Why?

He chased a kid down, after cops told him to desist.  He confronted the kid, and then killed him.  For shame.

This was, has been, and still is a very small incident in Florida.

Dmtdust wrote:

No.  It is indicative of the greater illness this country struggles through.

That's right. I only wish Jeb Bush (or even ALEC) had had the guts and integrity to name his legislative masterpiece a more honest name than 'Stand Your Ground'. Something along the lines of 'The Open Season On Niggers Law'.

The verdict probably was inevitable.  The evidence as to the physical altercation was not good for the prosecution. 

It is now pretty obvious how bad a cocktail you get when you mix Neighborhood Watch and concealed carry.  Add a little wannabe cop with an axe to grind and stir.

Tall Paul wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

No.  It is indicative of the greater illness this country struggles through.

That's right. I only wish Jeb Bush (or even ALEC) had had the guts and integrity to name his legislative masterpiece a more honest name than 'Stand Your Ground'. Something along the lines of 'The Open Season On Niggers Law'.

To keep things on line Treyvon Martin had a right to Stand His Ground when being stalked by a stranger, incompetence on the prosecutors part brought about this travesty of justice.  Zimmerman hunted a kid down, initiated a confrontation and then shot him; I just want to puke.

A reminder of the whole story.

Last edited by whosasailorthen (2013-07-14 11:49:37)

Zimmerman also took martial arts lessons; the instructor described him as, basically, a fat, out of shape, "nice guy".

My advice to Zimmerman is to move to a small town someplace where there are none of those scary "negroes" to cause him night terrors.

I'm not going to invite fnord to join him there because fnord's merely (or presents as) racist. Zimmerman tooled up and went looking for a fight. I am certain that if you could peel away the veneer of "self defense" from concealed carry advocates, you'd find a fantasy about carving notches into their grips.

Last edited by sigmoid freud (2013-07-14 13:17:57)

No, it doesn't give Zimmerman the right to shoot anyone.  However, it's pretty clear to me that Zimmerman's nose didn't break itself.  Nor did Zimmerman's head raise its own welts and cuts. 

The undisputed fact is that he got cold-cocked by a delinquent kid that was a lot bigger than he was.  He got slammed to the ground.  He was scared and not a very good fighter.  He was in fear of his life after his head hit that hard concrete for the 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th time.  He saw no other way out.  It's that simple.

As to 'stalking', everyone says that the kid had a right to be walking there without being assaulted.  Well, so did Zimmerman.  He had a right to just be walking there, too.  And Zimmerman didn't DO any assaulting. He didn't attack anyone.  The kid did.  And if the kid had not assaulted Zimmerman he'd be alive today, because Zimmerman was not stalking with intent to shoot.  Hell, he was in communication with the 911 line - how was he gonna stalk and shoot somebody while on the phone with the police?

And Zimmerman wasn't walking in near proximity to the kid.  He wasn't following behind him.  He actually lost track of the kid, and the kid came out of seemingly nowhere and suddenly assaulted him.

Last edited by whosasailorthen (2013-07-14 14:38:09)

Even Harvard Law professor and liberal civil rights lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz agrees... this case had nothing to do with race and everything to do with self-defense.

whosasailorthen wrote:

And Zimmerman wasn't walking in near proximity to the kid.  He wasn't following behind him.  He actually lost track of the kid, and the kid came out of seemingly nowhere and suddenly assaulted him.

Those are the claims of the shooter after he shot someone dead.

There is simply no excuse for what Zimmerman did, you can play the devil's advocate all you like but in the end one man stalked the other, intentionally got out of his vehicle, engaged the boy in hand to hand combat and then shot him dead.  Any questions here?

In normal America we call this murder.

Emmeran wrote:

...in the end one man stalked the other, intentionally got out of his vehicle, engaged the boy in hand to hand combat and then shot him dead.  Any questions here?

In normal America we call this murder.

