goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Emo EMAW on August 09, 2012, 12:28:34 PM
-
How batshit crazy are people going to get when this guy walks? I think pretty batshit crazy.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
-
I have the right to self defense judge any man I choose
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
I'm not sure he started the fight.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
I'm not sure he started the fight.
I don't think the kid dragged him into his dad's girlfriend's back yard.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
I'm not sure he started the fight.
I don't think the kid dragged him into his dad's girlfriend's back yard.
I don't think anyone dragged anyone anywhere.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
I'm not sure he started the fight.
I don't think the kid dragged him into his dad's girlfriend's back yard.
I don't think anyone dragged anyone anywhere.
I agree, but I'm also pretty sure that GZ shot TM to death after chasing TM down.
-
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
-
It's going to be pretty bad. If this qualifies as self defense, then we need to really evaluate self defense laws.
I dunno.
I just don't think carrying a gun gives you the right to go and start fights and then shoot the other guy when you are losing that fight. Maybe I'm just a crazy gun control nut, though. :dunno:
I'm not sure he started the fight.
I don't think the kid dragged him into his dad's girlfriend's back yard.
I don't think anyone dragged anyone anywhere.
I agree, but I'm also pretty sure that GZ shot TM to death after chasing TM down.
Ya me too.
-
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
I think "Who had a reason to be at the location at the time of the altercation?" should come into play as well. TM probably just thought that GZ was an intruder and was protecting his father's girlfriend's property.
-
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
I think "Who had a reason to be at the location at the time of the altercation?" should come into play as well. TM probably just thought that GZ was an intruder and was protecting his fater's girlfriend's property.
If anything he was protecting himself from some weird trying to detain him for some unknown reason.
-
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
I think "Who had a reason to be at the location at the time of the altercation?" should come into play as well. TM probably just thought that GZ was an intruder and was protecting his father's girlfriend's property.
If anything he was protecting himself from some weird trying to detain him for some unknown reason.
Yeah, no kidding. If GZ pulled him even a few feet that is kidnapping, but unfortunately GZ killed the only witness to this crime so we will never know.
-
My step sister lives 2 blocks away from where the shooting took place.
She has talked to several cops from the town about it.
TM jumped GZ after GZ was following him and told him to stop.
Started smashing his head into the ground. GZ pulled his gun and shot him once in the chest.
The cops she talked to were all :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: when they heard people saying it was cold blood. GZ defended himself and the black community is twisting it to a race war(mostly fueled by the media).
-
My step sister lives 2 blocks away from where the shooting took place.
She has talked to several cops from the town about it.
TM jumped GZ after GZ was following him and told him to stop.
Started smashing his head into the ground. GZ pulled his gun and shot him once in the chest.
The cops she talked to were all :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: when they heard people saying it was cold blood. GZ defended himself and the black community is twisting it to a race war(mostly fueled by the media).
Yeah, I'm sure the local cops are a great source of information here. They wouldn't be trying to cover their asses at all.
-
NK, she lives 2 blocks away. Obvs she knows exactly what went on.
-
NK, she lives 2 blocks away. Obvs she knows exactly what went on.
crap, that's a good point.
-
My step sister lives 2 blocks away from where the shooting took place.
She has talked to several cops from the town about it.
TM jumped GZ after GZ was following him and told him to stop.
Started smashing his head into the ground. GZ pulled his gun and shot him once in the chest.
The cops she talked to were all :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: when they heard people saying it was cold blood. GZ defended himself and the black community is twisting it to a race war(mostly fueled by the media).
Yeah, I'm sure the local cops are a great source of information here. They wouldn't be trying to cover their asses at all.
Correct.
No need to.
-
My step sister lives 2 blocks away from where the shooting took place.
She has talked to several cops from the town about it.
TM jumped GZ after GZ was following him and told him to stop.
Started smashing his head into the ground. GZ pulled his gun and shot him once in the chest.
The cops she talked to were all :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: when they heard people saying it was cold blood. GZ defended himself and the black community is twisting it to a race war(mostly fueled by the media).
Yeah, I'm sure the local cops are a great source of information here. They wouldn't be trying to cover their asses at all.
Correct.
No need to.
Yeah. I mean they wouldn't look like a bunch of Barney Fife redneck hayseeds at all if GZ gets found guilty.
-
My step sister lives 2 blocks away from where the shooting took place.
She has talked to several cops from the town about it.
TM jumped GZ after GZ was following him and told him to stop.
Started smashing his head into the ground. GZ pulled his gun and shot him once in the chest.
The cops she talked to were all :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: when they heard people saying it was cold blood. GZ defended himself and the black community is twisting it to a race war(mostly fueled by the media).
Yeah, I'm sure the local cops are a great source of information here. They wouldn't be trying to cover their asses at all.
Correct.
No need to.
Yeah. I mean they wouldn't look like a bunch of Barney Fife redneck hayseeds at all if GZ gets found guilty.
If he gets found guilty it will be because GZ would have been smeared to look like a racist to the jury/judge. All the evidence points to him being well within his legal rights to retaliate how he did. It's not like he emptied a clip.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
I don't think this is the definition of standing your ground. More like beating the crap out of somebody for following you.
-
Guys I understand this is a polarizing subject but please.
-
I have the right to self defense judge any man I choose
I'd bring my own judge to a stand your ground hearing
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
I haven't heard this before. Link?
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
If someone is following me at night, I asked them to stop following me, and they kept following me...yes. What's more mumped up is deciding that it's a better outcome to shoot a kid in the chest rather than take a few more punches/kicks.
You're telling me that if someone is following you at night, you start running, then they continue to follow you to the point that they catch up to you after you've been running, you aren't going to defend yourself? I start running, the person following me keeps up to the point that they catch up, I'm going to try to kick their ass when they get to me. I don't really see how thats "mumped up".
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
No wonder everyone is so anti-gun. If you're willing to kick someone's ass for following you, you likely don't trust yourself to be carrying a gun and don't trust anyone else. Sheesh... talk about paranoia.
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
So I shouldn't defend myself because I should assume the other person has a gun, therefore if I defend myself I should assume I'm going to get shot and it's my fault when I get shot...yeah, my view is the mumped up one.
Have someone chase one your family members through their neighboorhood at night, then tell me when they get killed because they fought back rather than called the cops their killing was justified. Jesus rough ridin' christ.
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Well you're supposed to stop kicking their ass once you have the upper hand, like when he's on his back and crying like a girl and bleeding from his head.
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Well you're supposed to stop kicking their ass once you have the upper hand, like when he's on his back and crying like a girl and bleeding from his head.
That's probably why he got shot. If TM had just assumed GZ had a gun like Heinballz suggested, he could have just beaten him to death and then claimed self defense. It's hard to grab your gun and shoot somebody while you are trying to protect your face from vicious blows.
-
So I shouldn't defend myself because I should assume the other person has a gun, therefore if I defend myself I should assume I'm going to get shot and it's my fault when I get shot...yeah, my view is the mumped up one.
Have someone chase one your family members through their neighboorhood at night, then tell me when they get killed because they fought back rather than called the cops their killing was justified. Jesus rough ridin' christ.
Fighting back from what? Defending from what? Here's where the paranoia part comes in. FOLLOWING IS NOT ASSAULTING. I don't know how to make it more clear than that. If someone is following you, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSAULT THEM.
-
So I shouldn't defend myself because I should assume the other person has a gun, therefore if I defend myself I should assume I'm going to get shot and it's my fault when I get shot...yeah, my view is the mumped up one.
Have someone chase one your family members through their neighboorhood at night, then tell me when they get killed because they fought back rather than called the cops their killing was justified. Jesus rough ridin' christ.
Fighting back from what? Defending from what? Here's where the paranoia part comes in. FOLLOWING IS NOT ASSAULTING. I don't know how to make it more clear than that. If someone is following you, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSAULT THEM.
If some stranger is walking around on my property in the middle of a rainy night, I definitely have the right to judge him, especially if he is armed.
