.

I'd be sorely disappointed as a tax-payer if our federal government didn't step in when/if a state failed to investigate a murder.

Edited, Mar 26th 2012 3:16pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#188 Mar 26 2012 at 7:51 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,737 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Everything else aside, since when was lethal force ever allowed to settle a fist fight?
When the person's fists are capable of causing severe damage and/or death, for instance when the aggressor is clearly several weight classes above the victim or has/is showing experience. If the victim is in or feels they are in imminent danger, pretty much.

I don't need to point out I'm just answering the question and not the overall topic, do I?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#189 Mar 26 2012 at 9:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Totem wrote:
All of the assumptions each of you have made as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman or Martin is just conjecture, nothing more.

Oh, thank God. Here I thought this was the court-appointed jury and we were doing it all wrong.


So, does this mean we're not going to be getting that bribe money now? Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#190 Mar 26 2012 at 1:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,925 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Everything else aside, since when was lethal force ever allowed to settle a fist fight?
When the person's fists are capable of causing severe damage and/or death, for instance when the aggressor is clearly several weight classes above the victim or has/is showing experience. If the victim is in or feels they are in imminent danger, pretty much.


So if, just as an example, you were on your back, with a broken nose, and having your head smashed into the sidewalk by an assailant? That might do it, right?

Quote:
I don't need to point out I'm just answering the question and not the overall topic, do I?


Oh. Then never mind!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#191 Mar 26 2012 at 2:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bloody =/= Broken

But feel free to lay on the hyperbole as long as we're not talking about this specific case Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#192 Mar 26 2012 at 2:50 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,633 posts
The only decent argument you've made is that we cant trust our sources and we don't really know what happend and that alone cancels out everything else you've said.

They may have both handled to situation poorly but since Zimmerman is the aggressor, the adult, the one with the gun and the one that's still alive I really can't believe anyone would argue against him being detained while a proper investigation is done.

That being said my money would be on it WAS completely Zimmerman's fault. We have reason to believe Zimmerman was a bit irrational and had a hero complex, possibly even racist and no reason to believe Trayvon was anything but a normal teen.
____________________________
Mistress Darqflame wrote:
Sorry, anything representing or remotely resembling a ***** is a nono.
gigasnail wrote:
i'm lighting the freak signal here, sara help me out ~
Redding wrote:
Same ol' Sara now with 50% less hidden *****
#193 Mar 26 2012 at 3:04 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
Apparently he's arguing that Trayvon went for his gun, which is apparently supposed to put the law on his side.

I'm sorry, but if Trayvon was in a position to go for your gun, it meant that your gun was exposed and accessible. Which means it probably wasn't fastened into its holster, and he was probably holding it.

He put Trayvon into a situation where he had to defend his life. That is not self defense. The individual act cannot be applied to the conflict as a whole. He may have shot Trayvon in self defense, but the entire conflict is Zimmerman's fault.

I don't get to hold a knife against someone's throat, wait until they fight back, and then stab them. That's ridiculous.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#194 Mar 26 2012 at 3:08 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,925 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bloody =/= Broken

But feel free to lay on the hyperbole as long as we're not talking about this specific case Smiley: laugh


But if we're taking the words of lawyers for various parties (which no one here seems to have any problem with doing), then Zimmermans's lawyer's account says that his nose was broken:

Quote:
Among that evidence is proof, Mr Sonner said, that Trayvon struck Zimmerman and knocked him to the ground. His nose was broken, he had a gash on his the back of his head and grass stains on on back, the lawyer revealed.


Maybe the lawyer is exaggerating as well. No way to know. But isn't this kind of a minor point to make? So you acknowledge now that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman, beating his face, smashing his head into the ground, but it's all ok because there's wiggle room over whether he actually broke Zimmerman's nose?

Remember last week when I said that once the facts of this case start to come out, a lot of people are going to owe some apologies? Looks like I was right.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#195 Mar 26 2012 at 3:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,925 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Apparently he's arguing that Trayvon went for his gun, which is apparently supposed to put the law on his side.


Haven't heard that particular bit. Pretty impossible to prove either way.

Quote:
I'm sorry, but if Trayvon was in a position to go for your gun, it meant that your gun was exposed and accessible. Which means it probably wasn't fastened into its holster, and he was probably holding it.


Because it's impossible for someone straddling someone on his back on the ground to grab for a gun in a holster on the person's waistband? It's irrelevant anyway. The injuries Zimmerman sustained and every eyewitness who actually saw the fight more than confirm sufficient self-defense cause for the shooting.

Quote:
He put Trayvon into a situation where he had to defend his life.


