Author Topic: George Zimmerman is a piece of crap  (Read 224911 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #525 on: June 28, 2013, 11:33:10 AM »
It's clear Zimmerman was the victim here. :party:


Yeah, the dead kid should probably get jail time here.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45287
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #526 on: June 28, 2013, 11:48:08 AM »
...  a man stalked and shot an innocent and unarmed citizen on the street like it was rough ridin' pheasant season.

If you don't want it to be about race, why ignore all the facts that make this case actually interesting? There is Zimm's bloody nose/bashed head, witnesses saying that Martin was the agressor at the time he was shot, and Zimm's unrefuted story that Martin said he was going to use the gun to kill Zimm.  To me, this brings up a very intriguing question as to whether a gun-toting fool can still claim self defense if he confronts someone, is subdued, and then by the use of his own gun, feels his life is in danger.  There is also an interesting angle about the accused killing the person that could contradict the claims of threats to the accused's life.  All of that is more intriguing than another racist american and pd .

Your post is a non-sequitur.  You quoted me mentioning nothing about race and then insinuated that I want to talk about race, this confuses me. There is nothing about this that is remotely interesting.  If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked. Getting beaten up, under no circumstance, does not afford you the right to shoot and kill an unarmed human. The case could be made better if Zimmerman was minding his own business or directly protecting his property or family.  He was doing none of this. He was a nosy hothead who may or not profiled someone, either way he bit off more than he could chew and his response was to shoot when his fat ass could have been in his living room eating. A confrontation didn't find him, he found himself a confrontation.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13745
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #527 on: June 28, 2013, 11:52:54 AM »
A co-worker said the testimony from the prosecution's star witness is worth a listen.

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #528 on: June 28, 2013, 11:57:06 AM »
...  a man stalked and shot an innocent and unarmed citizen on the street like it was rough ridin' pheasant season.

If you don't want it to be about race, why ignore all the facts that make this case actually interesting? There is Zimm's bloody nose/bashed head, witnesses saying that Martin was the agressor at the time he was shot, and Zimm's unrefuted story that Martin said he was going to use the gun to kill Zimm.  To me, this brings up a very intriguing question as to whether a gun-toting fool can still claim self defense if he confronts someone, is subdued, and then by the use of his own gun, feels his life is in danger.  There is also an interesting angle about the accused killing the person that could contradict the claims of threats to the accused's life.  All of that is more intriguing than another racist american and pd .

Your post is a non-sequitur.  You quoted me mentioning nothing about race and then insinuated that I want to talk about race, this confuses me. There is nothing about this that is remotely interesting.  If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked. Getting beaten up, under no circumstance, does not afford you the right to shoot and kill an unarmed human. The case could be made better if Zimmerman was minding his own business or directly protecting his property or family.  He was doing none of this. He was a nosy hothead who may or not profiled someone, either way he bit off more than he could chew and his response was to shoot when his fat ass could have been in his living room eating. A confrontation didn't find him, he found himself a confrontation.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."




Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45287
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #529 on: June 28, 2013, 11:58:14 AM »
so can we get any of you guys to go on record that TM prolly shouldn't have started beating a man for standing in a courtyard?  seems you guys are trying to paint him as an innocent here.

You're making assumptions here. IMO Trayvon was completely justified in beating the crap out of Zimmerman.  You don't want to get your ass kicked?  Mind your own rough ridin' business. I've never been beaten up by a stranger I've chased down because I don't chase strangers down.

I actually like to fight and it seems with his history,  Zimmerman does too. I bet Zimmerman persued Martin because he thought he could kick his skinny ass. I bet he wouldn't have been so willing to chase me at 6'3" 250 down. I don't think he intended to use his gun at all but he started the confrontation and just couldn't take the ass beating he deserved for harassing a stranger.

You make a lot of assumptions after scolding me for doing the same.

And...

Difference is I made very likely assumptions based on Zimmerman's very public past to illustrate he is a hothead and very likely a cowardly bully. You made assumptions to paint what may or may not have happened that night in a light that suits your argument and then attemped to state that your assumption was the only logical one to make. I'm going to assume that the differences in assumptions either will be lost on you or you won't care.

