Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
Unarmed Teenager Shot in Gated Community Part II: Possible Confrontation by Victim?
The point is, there is so much conflicting reports, that it's impossible to conclude one way or the other at this point but so many have already made up their minds. The law is one thing but to assert that TM was so innocent and was doing nothing and therefore, he got shot because GZ had a problem with him is very difficult to contemplate, imho.
Also, how can anyone take any of the media's reporting seriously when they continue to show video and pictures of a 13 year-old Trayvon Martin? Who does this?!?
I agree that it would be nice if media outlets would address this incident with a little less speculative tone.
I think that the speculative coverage of this is more related to the way people consume media nowadays. The internet has changed the way we seek information. Patience doesn't really exist anymore, so people want to have constant updates and frequent release of new information. News outlets play into this and relate everything they get their hands on, as they get their hands on it. Since every bit of information is a small piece of information removed from it's context, they try to contextualize and inject importance into it which leads to over-analysis and speculation.
However, my agreement with you ends there.
I'm perfectly willing to wait until more dependable evidence comes out before deciding what the legal repercussions should be, but no matter what happened afterwards, Zimmerman's vigilante behaviour is the root cause of any confrontation that took place. Any opinion that tries to project guilt onto Martin is purely speculative. If Zimmerman doesn't make the choice to tail Martin; he is merely a teenager armed with candy walking home from a store and lives to see today. If Zimmerman stays in his vehicle, no confrontation or shooting happens. No matter what direction this ends up going legally, Zimmerman's vigilante actions were the ultimate cause of the death of a teenager.
Last edited by LyleOdelein: 03-31-2012 at 03:24 PM.
The contradictions were the first 2 sentences and the last which you not surprisingly blew right by and ignored. The underlined in your last retort is wild speculation since no one has seen the police report.
I blew right past the last second, even though I specifically referred to it as a reasoning behind his gun malfunctioning? Seriously dude, try ****ing harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa
Led Zappa internet poster 'George chased Trayvon' carries more weight, since, you know, there is actually audio that indicates it's true and not just a story he supposedly heard from his brother. I say supposedly because he hadn't talked to his brother in 2 years and there is no evidence he's talked to his brother since. In fact, there are rumors that he's saying this just to get on TV.
He goes on TV and defends his brother at the risk of death threats, just to get on TV?
Wow, how did you think that one up?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilkka Sinisalo
well gee mike, i'd say it's probably because the guy who shot an unarmed teenager has still not been charged with anything.
So if a rapist doesn't have a weapon, the woman must take it and not shoot them?
So if a rapist doesn't have a weapon, the woman must take it and not shoot them?
Poor analogy. The kid was being stalked by an adult male. He was the one standing his ground. Zimmerman was escalating a scenario he started. Imagine how you'd feel if your teenager was being followed by an adult male? Imagine how the kid felt being followed by an adult male?
Using your **** example, this is akin to a man following a woman in a threatening fashion, the woman fighting back, then the man shoots her dead claiming self defense.
Last edited by Psycho Papa Joe: 03-31-2012 at 05:03 PM.
Deadly force by case law is justified in response to any action that causes serious bodily harm, if someone says and people hear they are just going to break your arm and you kill them, its not oh he said he was just going to break your arm, if someone attacks you, you can put them down.
The only onus you have if its not on your property, is they were the instigator.
This is wrong. On so many levels. You have no idea what you are talking about. I pray that you are not a lawyer or in law school, because you are embarrassingly wrong.
__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB "Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
This is wrong. On so many levels. You have no idea what you are talking about. I pray that you are not a lawyer or in law school, because you are embarrassingly wrong.
Look back on his posting history. This occasion is not a rarity, it is the norm.
well congratulations, you may actually be the dumbest poster on hfboards.
this post is over 3 hours old and still cant even figure out what he this means. If a rapist doesnt have a gun, how can his target take it? I would like some elaboration on this dumbest post of the year nominee . I have never seen a post this stupid on any message board.
this post is over 3 hours old and still cant even figure out what he this means. If a rapist doesnt have a gun, how can his target take it? I would like some elaboration on this dumbest post of the year nominee . I have never seen a post this stupid on any message board.
You've just missed them.I promise.
__________________
History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
this post is over 3 hours old and still cant even figure out what he this means. If a rapist doesnt have a gun, how can his target take it? I would like some elaboration on this dumbest post of the year nominee . I have never seen a post this stupid on any message board.
It's probably not worth the clarification, but I think by "take it" he meant the woman should accept being ***** and not shoot him (the hypothetical woman is apparently packing heat).
It's probably not worth the clarification, but I think by "take it" he meant the woman should accept being ***** and not shoot him (the hypothetical woman is apparently packing heat).
Well that makes a little more sense but that post is still incredibly foolish.
Regardless of what exactly happened in the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin, there is one thing that is crystal clear:
Zimmerman racially profiled Martin, disobeyed the 911 dispatcher in some sort of warped sense of community safety, and got himself into a situation where he ended up shooting this young man.
Had he just listened to the 911 dispatcher, him and Martin would have gone their separate ways. Such a damn shame.
But it's not supported by voice recognition experts.
"Experts" may give contradictory testimonies depending on who pays them. Let's see if Zimmerman calls forward his own experts who support his side of the story.
Quote:
No it doesn't. The funeral director said there were no bruises on Trayvon's knuckles.
That proves nothing. You can break someone's nose with a punch without getting bruises on your knuckles.
Two eyewitnesses testify that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman punching him before the fatal shot was fired. Zimmerman had to shoot fast in that kind of a situation or Trayvon would have grabbed his gun.
Two eyewitnesses testify that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman punching him before the fatal shot was fired. Zimmerman had to shoot fast in that kind of a situation or Trayvon would have grabbed his gun.
You mean this?
Quote:
I don't know if was an echo but it definitely made more than one pop ... After the larger man got off there was a boy, obviously now dead, on the ground facing down...
It was dark. I can't say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. It was a Hispanic man. He didn't appear hurt or anything else. He just kind of seemed very worried with his hand up to his forehead."
The witness also added that he saw no blood and that the confrontation took place on grass, contradicting the claim that Zimmerman was wounded in the back of the head because Martin was slamming his head into the pavement.
.
. I have never seen a post this stupid on any message board.