People keep saying this, but are you basing that on any actual facts, or just a need to justify a position you've already taken on the issue. I believe that you first adopted the assumption that Martin was the innocent victim of an unjustified shooting and now have to keep inventing stuff to support that assumption. You have zero facts to this. It's pure speculation.

Can you even allow yourself to imagine the possibility that Martin attacked Zimmerman without cause? You're so quick to assume that Zimmerman would stalk Martin and deliberately set up a situation where he could shoot him and claim self defense, but can't even admit the possibility that Martin might have jumped a guy he thought wasn't armed? Why assume one, but not even allow the possibility of the other?

Quote:
That is not self defense.


Correct. Attacking a guy who's done nothing more than walk down a sidewalk is not self defense. Martin had absolutely no justification to attack Zimmerman.


Quote:
The individual act cannot be applied to the conflict as a whole. He may have shot Trayvon in self defense, but the entire conflict is Zimmerman's fault.


Is it? How do you know?

Quote:
I don't get to hold a knife against someone's throat, wait until they fight back, and then stab them. That's ridiculous.


Yes, it is. But that's not even remotely similar to what happened here. And frankly, it doesn't make any sense. You're allowing that starting assumption to drive your argument into pretty absurd directions. Which makes more sense:

1. Zimmerman forced Martin to attack him by threatening him with a gun.

2. Martin attacked Zimmerman because he didn't realize he had a gun.

Think about it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#196 Mar 26 2012 at 3:21 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
His injuries weren't serious enough to be tended to before they brought him to the station, according to the reports. They are definitely using exaggerated language. Doesn't mean his nose couldn't have been broken, technically, but a cracked bone isn't anything like what they want us to picture.

And, again, no one denies that they fought. I don't know why you are dwelling on that--it isn't important. No one owes you an apology, because no one ever denied that he could have been injured.

The point is that Trayvon didn't initiate their encounter, he didn't bring firearms into the picture, and he had every right to be there. We don't know who started the fight and, frankly, that doesn't even matter. Zimmerman voided his ability to claim self defense by putting Trayvon into a situation where he had legitimate reason to fear for his life. If he initiated the fight, it simply makes him even more culpable. If he didn't, it's still his fault for forcing a minor into a situation where his life could be forfeit.

[EDIT]

Seriously, your "who started the fight" argument isn't working, because no one cares. Why? Because it doesn't matter. Zimmerman was the aggressor of the whole conflict, even if he had not initiated the fight, because had he not stalked the kid in his car there wouldn't have been a conflict.

Edited, Mar 26th 2012 5:23pm by idiggory
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#197 Mar 26 2012 at 3:26 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,925 posts
SillyXSara wrote:
They may have both handled to situation poorly but since Zimmerman is the aggressor, the adult, the one with the gun and the one that's still alive I really can't believe anyone would argue against him being detained while a proper investigation is done.


They did detain him. But there was no evidence that he had broken the law. So they did what the police are supposed to do. They released him and didn't file charges. You're reacting to parts of a story, told in an emotional fashion a month after the event itself. The police reacted to the actual evidence in front of them, and the full accounts of the witnesses at the time. They had a much better ability to judge this than you do.

Quote:
That being said my money would be on it WAS completely Zimmerman's fault. We have reason to believe Zimmerman was a bit irrational and had a hero complex, possibly even racist and no reason to believe Trayvon was anything but a normal teen.


No reason because no reason exists? Or no reason because you haven't heard one? You do get that the entire story you've heard so far is being told by the Martin's and their lawyer, right? It hasn't occurred to you that they might just omit any information about their son which might make him appear less innocent?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#198 Mar 26 2012 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,373 posts
I'm curious as to why you refer to one by their first name and the other by their last name. Trying to raise sympathy? I haven't followed this at all but that's the sort of thing you do when your facts aren't very good.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#199 Mar 26 2012 at 3:41 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
I've been moving between Trayvon and Martin. Honestly, I think it's because I'm inclined to use their last names and, even though Martin is the surname, it got filed in my brain as the first name. Which is probably partly due to the fact that, until two days ago, I had no idea how to pronounce "Trayvon".
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#200 Mar 26 2012 at 3:41 PM Rating: Good
******
21,720 posts
gbaji wrote:
SillyXSara wrote:
They may have both handled to situation poorly but since Zimmerman is the aggressor, the adult, the one with the gun and the one that's still alive I really can't believe anyone would argue against him being detained while a proper investigation is done.


They did detain him. But there was no evidence that he had broken the law. So they did what the police are supposed to do. They released him and didn't file charges. You're reacting to parts of a story, told in an emotional fashion a month after the event itself. The police reacted to the actual evidence in front of them, and the full accounts of the witnesses at the time. They had a much better ability to judge this than you do.