-
So I shouldn't defend myself because I should assume the other person has a gun, therefore if I defend myself I should assume I'm going to get shot and it's my fault when I get shot...yeah, my view is the mumped up one.
Have someone chase one your family members through their neighboorhood at night, then tell me when they get killed because they fought back rather than called the cops their killing was justified. Jesus rough ridin' christ.
Fighting back from what? Defending from what? Here's where the paranoia part comes in. FOLLOWING IS NOT ASSAULTING. I don't know how to make it more clear than that. If someone is following you, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSAULT THEM.
Yet GZ has the right to chase TM through the dark streets, to the point that TM is running and GZ is keeping up, then kill him when TM assaults him for chasing him...tell me what part of this law structure isn't mumped up. Also, you said that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed that GZ had a gun. So going even further down how you are trying to justify this, TM shouldn't have the right to assult a man chasing him with a gun at night, but when the person chasing with the gun gets assulted, they have the right to kill the person they were chasing.
Also, I like how you keep falsing using the term "following" instead of "chasing", which is exactly was GZ did even after the 911 dispatcher told him to stop.
-
If some stranger is walking around on my property in the middle of a rainy night, I definitely have the right to judge him, especially if he is armed.
Well now you're just throwing hypothetical situations out there to make my argument void. Hey everyone! Heinballs says that if a dude wearing a jason mask and carrying a big machete is following you in your house, you can't kick his ass until he tries to kill you. What a douchbag, amirite?
FTR, what you're doing is social engineering.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
I haven't heard this before. Link?
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher (http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher)
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Well you're supposed to stop kicking their ass once you have the upper hand, like when he's on his back and crying like a girl and bleeding from his head.
That's probably why he got shot. If TM had just assumed GZ had a gun like Heinballz suggested, he could have just beaten him to death and then claimed self defense. It's hard to grab your gun and shoot somebody while you are trying to protect your face from vicious blows.
Basically, GZ is innocent according to the law. The law might be mumped up, though. Honestly the most interesting stories are when those little weird circumstances add up and, under those circumstances, the law doesn't make sense. So we focus on the 1% of the time the law doesn't work. Let's not knee-jerk here people.
-
So I shouldn't defend myself because I should assume the other person has a gun, therefore if I defend myself I should assume I'm going to get shot and it's my fault when I get shot...yeah, my view is the mumped up one.
Have someone chase one your family members through their neighboorhood at night, then tell me when they get killed because they fought back rather than called the cops their killing was justified. Jesus rough ridin' christ.
Fighting back from what? Defending from what? Here's where the paranoia part comes in. FOLLOWING IS NOT ASSAULTING. I don't know how to make it more clear than that. If someone is following you, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSAULT THEM.
Yet GZ has the right to chase TM through the dark streets, to the point that TM is running and GZ is keeping up, then kill him when TM assaults him for chasing him...tell me what part of this law structure isn't mumped up. Also, you said that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed that GZ had a gun. So going even further down how you are trying to justify this, TM shouldn't have the right to assult a man chasing him with a gun at night, but when the person chasing with the gun gets assulted, they have the right to kill the person they were chasing.
Also, I like how you keep falsing using the term "following" instead of "chasing", which is exactly was GZ did even after the 911 dispatcher told him to stop.
No, he doesn't have the right to chase him or follow him. But following OR chasing does not equate to assaulting. One is illegal, the other is not. GZ is a douchbag - no one is debating that. TM is also a douchbag - you are disputing this.
-
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe. But I have to assume that anyone following me likely has a gun and attacking them is going to get me shot - and justifiably so.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Well you're supposed to stop kicking their ass once you have the upper hand, like when he's on his back and crying like a girl and bleeding from his head.
That's probably why he got shot. If TM had just assumed GZ had a gun like Heinballz suggested, he could have just beaten him to death and then claimed self defense. It's hard to grab your gun and shoot somebody while you are trying to protect your face from vicious blows.
Basically, GZ is innocent according to the law. The law might be mumped up, though. Honestly the most interesting stories are when those little weird circumstances add up and, under those circumstances, the law doesn't make sense. So we focus on the 1% of the time the law doesn't work. Let's not knee-jerk here people.
:thumbs:
Not that I think the law is broken. GZ is guilty of stalking at the very least.
-
No, he doesn't have the right to chase him or follow him. But following OR chasing does not equate to assaulting. One is illegal, the other is not. GZ is a douchbag - no one is debating that. TM is also a douchbag - you are disputing this.
How is someone attacking a person chasing them through their neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night a douchebag? As you said earlier, TM should have tried to get to a safe place...that's exactly what he rough ridin' did when he started running but GZ caught up to him. But TM attacking GZ after GZ caught up to him after a running foot chase...that makes him a douchebag?
Also, I'm pretty sure if I came to your neighboorhood and chased you around in the dark for awhile, you would claim I was breaking some sort of law.
-
If some stranger is walking around on my property in the middle of a rainy night, I definitely have the right to judge him, especially if he is armed.
Well now you're just throwing hypothetical situations out there to make my argument void. Hey everyone! Heinballs says that if a dude wearing a jason mask and carrying a big machete is following you in your house, you can't kick his ass until he tries to kill you. What a douchbag, amirite?
FTR, what you're doing is social engineering.
1. Trayvon did not own the property, but he did live there.
2. It was raining.
Had Trayvon killed GZ, he would have a self defense claim that would stand up under duty to flee laws, not to mention stand your ground.
-
If some stranger is walking around on my property in the middle of a rainy night, I definitely have the right to judge him, especially if he is armed.
Well now you're just throwing hypothetical situations out there to make my argument void. Hey everyone! Heinballs says that if a dude wearing a jason mask and carrying a big machete is following you in your house, you can't kick his ass until he tries to kill you. What a douchbag, amirite?
FTR, what you're doing is social engineering.
1. Trayvon did not own the property, but he did live there.
2. It was raining.
Had Trayvon killed GZ, he would have a self defense claim that would stand up under duty to flee laws, not to mention stand your ground.
I'm not so sure. It takes a lot longer to kill a person by beating them to death than by shooting. One could argue (and these arguments have been made in Florida in stand-your-ground hearings before) that it would be excessive.
Here's one thing though, wouldn't GZ not qualify for stand-your-ground if the was breaking the law at the time, ala stalking or trespassing?
-
Here's one thing though, wouldn't GZ not qualify for stand-your-ground if the was breaking the law at the time, ala stalking or trespassing?
IF GZ gets off on the stand-your-ground law, this is where the mumped-up law structure I've been talking about this whole time comes into play. If the incident is started by you breaking the law, then you shouldn't qualify for stand-your-ground. If that's not in the law, the law is mumped up. If it is in the law, GZ shouldn't get off and this whole discussion is moot.
-
I didn't realize a trial had taken place where all of these details & personal accounts had been officially brought to light. All I’ve heard are accounts where TM was walking around a gated community… not his front yard. I also heard that GZ was following him in his car. See what I mean when I made this statement:
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
-
I didn't realize a trial had taken place where all of these details & personal accounts had been officially brought to light. All I’ve heard are accounts where TM was walking around a gated community… not his front yard. I also heard that GZ was following him in his car. See what I mean when I made this statement:
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
Yet you've already labeled TM a douchebag and have spent this entire thread defending GZ's right to shoot TM if TM attacked GZ after GZ chased him through the neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night...and started another thread about gun control laws.
If that's all you've heard, you obviously haven't heard the 911 call where GZ told the dispatcher that TM was running away from him and the dispatcher told him to wait for police...yet somehow they crossed paths again later.
-
I didn't realize a trial had taken place where all of these details & personal accounts had been officially brought to light. All I’ve heard are accounts where TM was walking around a gated community… not his front yard. I also heard that GZ was following him in his car. See what I mean when I made this statement:
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
As far as I'm concerned a 911 dispatcher isn't a rough ridin' cop and I don't have to do what they say, or at least failing to do what they say isn't obstruction.