Offline jmlynch1

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2781
  • stay together for the kids
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #530 on: June 28, 2013, 11:58:57 AM »
...  a man stalked and shot an innocent and unarmed citizen on the street like it was rough ridin' pheasant season.

If you don't want it to be about race, why ignore all the facts that make this case actually interesting? There is Zimm's bloody nose/bashed head, witnesses saying that Martin was the agressor at the time he was shot, and Zimm's unrefuted story that Martin said he was going to use the gun to kill Zimm.  To me, this brings up a very intriguing question as to whether a gun-toting fool can still claim self defense if he confronts someone, is subdued, and then by the use of his own gun, feels his life is in danger.  There is also an interesting angle about the accused killing the person that could contradict the claims of threats to the accused's life.  All of that is more intriguing than another racist american and pd .

Your post is a non-sequitur.  You quoted me mentioning nothing about race and then insinuated that I want to talk about race, this confuses me. There is nothing about this that is remotely interesting.  If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked. Getting beaten up, under no circumstance, does not afford you the right to shoot and kill an unarmed human. The case could be made better if Zimmerman was minding his own business or directly protecting his property or family.  He was doing none of this. He was a nosy hothead who may or not profiled someone, either way he bit off more than he could chew and his response was to shoot when his fat ass could have been in his living room eating. A confrontation didn't find him, he found himself a confrontation.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."
At one point TM was running away, but yeah he is totally the aggressor. Also, that makes this incredibly sad.

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23383
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #531 on: June 28, 2013, 12:10:17 PM »
i haven't and won't read this whole thread, but are there people seriously saying that it was ok to shoot and kill the kid because he landed a couple of punches on the guy that was stalking him at night for no reason?

Offline SkinnyBenny

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16728
  • good time rock-n-roll plastic banana FM type
    • View Profile
Trayvon Martin
« Reply #532 on: June 28, 2013, 12:14:34 PM »
MakeItRain is doing some serious face-cratering of the dumbasses in this thread.
"walking around mhk and crying in the rain because of love lost is the absolute purest and best thing in the world.  i hope i fall in love during the next few weeks and get my heart broken and it starts raining just to experience it one last time."   --Dlew12

Offline Daddy Claxton

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #533 on: June 28, 2013, 12:35:20 PM »
i haven't and won't read this whole thread, but are there people seriously saying that it was ok to shoot and kill the kid because he landed a couple of punches on the guy that was stalking him at night for no reason?
I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think it's 'ok'. Zimm is a pos and i've said that. But I do think this is a really interesting case because Zimm is still going to walk. That result is going to be reached for many reasons, and race isn't the only one.

Offline EllRobersonisInnocent

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 7690
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #534 on: June 28, 2013, 12:37:52 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

Offline yoman

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #535 on: June 28, 2013, 12:38:02 PM »
MakeItRain is doing some serious face-cratering of the dumbasses in this thread.

MIR is surprisingly good at doing that. I noticed it in the big floodaggy fanatics thread this year. Also, I love how people act like Zimmerman couldn't at least shoot the kid in an incapacitating way (arm or something) to distract him so he could get away. Nope. Definitely had to kill him. Either that or he would continue to get his ass beat, which he may or may not have deserved. Definitely his only two options.

Offline Brock Landers

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7167
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #536 on: June 28, 2013, 12:40:32 PM »
i haven't and won't read this whole thread, but are there people seriously saying that it was ok to shoot and kill the kid because he landed a couple of punches on the guy that was stalking him at night for no reason?

Yes, but they are racist dumbasses and/or people who have gotten their asses beat from starting crap.

Offline yoman

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #537 on: June 28, 2013, 12:40:45 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

Acquittal is hugely different from innocent. Most people in this thread assumed he would get acquitted, at least that is the vibe I had.

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7732
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #538 on: June 28, 2013, 12:41:22 PM »
If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."