Where, please tell me, is any shred of evidence that says Zimmerman 'engaged the boy in hand to hand combat'?  Where is the evidence that he in any way started a physical altercation?  Do tell.  Other than the gunshot wound, were there ANY marks on the kid?  Bruises?  Cuts?  Abrasions? Anything to show that Zimmerman got in even a single blow?

Last edited by whosasailorthen (2013-07-14 15:27:25)

Please Sailor - he stalked and then engaged the boy, too bad for him that he was getting his as kicked for stalking another guy - hell I'd never do that.  What the fuck did he expect to happen?

Zimmerman created the situation and then killed him - everything else are just side notes to the issue. 

If Zimmerman hadn't followed him, if Zimmerman had stayed in his car, if Zimmerman had not pulled his gun then there would be two people alive today instead of just one.  You can't undo dead.

whosasailorthen wrote:

Nice that you're willing to listen to the facts.  No supposing or inference from you, no sir.

You can't undo brain damage or dead-from-brain-bleed either.

Correct - but who initiated the situation?  Who created the conflict?  Why did this happen and who truly caused it?

Mr. Martin, after going to the store for a drink and a snack, was talking to his girlfriend and was stalked, confronted and shot.  None of this need to have happened; these events only occurred because Mr. Zimmerman had some sort of authority complex.  Because of his complex a kid that went to the local mini-mart is dead.

Mr. Martin had every right to confront his stalker under the stand your ground laws regardless of his past brushes with the law, Mr. Zimmerman should have observed the advice he received and we wouldn't have a dead body on our hands.

Last edited by Emmeran (2013-07-14 17:31:02)

You know at the end of the day a boy is dead.  No graduation, no wedding, no first born child.

George Zimmerman stole this all from Trayvon Martin because he was paranoid; Melons and I are both beyond outraged by this decision and while we understand the prosecutors blew it we also remember that a young man is dead for no good reason.


Riots start in:  3...2....1...

Sailor, hey you! You asshole, what the fuck do you think you're doing on High Street? Do you think a fucking punk like you have the right to be in this neighborhood? I've got a gun.... You'd better get out of here right now and stay out, or I'll fuck you up!

There now, THAT's an assault ("Hey man, why are you following me?" doesn't qualify). If I had had the chutzpah to walk up to you and say such things, that in itself would constitute a crime. The first three are merely a confrontation, legal but also the mark of an asshole. It's that last sentence with a threat of violence that does the trick. Pulling a gun would be assault with a deadly weapon. Actually laying hands on you would constitute battery.  Based on the evidence, a reasonable person would agree that Zimmerman is most likely indictable (at least) on a charge of aggravated assault.

After hearing the 911 tape and seeing the evidence can you really say with a straight face that Mr. Zimmerman was just standing there minding his own business when Mr. Martin that big dope smokin' troublemakin' buck nigrah ran up, pulled a sidewalk out of his pocket and attacked? There were only two witnesses to the confrontation: One is dead and it's a  documented fact that the other changed his story several times and also has a history of violence and being a weasel. I can't help feeling that anyone initiating a crime has to bear the consequences of anything that happens because of it. The only way this verdict makes sense is if you believe that walking down the street is a crime for a black teenager.

AladdinSane wrote:

And George Zimmerman has filed suit against NBC News for defamation of character.

Wait - how can you defame the character of someone of that ilk?

I agree on the civil rights stuff but the basic facts are that the actions of Mr. Zimmerman caused the death of Mr. Martin, everything outside of that is pure spin and bullshit.  The jury's verdict was based on a legal stipulations and jury makeup - both of which the prosecution was able to influence.  The prosecution failed.

But at the end of the day because of the actions of Zimmerman a boy is dead; that's all folks, end of story.

Fid wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Anyone who thinks that this not guilty verdict was not justifiable is either ignorant of the facts or choosing to ignore them.  All this talk about Zimmerman stalking Martin is speculation by those who don't like the outcome.  All the known observations by witnesses as well as the facts collected by the police show that Zimmerman was acting in self defense. 