Yet you've already labeled TM a douchebag and have spent this entire thread defending GZ's right to shoot TM if TM attacked GZ after GZ chased him through the neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night...and started another thread about gun control laws.
If that's all you've heard, you obviously haven't heard the 911 call where GZ told the dispatcher that TM was running away from him and the dispatcher told him to wait for police...yet somehow they crossed paths again later.
-
As far as I'm concerned a 911 dispatcher isn't a rough ridin' cop and I don't have to do what they say, or at least failing to do what they say isn't obstruction.
So because the 911 dispatcher isn't a cop, that makes it OK for GZ to continue to chase TM through the neighboorhood eventhought GZ knows the cops are on their way? If you aren't going to wait for the cops to show up to do their job, why the even call 911 in the first place?
-
As far as I'm concerned a 911 dispatcher isn't a rough ridin' cop and I don't have to do what they say, or at least failing to do what they say isn't obstruction.
So because the 911 dispatcher isn't a cop, that makes it OK for GZ to continue to chase TM through the neighboorhood eventhought GZ knows the cops are on their way? If you aren't going to wait for the cops to show up to do their job, why the even call 911 in the first place?
I'm saying it's not illegal for GZ to not follow the dispatcher's directions. Or that him ignoring those directions does not by itself nullify the stand-your-ground statute.
-
I didn't realize a trial had taken place where all of these details & personal accounts had been officially brought to light. All I’ve heard are accounts where TM was walking around a gated community… not his front yard. I also heard that GZ was following him in his car. See what I mean when I made this statement:
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
Yet you've already labeled TM a douchebag and have spent this entire thread defending GZ's right to shoot TM if TM attacked GZ after GZ chased him through the neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night...and started another thread about gun control laws.
If that's all you've heard, you obviously haven't heard the 911 call where GZ told the dispatcher that TM was running away from him and the dispatcher told him to wait for police...yet somehow they crossed paths again later.
You must be new to my posts, I label everyone a douchebag that resorts to violence based off of their paranoia. As for the gun control thread; It's completely unrelated to this discussion. I've been in several threads over the last month discussing gun control with gun control nuts - that thread is an extension of my arguments.
-
If some stranger is walking around on my property in the middle of a rainy night, I definitely have the right to judge him, especially if he is armed.
Well now you're just throwing hypothetical situations out there to make my argument void. Hey everyone! Heinballs says that if a dude wearing a jason mask and carrying a big machete is following you in your house, you can't kick his ass until he tries to kill you. What a douchbag, amirite?
FTR, what you're doing is social engineering.
1. Trayvon did not own the property, but he did live there.
2. It was raining.
Had Trayvon killed GZ, he would have a self defense claim that would stand up under duty to flee laws, not to mention stand your ground.
I'm not so sure. It takes a lot longer to kill a person by beating them to death than by shooting. One could argue (and these arguments have been made in Florida in stand-your-ground hearings before) that it would be excessive.
Here's one thing though, wouldn't GZ not qualify for stand-your-ground if the was breaking the law at the time, ala stalking or trespassing?
GZ had a gun. TM had reason to believe that if he stopped beating GZ, he would get shot, and it turns out he was right.
-
You must be new to my posts, I label everyone a douchebag that resorts to violence based off of their paranoia.
lol at you thinking that someone chasing you through your neighboorhood after you start running on a dark, rainy night might have ill-intentions towards you as "paranoia", especially since you stated earlier that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed he had a gun.
-
I think the moral of the story here is that if somebody chases you to your home you should just kill them first and ask questions later. If you don't like the answers to those questions, you can just make up your own story. It's not like the dead guy is going to dispute it.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
I haven't heard this before. Link?
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher (http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher)
I'm not defending GZ, but the affidavit doesn't say who started the "struggle". Says he confronted him, but that doesn't mean he touched him or even got within arms length.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
I haven't heard this before. Link?
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher (http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher)
I'm not defending GZ, but the affidavit doesn't say who started the "struggle". Says he confronted him, but that doesn't mean he touched him or even got within arms length.
He couldn't have gotten punched if he wasn't within arms length.
-
OK Unruly, let me get this straight. You're saying TM knew GZ was following him, asked GZ to stop following him, GZ didn't, so TM jumped GZ. At this point GZ has the right to pull out his gun and shoot TM because he is being attacked. TM stood his ground against a man following him because he felt threatened, but because TM stood his ground with his fists, that gives GZ the right to stand his ground with a gun?
If it's within your legal rights to provoke someone to protect themselves (while knowing you are carrying a gun) and then shoot them because of their reaction to you stalking them, then the law is mumped up.
This is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Your natural response to someone following you is "kick their ass"? That's mumped up.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I would expect that to be that natural response of anybody I chased home and then tried to apprehend.
I haven't heard this before. Link?
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher (http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-12/politics/31330086_1_affidavit-martin-case-police-dispatcher)
I'm not defending GZ, but the affidavit doesn't say who started the "struggle". Says he confronted him, but that doesn't mean he touched him or even got within arms length.
He couldn't have gotten punched if he wasn't within arms length.
For all we know, GZ was running from TM at the time. I'm sure this will all come out in the hearing.
-
You must be new to my posts, I label everyone a douchebag that resorts to violence based off of their paranoia.
lol at you thinking that someone chasing you through your neighboorhood after you start running on a dark, rainy night might have ill-intentions towards you as "paranoia", especially since you stated earlier that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed he had a gun.
You're missing the point here entirely. Who started the assault? Chasing / running/ following/ driving after is not assault. Whoever started the assault is the one acting on their paranoia and is in the wrong.
-
You must be new to my posts, I label everyone a douchebag that resorts to violence based off of their paranoia.
lol at you thinking that someone chasing you through your neighboorhood after you start running on a dark, rainy night might have ill-intentions towards you as "paranoia", especially since you stated earlier that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed he had a gun.
You're missing the point here entirely. Who started the assault? Chasing / running/ following/ driving after is not assault. Whoever started the assault is the one acting on their paranoia and is in the wrong.
This is laughable. You're trying to take an absolute statement (one you made up yourself) and apply it to this situation. Are you saying if someone chased you through your neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night, you are going assume they have good intentions up until the point that their hands/weapons come into physical contact with you?
-
For all we know, GZ was running from TM at the time. I'm sure this will all come out in the hearing.
It won't come out in the hearing, the witness who isn't on trial was shot and killed
-
I think the moral of the story here is that if somebody chases you to your home you should just kill them first and ask questions later. If you don't like the answers to those questions, you can just make up your own story. It's not like the dead guy is going to dispute it.
Pretty much. :thumbs:
-
You must be new to my posts, I label everyone a douchebag that resorts to violence based off of their paranoia.
lol at you thinking that someone chasing you through your neighboorhood after you start running on a dark, rainy night might have ill-intentions towards you as "paranoia", especially since you stated earlier that since GZ was chasing TM, TM should have assumed he had a gun.
You're missing the point here entirely. Who started the assault? Chasing / running/ following/ driving after is not assault. Whoever started the assault is the one acting on their paranoia and is in the wrong.
This is laughable. You're trying to take an absolute statement (one you made up yourself) and apply it to this situation. Are you saying if someone chased you through your neighboorhood on a dark, rainy night, you are going assume they have good intentions up until the point that their hands/weapons come into physical contact with you?
1. Assault is defined differently in different states - but typically it deals with imminent intention of doing harm. Pulling a weapon would suffice.
2. It's already been stated that this case represents 1% of when laws don't work - which I agree that happens - why is it hard to believe that 1% of the time, the guy following you could just be trying to return the wallet you dropped.
This entire debate reminds me of a study done several years ago where they had children play Grand Theft Auto at different age brackets to see how they played the game. It was surprising to see the kids roughly 7 & under play the video game in a completely non-violent manner. Driving around firetrucks/ambulances and generally being decent human beings. The older kids drove around killing prostitutes and were shocked to know that it was possible to drive around firetrucks and make $$ by putting out fires.