I think it was foolish for GZ to follow TM, but you seem to be saying that if someone is following you, it's OK to physically assault them to the point of beating them bloody. At this point, there is no proof that GZ ever touched, or even got in the face of TM. GZ was on the phone with the police, so it's obvious his only goal was to keep TM in sight until the police arrived.

Offline EllRobersonisInnocent

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 7690
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #539 on: June 28, 2013, 12:44:34 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

Acquittal is hugely different from innocent. Most people in this thread assumed he would get acquitted, at least that is the vibe I had.

If I ever said he was "innocent" it was meant w/ sarcasm. I'm very much in favor of him being acquitted of the charges based on the evidence.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #540 on: June 28, 2013, 12:44:58 PM »
Is anyone else looking forward to the riots when Zimm gets acquitted?  :drool:

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #541 on: June 28, 2013, 12:46:51 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?


It's Florida.  They let Casey Anthony off even though the trunk of her car smelled like a dead body and had the daughter's DNA in it. 

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #542 on: June 28, 2013, 12:48:08 PM »
If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."

I think it was foolish for GZ to follow TM, but you seem to be saying that if someone is following you, it's OK to physically assault them to the point of beating them bloody. At this point, there is no proof that GZ ever touched, or even got in the face of TM. GZ was on the phone with the police, so it's obvious his only goal was to keep TM in sight until the police arrived.


There is evidence that Zimmerman killed Martin, however. 

Offline yoman

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #543 on: June 28, 2013, 12:48:28 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

Acquittal is hugely different from innocent. Most people in this thread assumed he would get acquitted, at least that is the vibe I had.

If I ever said he was "innocent" it was meant w/ sarcasm. I'm very much in favor of him being acquitted of the charges based on the evidence.

Then I guess I don't know what your point is. I think most people a day or two into the trial thought he would be acquitted. I don't think they agreed with the decision, but assumed it was the most likely outcome. That's been my views throughout this process anyway.

Offline Tobias

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29233
  • hypoclique lieutenant
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #544 on: June 28, 2013, 12:48:47 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

depends on if it has to be 100% of gE jurors or like 95%

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 54815
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #545 on: June 28, 2013, 12:51:19 PM »
GZ was on the phone with the police, so it's obvious his only goal was to keep TM in sight until the police arrived.

it's obvious

Online steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 86749
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #546 on: June 28, 2013, 12:52:21 PM »
Is anyone else looking forward to the riots when Zimm gets acquitted?  :drool:

no, and you are a shitty person if you are

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 54815
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #547 on: June 28, 2013, 12:52:44 PM »
So after being presented all the evidence and the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, will we still considered "dumbasses"?

yes

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #548 on: June 28, 2013, 12:53:44 PM »
Is anyone else looking forward to the riots when Zimm gets acquitted?  :drool:

no, and you are a shitty person if you are

It's not like people rioted when OJ Simpson was acquitted.  We were all just  :sdeek:

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45287
    • View Profile
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #549 on: June 28, 2013, 12:54:11 PM »
If you make the choice to pursue and confront a stranger on the street you run the risk of getting your ass kicked.

I feel like people who don't think Zimmerman started this fight are the people who think they can do or say whatever they want to people without getting their asses kicked. In this case its particularly ironic because these same people are okay with shooting an unarmed person. "I can shoot you but you can't punch me."

I think it was foolish for GZ to follow TM, but you seem to be saying that if someone is following you, it's OK to physically assault them to the point of beating them bloody. At this point, there is no proof that GZ ever touched, or even got in the face of TM. GZ was on the phone with the police, so it's obvious his only goal was to keep TM in sight until the police arrived.

Yes, I think following someone close enough for a fight to happen at night with no one else around is grounds for getting your ass kicked. There's a reason why none of us have ever done the same.  If Martin did just spin around and just started pounding Zimmerman (that didn't happen), it is logical to assume that Martin felt unsafe because this large man was tailing him. If Zimmerman asked Martin what he was doing there, that is even more provocation for a fight. I work in an industry where I have to train 18-22 year olds how to deal with unfamiliar faces, if Zimmerman couldn't do that without invoking violence he should have stayed in his truck or better yet in his house.