This whole case was brought for political purposes.  The original Sheriff and DA were fired by the governor because they refused to bow to pressure to prosecute a case they knew they could not prove.  Angela Corey, state's attorney stepped in and filed charges that were not warranted.  This new prosecutor withheld evidence from the defense and will probably be censured for it.  The only reason the defense got the info was because a staffer in her office sent it to them without her approval.  He was fired yesterday for doing so.  Even the liberal attorney Alan Dershowitz says the only one who should go to jail is Angela Corey.

Now, we have Eric Holder blathering about bringing a civil rights lawsuit.  Read what Dershowitz has to say about that too.

This pudgy wannabe precipitated the whole tragedy. This is part of the problem of concealed weapons permits. Loser douche bags provoke conflict as they feel the heat in their pocket. In no way was this stand your ground.

I'm so sorry the Constitution doesn't sit will with you Fid, perhaps you should move to a totalitarian country where the government has a little better control over its citizens.

Emmeran wrote:

phreddy wrote:

I'm so sorry the Constitution doesn't sit will with you Fid, perhaps you should move to a totalitarian country where the government has a little better control over its citizens.

Now you're just trolling...

Really? Fid thinks we should send Zimmerman to prison for life because he is pudgy and he wanted to be a cop, and because he holds a legal concealed weapons permit and because a jury found that he was attacked by a punk who was beating the crap out him.  And you say I'm trolling? 

This whole case, the race baiters who pushed it, the politicians and journalists who jumped on board, and the ignorant whiners who refuse to see the truth are all full of shit and you know it.

I have to ask; on the heels of Prism-Gate, Drone-gate, IRS-gate, Oil train exploding and all of the other things is anyone really surprised we that have a racial issue to suck up the headlines?

Woo Hoo, Zimmerman is free!  Free the bound periodicals!

I do not want to get in the middle of this fight since one of you might be armed.  I would note, for whos's benefit, that dead people do not bruise.  The cute little drawings tell us eith nothing or very little.

phreddy wrote:

photos of naked underaged girls

Eh?  He was 17 - those girls weren't underaged for him.  So he was a wannabe Hip-hop guy, that was why his mother sent him to stay with his father; they wanted to get him straight.  He was also an athlete and many other things.  None of those facts were known to Mr. Zimmerman when he initiated the encounter and thus none of them matter.  The boy was walking home, end of story.

Point of points - Mr. Martin did not pull Mr. Zimmerman out of his car and start a fight, Mr. Zimmerman pursued, left his vehicle and eventually engaged Mr. Martin.  Mr. Martin was unarmed and felt threatened, Mr. Zimmerman had a round in the chamber.  Seriously what more is there to be said?

In the words of Fnord - the Spic shot the Nigger dead.

Last edited by Emmeran (2013-07-15 18:37:21)

Fled wrote:

Emm - Have you noticed how silent people get when you mention PRISM?  The normal noisy boards are nearly bereft of discussion about it. 

The theme song is either "Do You Hear What I Hear?" or "The Eyes of Texas Are Upon You."

That's actually interesting, I'm not sure that prisms and pyramids will actually cause a hit in the rhythm of the cycle.  In any event someone must eventually evaluate the artwork but the herd might actually be the best place to hide from the wolves.  That was my take on moving to the cloud...

Em wrote:

Point of points - Mr. Martin did not pull Mr. Zimmerman out of his car and start a fight, Mr. Zimmerman pursued, left his vehicle and eventually engaged Mr. Martin.  Mr. Martin was unarmed and felt threatened, Mr. Zimmerman had a round in the chamber.  Seriously what more is there to be said?

For many of you this whole case is more about guns than race or stand your ground, or self defense.  If you believe that we should not have the right to bear arms, then anything that happens between an armed person and an unarmed one becomes the fault of the armed one.  In your logic, Zimmerman, or anyone for that matter, who is carrying a weapon is asking for trouble.  It's like blaming the raped woman for wearing a short skirt. 

Zimmerman had every right to carry that pistol and to watch and report suspicious activity in his neighborhood.  Trayvon Martin had every right to keep walking back to his dad's house, but he decided instead to attack Zimmerman.  I'm sorry he died, but it was his own doing.