You're the type of guy that drives around choking out prostitutes - and shocked to see that people might have good intentions. I'm the guy that knows you like to choke out prostitutes, but also knows some people like to drive around with their fire trucks and put out fires - so I withhold judgement until I'm sure if I need to shoot you in the rough ridin' chest or not. So until it is evident exactly who initiated the assault, I will withhold judgement on who is legally responsible, but I will immediately judge both of them for being the type of guys that like to drive around & choke out prostitutes. I should emphasize though that enjoying this behavior is not illegal... the behavior itself is.
-
and LOL at you for thinking another thread was in any way related to this thread. If I wanted to talk about gun control in relation to this, I would have posted that video in this thread. Learn how bbs works, then come back.
-
Two responses, still no response to my actual question about if someone was chasing you through your neighboorhood in the dark if you would assume they have good intentions until they phsyically touch you, instead you give some Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) response about GTA and dropped wallets.
-
If GZ was giving CPR when the cops showed up does it make him look a lot better? I think so.
-
fwiw, I don't think GZ should be convicted of murder, just manslaughter.
-
fwiw, I don't think GZ should be convicted of murder, just manslaughter.
I think he should be convicted of causing HeizBalls emotional distress.
-
Two responses, still no response to my actual question about if someone was chasing you through your neighboorhood in the dark if you would assume they have good intentions until they phsyically touch you, instead you give some Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) response about GTA and dropped wallets.
Let me be more straight forward and highlight my answering your question along with an explaining my reasoning through a GTA story that I thought was relevant.
I'm the guy that knows you like to choke out prostitutes, but also knows some people like to drive around with their fire trucks and put out fires - so I withhold judgement until I'm sure if I need to shoot you in the rough ridin' chest or not.
To summarize... I would probably ask a guy why he was following me before I decided to kick his ass. If he began assault by brandishing a weapon, or physically touching me, I would then kick his ass.
-
fwiw, I don't think GZ should be convicted of murder, just manslaughter.
I think he should be convicted of causing HeizBalls emotional distress.
Do I seem distressed? That's unfortunate you've perceived that.
-
fwiw, I don't think GZ should be convicted of murder, just manslaughter.
I think he should be convicted of causing HeizBalls emotional distress.
Do I seem distressed? That's unfortunate you've perceived that.
I'm mostly sarcastic. Personally I could given an eff about laws or whatever, I just do what I want according to my own constitution of what's right and wrong. So I think it's dumb to try to convince others of whatever. Let dissenters dissent.
-
Two responses, still no response to my actual question about if someone was chasing you through your neighboorhood in the dark if you would assume they have good intentions until they phsyically touch you, instead you give some Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) response about GTA and dropped wallets.
Let me be more straight forward and highlight my answering your question along with an explaining my reasoning through a GTA story that I thought was relevant.
I'm the guy that knows you like to choke out prostitutes, but also knows some people like to drive around with their fire trucks and put out fires - so I withhold judgement until I'm sure if I need to shoot you in the rough ridin' chest or not.
To summarize... I would probably ask a guy why he was following me before I decided to kick his ass. If he began assault by brandishing a weapon, or physically touching me, I would then kick his ass.
Good luck with stopping, turning around, and asking "why are you chasing me?" when they catch up to you. You take your chance that the crazy guy has good intentions and is just waiting until he catches you to tell you that you dropped your wallet instead of yelling it at you while he chases you. No reasonable person chases someone around the neighboorhood in the dark without identifiying themselves. If someone is chasing me in the dark and catches up, I'm turning around swinging. If he yells out a reasonable answer as to why he was chasing me at any point, like "I'm neighboorhood watch", I'll stop. (It should be noted that no where in anything about the TM case has GZ said that anytime during the incident he identified himself as neighboorhood watch.)
-
I'm done with this. You're clearly trying to paint me as something I'm not. FTR, you've revealed yourself as someone that is no different than TM or GZ as you've illustrated your ability to cast judgements and assertions based off of your vague and unclear perceptions. I'll maintain that you shouldn't judge a person based off misconstrued sinister actions when they could be completely innocent in nature - something each party was guilty of. Maybe GZ was running up to ask him what TM was doing - you don't know - there has been no trial. At the end of the day, an innocent kid is dead. - It's sad - but innocent people die all the time. Where is the heartfelt sorrow & bickering/anger/outrage at the thousands of people that die every day? Why has this one become such a big deal?
-
Why has this one become such a big deal?
This one became a big deal because the local police and DA decided that GZ was innocent without even trying him. Had GZ been arrested and tried before the media outcry led to federal involvement, nobody would know anything about this case.
-
I'm done with this. You're clearly trying to paint me as something I'm not. FTR, you've revealed yourself as someone that is no different than TM or GZ as you've illustrated your ability to cast judgements and assertions based off of your vague and unclear perceptions. I'll maintain that you shouldn't judge a person based off misconstrued sinister actions when they could be completely innocent in nature - something each party was guilty of. Maybe GZ was running up to ask him what TM was doing - you don't know - there has been no trial. At the end of the day, an innocent kid is dead. - It's sad - but innocent people die all the time. Where is the heartfelt sorrow & bickering/anger/outrage at the thousands of people that die every day? Why has this one become such a big deal?
What do you think I'm trying to paint you as? I'm not trying to paint you as anything. What I am doing is attacking you for calling TM a douchebag for defending himself because he was being chased in the dark by someone who didn't identify themself and trying to put him in the same boat as the guy who had a 60+pound advantage and still felt the need to shoot him in the chest, eventhough there was enough separation between the two he got off a clean shot to the chest. I have no idea how you can say "I'm no different than TM" and mean that as an insult.
You keep defending GZ by saying we don't have the facts because their hasn't been a trial, but you keep damning TM...but hey, keep attacking me for passing judgement GZ, you clearly haven't on TM
-
I'm done with this. You're clearly trying to paint me as something I'm not. FTR, you've revealed yourself as someone that is no different than TM or GZ as you've illustrated your ability to cast judgements and assertions based off of your vague and unclear perceptions. I'll maintain that you shouldn't judge a person based off misconstrued sinister actions when they could be completely innocent in nature - something each party was guilty of. Maybe GZ was running up to ask him what TM was doing - you don't know - there has been no trial. At the end of the day, an innocent kid is dead. - It's sad - but innocent people die all the time. Where is the heartfelt sorrow & bickering/anger/outrage at the thousands of people that die every day? Why has this one become such a big deal?
What do you think I'm trying to paint you as? I'm not trying to paint you as anything. What I am doing is attacking you for calling TM a douchebag for defending himself because he was being chased in the dark by someone who didn't identify themself and trying to put him in the same boat as the guy who had a 60+pound advantage and still felt the need to shoot him in the chest, eventhough there was enough separation between the two he got off a clean shot to the chest. I have no idea how you can say "I'm no different than TM" and mean that as an insult.
You keep defending GZ by saying we don't have the facts because their hasn't been a trial, but you keep damning TM...but hey, keep attacking me for passing judgement GZ, you clearly haven't on TM
Well damn... I know I'd said I was done - but you sucked me back in. I suggest you're painting me as something because you won't let my opinion go and you're twisting what I say into crap no one would agree with. I have no clue what you're agenda is - but you've taken offense to my opinion that you're condemning someone before knowing any facts at all. FTR, you were attacking me long before I called TM a douchebag. Also, I'm not defending GZ - I'm just failing to persecute him -There is a tremendous difference. I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked". But seriously - you're taking the term douchebag too seriously... it's not a condemnation of their souls or painting them as evil. It's merely an observation; perhaps bonehead would be a better word?
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and may you live the rest of your life without reason to mistrust anyone.
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
The kid was 6'3", more like 180 pounds. He wasn't the little boy the media makes him out to be.
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
The kid was 6'3", more like 180 pounds. He wasn't the little boy the media makes him out to be.