Quote:
That being said my money would be on it WAS completely Zimmerman's fault. We have reason to believe Zimmerman was a bit irrational and had a hero complex, possibly even racist and no reason to believe Trayvon was anything but a normal teen.


No reason because no reason exists? Or no reason because you haven't heard one? You do get that the entire story you've heard so far is being told by the Martin's and their lawyer, right? It hasn't occurred to you that they might just omit any information about their son which might make him appear less innocent?


It really doesn't matter if Martin was a complete thug. His innocence beyond the scope of the incident at hand is irrelevant. The fact that you can't see that is not surprising. ZImmerman called the police, was told to meet the cops and stop following. The minute he disobeyed that order, he became the aggressor. It's really that ******* simple.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#201 Mar 26 2012 at 3:44 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,925 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
His injuries weren't serious enough to be tended to before they brought him to the station, according to the reports. They are definitely using exaggerated language. Doesn't mean his nose couldn't have been broken, technically, but a cracked bone isn't anything like what they want us to picture.

And, again, no one denies that they fought.


Now. A week ago?

Quote:
I don't know why you are dwelling on that--it isn't important. No one owes you an apology, because no one ever denied that he could have been injured.


Fair enough. I dwell on it because there were people who seemed to think that Zimmerman just chased Martin down and shot him in cold blood and not after a struggle in which Zimmerman was on the loosing side. It's kinda relevant because the position of those defending Martin keeps shifting. First it was a cold blooded killing and there was no fight. Then it shifted to Martin being the victim who couldn't possibly have defended himself from the much larger and stronger older man and was just trying to defend himself and run home. Now, it's Martin was participating in the fight, and was continuing that fight long past the point of self-defense, but it's justified because Zimmerman started it, or gave him no choice, or something.

Quote:
The point is that Trayvon didn't initiate their encounter...


You do not know this. Holy ****!


Quote:
... he didn't bring firearms into the picture, and he had every right to be there.


Irrelevant *and* so did Zimmerman. The issue is only about who started the physical fight, not who was following whom, or who initiated a conversation, or whatever other stuff you keep spinning this into. What matters is who physically laid hands on the other first.

Quote:
We don't know who started the fight and, frankly, that doesn't even matter.


Um... Yes, it does. It's the only thing that does. If Martin started the fight, then Zimmerman is 100% in the right here. More to the point, we can only prove that Zimmerman is in the wrong if we can prove that he started the fight. And there is zero evidence for that. This is why the police didn't press charges. There's no evidence to refute Zimmerman's claim of self defense, and a **** of a lot of evidence that shows that at Martin choose to continue the fight. There is not a single eye witness account which shows Zimmerman as the aggressor.


Yet, you choose to assume he was. Why?

Quote:
Zimmerman voided his ability to claim self defense by putting Trayvon into a situation where he had legitimate reason to fear for his life. If he initiated the fight, it simply makes him even more culpable. If he didn't, it's still his fault for forcing a minor into a situation where his life could be forfeit.


That's not how the law works though. You don't get to deck someone because they walk up to you and ask you a question. Period.


Quote:
Seriously, your "who started the fight" argument isn't working, because no one cares. Why? Because it doesn't matter. Zimmerman was the aggressor of the whole conflict...


Patently false. Every eye witness account places Martin as the aggressor. No eye witness account places Zimmerman as the aggressor. While we can't say just by looking at who's on top at the end of a fight who started the fight, we can also only go based on the facts we have. At no point did any witness observe Zimmerman on top or in an aggressive position (until after he fired his gun). You're leading with your assumption and inventing facts to match.


Quote:
... even if he had not initiated the fight, because had he not stalked the kid in his car there wouldn't have been a conflict.


Irrelevant. That's like saying "if he hadn't looked at me funny, I wouldn't have had to beat him up, so it's not really my fault"

Do you even hear yourself? This is ridiculous. The lengths you're willing to go to excuse Martin's behavior is frankly astounding. Nothing Zimmerman did justified Martin assaulting him. You don't get to deck someone because they're following you, or asking you a question.

And, according to Zimmerman's statement (which is now being released by his lawyer), he had lost sight of Martin and was returning to his car when Martin jumped him. If this is true, then it wasn't even that Zimmerman chased the kid down, or that Martin was trying to get away. Martin may have actually circled around and stalked Zimmerman and jumped him.


Do I know that for a fact? Of course not. But again, in the absence of any solid facts regarding how the physical altercation started, we can't assume that Zimmerman is at fault. The law does not work that way.

Edited, Mar 26th 2012 2:56pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 78 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (78)