Sorry, my 140-pound comment was wrong, he was 5'11", 158-pounds according to his autopsy...that changes everything, since he was 158 lbs 17-year old, not 140 lbs a 17-year old, then they are both equally responsible for the miscommunication that resulted in him being shot in the chest.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750 (http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750)
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
Forgive me for not making myself clear. Equal footing in that they both resorted to violence out of mistrust - not equal in physical stature. But if you do want to go down that path, the "140 pound 17 year old" kid seemed to be holding his own until the gun came out.
FWIW, My son knows it is wrong to racially profile and chase someone that appears to be minding their own business - just as he knows it is wrong to physically attack someone that has not physically attacked him. I have witnessed him engage in conversation with people attempting to bully him - and watched as he deflates their ignorance. He's also really good at pointing out hypocrites... something I'm trying to become better at myself.
-
And btw - the "you're just like TM" is not an insult... just an observation at how you jump to conclusions and immediately condemn someone without any understanding or perspective.
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
The kid was 6'3", more like 180 pounds. He wasn't the little boy the media makes him out to be.
Sorry, my 140-pound comment was wrong, he was 5'11", 158-pounds according to his autopsy...that changes everything, since he was 158 lbs 17-year old, not 140 lbs a 17-year old, then they are both equally responsible for the miscommunication that resulted in him being shot in the chest.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750 (http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750)
I had heard differently, thanks for the correction. Pretty impressive if he was able to beat up GZ at that size.
-
I've put them on equal footing in douchebag status because they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way to prevent someone from getting shot or their "ass kicked".
My point is that I keep attacking you because you continue to make comments like this. They are not on equal footing. One was a 200+ pound, 28-year old man who was carrying a gun, knew he was carrying a gun and started the confrontation. The other was a 17-year old, 140 pound, unarmed kid being followed in the dark by an adult who failed to identify who he was. Yet you make comments that they are on equal footing that they were two adults that failed to communicate in an effective way. I can't help but respond because you make such stupid comments like this one and "you're just like TM" and mean that as an insult.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend and no one ever chases your 17-year old son around the neighboorhood in the dark.
The kid was 6'3", more like 180 pounds. He wasn't the little boy the media makes him out to be.
Sorry, my 140-pound comment was wrong, he was 5'11", 158-pounds according to his autopsy...that changes everything, since he was 158 lbs 17-year old, not 140 lbs a 17-year old, then they are both equally responsible for the miscommunication that resulted in him being shot in the chest.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750 (http://www.tampabay.com/news/a-review-of-the-evidence-released-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/1230750)
I had heard differently, thanks for the correction. Pretty impressive if he was able to beat up GZ at that size.
If funny what adrenaline will do to a 17 year old kid when they are being chased in the dark by an unidentified adult. Of course, he must not have been kicking GZ's ass that bad if GZ was able to get his gun between the two of them and get off a shot to the heart.
-
And btw - the "you're just like TM" is not an insult... just an observation at how you jump to conclusions and immediately condemn someone without any understanding or perspective.
How dare that 17-year old not have any understanding or perspective while being chased in the dark by an unidentified adult.
BTW, we aren't that far off on alot of this, our only difference is the line at which you have the right to physically defend yourself from a percieved physical threat. I content that line is cross when being chased in the dark by someone who fails to identify themself or their purpose in chasing you. At that point, there is no burden on the individual being chased to make sure there isn't a lack of communication.
-
And btw - the "you're just like TM" is not an insult... just an observation at how you jump to conclusions and immediately condemn someone without any understanding or perspective.
How dare that 17-year old not have any understanding or perspective while being chased in the dark by an unidentified adult.
BTW, we aren't that far off on alot of this, our only difference is the line at which you have the right to physically defend yourself from a percieved physical threat. I content that line is cross when being chased in the dark by someone who fails to identify themself or their purpose in chasing you. At that point, there is no burden on the individual being chased to make sure there isn't a lack of communication.
You're right, we're not that far off. But here's the difference from where I see it. You're asserting that only 1 person is to blame in this - I'm stating they're both to blame for this. You can make the argument of how dare this kid not be able to defend himself just as easily as I can say how dare that man not be able to defend himself when he's getting his ass kicked.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
All I know is the NRA thinks this would never have happened if both people had guns. :lol: :facepalm: :jerk: :barf:
-
I don't think I'll ever try to kick someone's ass. I could probably talk my way out of most situations .
-
Also I don't think I would be very good at kicking someone's ass.
-
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
-
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
Maybe not a trial, but at least a hearing in front of a judge.
-
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
Maybe not a trial, but at least a hearing in front of a judge.
yeah, but I don't trust activist judges.
-
And btw - the "you're just like TM" is not an insult... just an observation at how you jump to conclusions and immediately condemn someone without any understanding or perspective.
How dare that 17-year old not have any understanding or perspective while being chased in the dark by an unidentified adult.
BTW, we aren't that far off on alot of this, our only difference is the line at which you have the right to physically defend yourself from a percieved physical threat. I content that line is cross when being chased in the dark by someone who fails to identify themself or their purpose in chasing you. At that point, there is no burden on the individual being chased to make sure there isn't a lack of communication.
You're right, we're not that far off. But here's the difference from where I see it. You're asserting that only 1 person is to blame in this - I'm stating they're both to blame for this. You can make the argument of how dare this kid not be able to defend himself just as easily as I can say how dare that man not be able to defend himself when he's getting his ass kicked.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
So you are saying that you think both are to blame but only TM deserves any punishment?
-
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
I agree. Nobody would know about or care about this case if the police had just done their job in the first place.
-
So you are saying that you think both are to blame but only TM deserves any punishment?
Punishment? How will punishment prevent something like this from happening in the future? How will it bring TM back? I'm saying, it's irritating that events like this turn into a witch hunt trial - when it's a clear reflection of the illness within society and anger & fear were to blame - something each person was guilty of. Understand when I say fear, I mean mistrust.
FTR, I think GZ deserves jail-time... but focusing solely on GZ & what he did wrong will not solve anything.
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
I agree. Nobody would know about or care about this case if the police had just done their job in the first place.
This should be the biggest issue - but it's not.
-
So you are saying that you think both are to blame but only TM deserves any punishment?
Punishment? How will punishment prevent something like this from happening in the future? How will it bring TM back? I'm saying, it's irritating that events like this turn into a witch hunt trial - when it's a clear reflection of the illness within society and anger & fear were to blame - something each person was guilty of. Understand when I say fear, I mean mistrust.
FTR, I think GZ deserves jail-time... but focusing solely on GZ & what he did wrong will not solve anything.
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
I agree. Nobody would know about or care about this case if the police had just done their job in the first place.
This should be the biggest issue - but it's not.
Again, I'm not defending GZ or the police, but the police may have done their job if he is found to have legally "stood his ground".
-
So you are saying that you think both are to blame but only TM deserves any punishment?
Punishment? How will punishment prevent something like this from happening in the future? How will it bring TM back? I'm saying, it's irritating that events like this turn into a witch hunt trial - when it's a clear reflection of the illness within society and anger & fear were to blame - something each person was guilty of. Understand when I say fear, I mean mistrust.
FTR, I think GZ deserves jail-time... but focusing solely on GZ & what he did wrong will not solve anything.
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
I agree. Nobody would know about or care about this case if the police had just done their job in the first place.
This should be the biggest issue - but it's not.
Again, I'm not defending GZ or the police, but the police may have done their job if he is found to have legally "stood his ground".
Do you really want the police making that determination?
-
So you are saying that you think both are to blame but only TM deserves any punishment?
Punishment? How will punishment prevent something like this from happening in the future? How will it bring TM back? I'm saying, it's irritating that events like this turn into a witch hunt trial - when it's a clear reflection of the illness within society and anger & fear were to blame - something each person was guilty of. Understand when I say fear, I mean mistrust.
FTR, I think GZ deserves jail-time... but focusing solely on GZ & what he did wrong will not solve anything.
If one person shoots and kills another person with a gun it should always go to trial. IMO
I agree. Nobody would know about or care about this case if the police had just done their job in the first place.
This should be the biggest issue - but it's not.
Again, I'm not defending GZ or the police, but the police may have done their job if he is found to have legally "stood his ground".
Do you really want the police making that determination?
yeah, maybe not trial but at least grand jury.
-
So if we give that GZ had the right to use his gun to defend himself, do we really think it was okay to shoot him in the chest for a killshot? I'm sure it all happened fast and all, but I would imagine that if he had told TM that he was going to shoot him, then TM would have stopped, or GZ could have at least shot him in the leg or arm or anywhere that he would have a chance of surviving. I dunno. I think its all pretty mumped up. If GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them are dead today. I don't think that is really debatable.
-
If GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them are dead today. I don't think that is really debatable.
Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole?
-
If GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them are dead today. I don't think that is really debatable.
Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole?
he would have just 3d printed a gun. can't control people.
-
I have witnessed him engage in conversation with people attempting to bully him - and watched as he deflates their ignorance. He's also really good at pointing out hypocrites... something I'm trying to become better at myself.
good call heinballz. that 17 year old was being chased by an adult male with a gun in the dark. once he was caught by the adult male with the gun that was chasing him, he should have just "engage(d) in conversation with people attempting to bully him - and watched as he deflates(d) their ignorance".
you probably expect women to just lay back and take it too i guess. or maybe they could also "engage in conversation" and "deflate the ignorance" of someone that is threatening physical acts on them. you should teach a self defense class with this stuff.
-
The great Fatty Fat Fat once said, "smile, you're being judged"
As a minority, rising above ignorance works better than fitting yourself into someones stereotype.
-
I bet heinzballz kid would have kicked zimmerman's ass before he could get his gun out.
-
If GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them are dead today. I don't think that is really debatable.
Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole?
Sure, I don't believe that TM would have beaten GZ to death or vice versa. Certainly there is a lower chance of death. To be clear, I didn't say if all guns were outlawed no one would ever be killed, I said if GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them would have died.
-
i mean really though, how absurdly naive of the kid that was being chased in the dark by a guy with a gun to attempt to fight back when the guy caught him. he should've just quoted a whitty bit of prose and then went along his way.
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
-
Sure, I don't believe that TM would have beaten GZ to death or vice versa. Certainly there is a lower chance of death. To be clear, I didn't say if all guns were outlawed no one would ever be killed, I said if GZ didn't have a gun, then neither of them would have died.
how deeply insightful. I read a study once that said if cars didn't exist, there would be no automotive fatalities.
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
he should have sat there and had his rights crap on?
-
I bet heinzballz kid would have kicked zimmerman's ass before he could get his gun out.
no way. heinballz kid is above physical acts. if some old dude was chasing heinballz jr in the night with a gun through an unfamiliar neighborhood. heinballz jr would stop, turn around and engage the assailant with whitty debate on the effects of libor and loan rates.
-
Welp, another mass shooting in College Station. Wonder how many he'd have gotten with a sabre?
-
I don't know what the hell happened and I don't side with either one of them since I have not tried to follow the details of this. I am pretty sure it didn't happen like this:
Guy with gun: <while chasing guy without gun, draws his gun and says> Stop, I have a gun.
Guy without gun: <turns around and runs up to guy with gun and starts beating the crap out of him>
Guy with gun: <takes at least one good blow to head (maybe several) and then shoots the guy without gun>
Note, I did love the pictures the media was using of the guy without gun. It looked like he was 11 or 12 years old and I was like, "How in the hell could <guy with gun> shoot a pre-teen?!?"
-
I bet heinzballz kid would have kicked zimmerman's ass before he could get his gun out.
no way. heinballz kid is above physical acts. if some old dude was chasing heinballz jr in the night with a gun through an unfamiliar neighborhood. heinballz jr would stop, turn around and engage the assailant with whitty debate on the effects of libor and loan rates.
or used a 3d printer to make his own gun and then blow zimmerman's rough ridin' head off.
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
so if i'm ever in a weird neighborhood at night and i notice some male possibly following me and then i speed up and i notice he speeds up and i cross streets and he crosses and then i see he has a gun and at this point, i still have some distance between us...your advice to me would be to stop and turn around and address the unknown man with a gun that is aggressively following me at night through a neighborhood that i am unfamiliar with? that's really your advice?
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
so if i'm ever in a weird neighborhood at night and i notice some male possibly following me and then i speed up and i notice he speeds up and i cross streets and he crosses and then i see he has a gun and at this point, i still have some distance between us...your advice to me would be to stop and turn around and address the unknown man with a gun that is aggressively following me at night through a neighborhood that i am unfamiliar with? that's really your advice?
I gave up on this thread a few pages back, but why do we think he ran? At some point he had to confront the guy with the gun in order to beat on him prior to getting shot. If he would have run and gotten shot in the back while running away, down a public street, the guy with a gun would be behind bars, wouldn't he?
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
he should have sat there and had his rights crap on?
Forgive me guys... I was way off on this. I didn't realize GZ was running around with his gun out just looking for black people to shoot. I figured the gun came out after TM started kicking his ass. I only assumed that when I heard TM was cutting through properties & hopping fences at the gated community... I didn't realize TM was calmly walking down the sidewalk when a crazed racist mexican came running up on him with his gun drawn telling him to "bite the curb or die mother rough rider!"
-
probably shouldn't have run? :dunno:
so if i'm ever in a weird neighborhood at night and i notice some male possibly following me and then i speed up and i notice he speeds up and i cross streets and he crosses and then i see he has a gun and at this point, i still have some distance between us...your advice to me would be to stop and turn around and address the unknown man with a gun that is aggressively following me at night through a neighborhood that i am unfamiliar with? that's really your advice?
I gave up on this thread a few pages back, but why do we think he ran? At some point he had to confront the guy with the gun in order to beat on him prior to getting shot. If he would have run and gotten shot in the back while running away, down a public street, the guy with a gun would be behind bars, wouldn't he?
ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his ear, Crump said.
ABC News
Trayvon Martin, 17, was fatally shot by... View Full Size
ABC News
Trayvon Martin, 17, was fatally shot by neighborhood watch leader George Zimmerman. Neighborhood-Watch Shooting: Girlfriend Speaks Watch Video
Trayvon Martin's Alleged Killer: 911 Calls Watch Video
Florida Teen Killed by Community-Watch Member Watch Video
"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."
Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."
The line went dead. Besides screams heard on 911 calls that night as Martin and Zimmerman scuffled, those were the last words he said.
Trayvon's phone logs, also obtained exclusively by ABC News, show the conversation occurred five minutes before police first arrived on the scene. Crump said the girl's identity was being withheld because "her parents are gravely concerned about her health and her safety." Her parents asked that only an attorney be allowed to ask her questions.
Martin's father, Tracey Martin, and mother, Sybrina Fulton, listened to the call, along with ABC News, ashen-faced.
"He knew he was being followed and tried to get away from the guy, and the guy still caught up with him," Tracey Martin said. "And that's the most disturbing part. He thought he had got away from the guy, and the guy backtracked for him."
The girl was so distraught after the killing that she spent a night in the hospital, the lawyer said.
"She was really traumatized over this. They were dating. ... It's a situation where to know you were the last person to talk to the young man who was one of the most special persons in the world to you," Crump said.
The lawyer said he would give the details of the phone call to the federal investigation.
"We're going to turn this over to the Justice Department because the family does not trust the Sanford Police Department to have anything to do with the investigation," said Crump.
Zimmerman killed Martin as Martin walked back to his father's fiance's home after stepping out to buy snacks during the NBA All-Star Game. After weeks of relentless pressure, the Sanford Police Department at last released emergency and nonemergency calls placed during the attack.
"These a**holes always get away," Zimmerman said in a call to a nonemergency number.
Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"
Zimmerman: "Yeah."
Dispatcher: "We don't need you to do that."
An altercation soon ensued. A few moments later a torrent of 911 calls flooded in and Martin was killed by a single bullet. Zimmerman claimed self-defense and has yet to be arrested, stoking outrage and claims of prejudice against the police department.
"When George Zimmerman is arrested, tried and convicted I will get a little rest," Tracey Martin said.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-phone/story?id=15959017
-
Good thing GZ appointed himself to the police force. He will get treated like a cop in the pen.
-
rick daris, don't you know that was just the liberal media trying to drum up support for something?
-
Seems like the person stalking someone was probably in the wrong. Also, carrying a gun around with them as part of their neighborhood watch duties is probably not a great decision. Probably also should've listened to the dispatcher who said to knock it the eff off.
All of those seem much stupider/more dangerous than confronting someone following you.
-
so just remember guys...if it's dark and you are in an unfamiliar neighborhood and some guy 80 pounds bigger than you are is chasing after you...don't run.
-
No - turn around and kick his ass.
-
also, don't serve eviction papers on anyone's house
-
also, don't serve eviction papers on anyone's house
Yeah, no kidding. Judge not lest ye be judged.
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
-
Well that guy is clearly a Euro Trash Racist SOB
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
How so?
-
Well that guy is clearly a Euro Trash Racist SOB
Are Canadians generally considered "Euro Trash"
-
Yeah Canada is more Euro than most Countries in europe
-
Yeah Canada is more Euro than most Countries in europe
Wow, all this time I've wondered why he crops his videos chest up. Apparently it's to hide his skin tight jeans and punk sleeveless shirts.
-
No - turn around and kick his ass.
hey look everyone, the gun nut is on zimmerman's side.
-
If a YouTube video has a title that starts with "the truth about...", well, I am just hooked.
-
I do feel like he had some valid points on the media and the portrayals of gz and tm
-
Bill Whittle - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebu6Yvzs4Ls
-
Well that guy is clearly a Euro Trash Racist SOB
Can you call someone white trash and racist in the same sentence? :sdeek:
-
hey look everyone, the gun nut is on zimmerman's side.
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe.
...
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
How so?
His second bullet point on Trayvon was that he was probably a drug dealer.
-
hey look everyone, the gun nut is on zimmerman's side.
Who was attacked by who would be the indicator of who I would side with obviously... There's just so many conflicting stories out there, I don't know what to believe.
Following. Not assaulting. As soon as he lays hands on you, by all means kick his ass. But following? Call the damn cops or a friend or get somewhere safe.
...
ok?
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
How so?
His second bullet point on Trayvon was that he was probably a drug dealer.
He was kicked out of school for pot and had people contacting him on social media looking for drugs... Not much of a stretch to assume he was a drug dealer.
-
Did you stop watching the video after bullet point #2? Because I'm pretty sure he covered that in bullet point #3.
-
So shoot him. it's not much of a stretch to think Zimmerman knew he was dealing because he also Facebook stalking him.
-
Also, people ask me where to eat in DC. So I'm yelp.
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
How so?
His second bullet point on Trayvon was that he was probably a drug dealer.
He was kicked out of school for pot and had people contacting him on social media looking for drugs... Not much of a stretch to assume he was a drug dealer.
It's a bigger stretch to claim he's a dealer than it is to say Zimmerman had racial motivations.
I don't believe he did, but still.
-
captain fat-ass (Zimmerman) states in the final moments of the call to police that "I don't don't know where he is" and the call ends. Sometime after, the two end up in a altercation. Do people really believe that captain fat-ass could chase down this kid? The lack of critical-thinking skills being displayed by a mass is unbelievable, but then again, no it is not.
-
zimmerman couldn't find him because TM was stalking GZ.
-
So shoot him. it's not much of a stretch to think Zimmerman knew he was dealing because he also Facebook stalking him.
No, you shoot him after he attacks you, slams your head into the ground, then tells you: "you're gonna die tonight [redacted]."
If someone where to say that to you, I would want you to have the legal right to shoot them, as long as you didn't initiate the altercation.
I don't believe TZ initiated the confrontation, I believe he was only guilty of following him (which isn't a crime) because he suspected him of breaking into houses. It really doesn't matter why he had those suspicions; if he were incorrect in those beliefs, TM probably wouldn't have jumped him and he would have said: "eff off, my house is right there." And the whole thing probably would have ended there.
-
Bump
http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc
Well he seems a little biased.
How so?
His second bullet point on Trayvon was that he was probably a drug dealer.
He was kicked out of school for pot and had people contacting him on social media looking for drugs... Not much of a stretch to assume he was a drug dealer.
It's a bigger stretch to claim he's a dealer than it is to say Zimmerman had racial motivations.
I don't believe he did, but still.
Who the hell said Zimmerman had racial motivations? Do you even know who is arguing for who in this deal?
-
captain fat-ass (Zimmerman) states in the final moments of the call to police that "I don't don't know where he is" and the call ends. Sometime after, the two end up in a altercation. Do people really believe that captain fat-ass could chase down this kid? The lack of critical-thinking skills being displayed by a mass is unbelievable, but then again, no it is not.
the "gigantic fatass" angle seemed to be a very effective strategy, given that people don't seem/want to realize he told the police he weighed 194 lbs the night this all went down.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
-
If I'm reading the TM/GZ threads correctly, it's : 1) okay to attack (kill?) someone that's following you, but 2) its not okay to retaliate or kill someone who is trying to kill you.
Weird rules
-
If I'm reading the TM/GZ threads correctly, it's : 1) okay to attack (kill?) someone that's following you, but 2) its not okay to retaliate or kill someone who is trying to kill you.
Weird rules
:facepalm:
-
Bill Whittle - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebu6Yvzs4Ls
Holy crap. If the stuff reported herein is true, then the media snowjob was even worse than I thought. A whole lot worse. Evidence in droves that GZ was anything but a racist, and almost as much evidence that TM was seriously messed up. Couldn't believe that part about the skittles and "ice tea" ingredients, backed up by the web postings and autopsy report.
-
captain fat-ass (Zimmerman) states in the final moments of the call to police that "I don't don't know where he is" and the call ends. Sometime after, the two end up in a altercation. Do people really believe that captain fat-ass could chase down this kid? The lack of critical-thinking skills being displayed by a mass is unbelievable, but then again, no it is not.
the "gigantic fatass" angle seemed to be a very effective strategy, given that people don't seem/want to realize he told the police he weighed 194 lbs the night this all went down.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
George Zimmerman - 28yo
5'9 - 194lb
Trayvon Martin - 17yo
6'0+ - 160lb
Your critical-thinking skills are on display...
-
Bill Whittle - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebu6Yvzs4Ls
Holy crap. If the stuff reported herein is true, then the media snowjob was even worse than I thought. A whole lot worse. Evidence in droves that GZ was anything but a racist, and almost as much evidence that TM was seriously messed up. Couldn't believe that part about the skittles and "ice tea" ingredients, backed up by the web postings and autopsy report.
"It's called journalism..." :love:
-
https://twitter.com/MiamiHerald/status/597817725134704640
:Ugh:
-
Who could have seen that coming?
-
He is basically living in the "it's coming right at me!" Southpark sketch.
-
He is basically living in the "it's coming right at me!" Southpark sketch.
Looks like someone shot him in the face. Probably self defense, but he's going to live so I don't think you can use that defense.
-
DNR link.
-
Link just says "involved".
-
Link just says "involved".
Yeah, that's journalism for you.
-
Road rage incident. Can you imagine a pissed off George Zimmerman running up in your rear view screaming.
-
Lake Mary police are at the scene of a shooting near Trailhead Park where George Zimmerman was shot at, officials said.
Police Chief Steve Bracknell said Zimmerman did not shoot, but the other person involved shot at him.
Police said the shooting happened at the entrance to the park.
http://www.kansas.com/site-services/newsletters/afternoon/article20679156.html (http://www.kansas.com/site-services/newsletters/afternoon/article20679156.html)
-
Apparently, he was waiving a gun at a guy in another car... again. Really seems mumped up to get away with killing another person and then go around waiving a gun at people every time you have a disagreement.
-
Apparently, he was waiving a gun at a guy in another car... again. Really seems mumped up to get away with killing another person and then go around waiving a gun at people every time you have a disagreement.
:D...... :D
-
Sounds like the other guy tried to waive his ass from life. Takes more than a bullet to the face to keep GZ down, though.
-
Apparently, he was waiving a gun at a guy in another car... again. Really seems mumped up to get away with killing another person and then go around waiving a gun at people every time you have a disagreement.
:D...... :D
Well at least I'm consistent
-
Apparently, he was waiving a gun at a guy in another car... again. Really seems mumped up to get away with killing another person and then go around waiving a gun at people every time you have a disagreement.
:D...... :D
Well at least I'm consistent
Must be that thin air up there.
-
I don't believe this story. The GZ I know would only wave a gun at an unarmed kid, or a woman.
-
I don't believe this story. The GZ I know would only wave a gun at an unarmed kid, or a woman.
GZ just can't catch a break
-
I don't believe this story. The GZ I know would only wave a gun at an unarmed kid, or a woman.
We don't know many details yet. Maybe it was a woman he just assumed was unarmed. :dunno:
-
Never mind, it was this guy.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2015%2F05%2F11%2F21%2F2890E6EB00000578-3077175-image-a-144_1431376105121.jpg&hash=579f64f33aec6538530fbb4fe255d1a2683d36b0)
It's the same guy George waved a gun at 8 months ago. George also didn't get shot in the face. Glass from the windshield apparently just cut his face and either he or a witness must have thought he was shot.
-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/shooter-was-fixated-on-george-zimmerman-police-report-says/ar-BBjXHiZ
-
are you saying that this was an IRL #blessed'n?
-
are you saying that this was an IRL #blessed'n?
Yes. Someone is obsessed with him.
-
#TheStruggleIsReal
-
OMG! The comments! This has to be ERII trolling, right?
George is a hero and should be regarded as such. I will drink a trayvon martini in his honor.
-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/shooter-was-fixated-on-george-zimmerman-police-report-says/ar-BBjXHiZ
Zimmerman recently moved away from Florida but had returned to the Orlando area for Mother's Day.
That. Is. Awesome. :love: The dude loves his mother, and if loving your mother is a crime, then guilty as charged.
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
A make believe gun that isn't real. Did you read it?
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
A make believe gun that isn't real. Did you read it?
Where did it say that?
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
A make believe gun that isn't real. Did you read it?
Where did it say that?
Like, they never said they found a gun on him. This crazy person said he pointed a gun at him at a previous time. BRB. Let me read it again.
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
A make believe gun that isn't real. Did you read it?
Where did it say that?
Like, they never said they found a gun on him. This crazy person said he pointed a gun at him at a previous time. BRB. Let me read it again.
If I had a list of people most likely to wave a gun at someone GZ would be on it
-
This guy sounds worse than Zimmerman, and that's saying a lot:
Zimmerman told officers he had been driving in the Orlando suburb of Lake Mary last week when Apperson got behind his truck and yelled, "You remember me you fat mother f-----?" according to the report.
Apperson then yelled at Zimmerman, "You owe me your life. The only reason I didn't press charges on you is because I wanted to kill you myself," Zimmerman told detectives, according to the report.
Zimmerman and Apperson had a previous road-rage encounter last September, when Apperson alleged that Zimmerman had threatened him. Apperson decided not to pursue charges, and police officers were unable to move forward without a car tag identified or witnesses.
Two days later, Apperson called police to report that Zimmerman's truck was parked near the disability-benefits office where he worked. Zimmerman told police officers he had an appointment in the same office park, and no charges were filed.[/quote]
-
I can't understand why Apperson is being charged with anything. He said George pointed a gun at him.
A make believe gun that isn't real. Did you read it?
Where did it say that?
Like, they never said they found a gun on him. This crazy person said he pointed a gun at him at a previous time. BRB. Let me read it again.
If I had a list of people most likely to wave a gun at someone GZ would be on it
Very true.
-
Not surprising that a crazy stalker would work for the government in some capacity, especially a disability benefits dept.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCV0ezTs.jpg&hash=4430d0d210a6b96ba2959f5e67754a4f2e7635df)
-
Honestly, the law should allow for this dispute to be resolved in a good old fashioned duel. Both participants should have to use the same model of pistol that Aaron Burr used.
-
Honestly, the law should allow for this dispute to be resolved in a good old fashioned duel. Both participants should have to use the same model of pistol that Aaron Burr used.
Neither one of these guys has the balls. GZ might if you could convince him he was going to duel a woman
-
Not surprising that a crazy stalker would work for the government in some capacity, especially a disability benefits dept.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCV0ezTs.jpg&hash=4430d0d210a6b96ba2959f5e67754a4f2e7635df)
Favorite food is biscuits and mustard.
-
ugly people are always doing stuff like this.
-
ugly people are always doing stuff like this.
:lol:
-
https://twitter.com/chicagotribune/status/633652072219570176
This guy just doesn't know how to take it easy.
-
Onionesque title
-
Apparently he sold one of the paintings for $100,000. :facepalm:
-
Well, they aren't available at Walmart anymore.
supply and demand, I guess.
-
You wanna hear a conspiracy theory I have? You remember when he saved that person after a wreck right after the final verdict? I think it was staged by a daredevil. :Wha: It was a PR move.
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
It's the hand he's been dealt. Do you blame him?
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
It's the hand he's been dealt. Do you blame him?
Not even a little bit
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
It's the hand he's been dealt. Do you blame him?
I don't consider chasing down a kid and killing him as a hand being dealt to you.
-
Yeah, Zim was the dealer in that game.
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
It's the hand he's been dealt. Do you blame him?
I don't consider chasing down a kid and killing him as a hand being dealt to you.
Not that part. He is a dumb, unattractive psycho who is somehow a hero amongst a certain demographic. As dumb as he is, he has figured out that demo is stupid and easily fooled.
-
Yeah, you gotta pay the bills somehow. Might as well take advantage of ppl while doing it. His life isn't really going anywhere from here, so why not?
-
I would attend a George Zimmerman/Kasey Anthony wedding. Would be a great time, I imagine.
-
I love Kasey Anthony
-
I love Kasey Anthony
I'm a huge Amanda Knox fan.
-
GZ is playing the gun nut/racist crowd for money better than even Rush could.
It's the hand he's been dealt. Do you blame him?
I don't consider chasing down a kid and killing him as a hand being dealt to you.
Not that part. He is a dumb, unattractive psycho who is somehow a hero amongst a certain demographic. As dumb as he is, he has figured out that demo is stupid and easily fooled.
made me think this was Trump thread ("certain demographic" = USA)
-
https://twitter.com/chicagotribune/status/633652072219570176
This guy just doesn't know how to take it easy.
great video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=17&v=cSVuh_8-VQs
-
https://twitter.com/chicagotribune/status/633652072219570176
This guy just doesn't know how to take it easy.
great video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=17&v=cSVuh_8-VQs
compared attack on confederate flag to actions of Stalin, Hitler, and ISIS
-
We have our share of low life scummers tucked into crannies and gullies in Renoland, but nothing like this guy. Profiting from the fame of killing a kid is dog barf sick. Sicker is the turd buying this blood art. Could his buddy ban a gay islarmer from his gun range?
-
Yeah, you gotta pay the bills somehow. Might as well take advantage of ppl while doing it. His life isn't really going anywhere from here, so why not?
Are you saying that's his philosophy, or yours?
-
If I was an unredeemable lowlife piece of crap that found some super easy way of making money off of other unredeemable lowlife pieces of crap, I would certainly be doing it.
I mean, if I was Zim, I would have already opened my own gallery/studio and be taking apprentices and teaching classes and stuff.
-
https://twitter.com/chicagotribune/status/633652072219570176
This guy just doesn't know how to take it easy.
great video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=17&v=cSVuh_8-VQs
say what you want about zimmerman, but he never lets the haters get to him. He just does his own thing. In a way, we can all learn from zimmerman
-
Yeah, you gotta pay the bills somehow. Might as well take advantage of ppl while doing it. His life isn't really going anywhere from here, so why not?
Are you saying that's his philosophy, or yours?
His.