RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea...

RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MrBukani -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:00:12 AM)
I am giving you plenty of room to recant me and I did so on purpose. Some things you have to figure out yourself why. Why I said George Z. was in order to protect him actually. It has been a pretty big debate here wether we should use full names and pics. Its to protect the accused. But the media over here becomes just like yours catching every scoop in order to sell copies. Is that what we want really?

DarqueMirror -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:01:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Can you ehh.....show us who these "witnesses"are? Can you ehh....follow the story on your own? One's been on the Today Show twice in the last 4 days. Check their website. I'm not capable of hiding witnesses on you.

Kirata -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:01:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror Oh and using all caps and calling someone a liar repeatedly just makes you look childish. Ya think that would qualilfy as frothing? K.

DarqueMirror -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:02:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror Oh and using all caps and calling someone a liar repeatedly just makes you look childish. Ya think that would qualilfy as frothing? K. I don't know....judges? [8\|] Judges say yes.

Owner59 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:04:10 AM)
Nope....it`s been pointed out that the police were basically powerless to arrest Zimmerman......which is the main flaw in the "stand your ground" law.... It basically makes any ground,anywhere, a place where a gun toter can shoot someone.......and the police can`t do much unless there`s a witness or video tape showing the victim was completely innocent. This law WILL be rewritten or tossed outright, over coming months/years.

tj444 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:07:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Witness testimony does NOT confirm Zimmerman's claims that he was not the agressor. But they do lend credibility to his claim of self-defense as he was on the ground with Martin standing over him. Since the accusers have to prove his guilt, but cannot, we can only guy by what he said and what they saw. What he said was Martin was the aggressor. What they saw was him on the ground and Martin standing. These witnesses would not have seen the whole incident, they would have come in after it started when they hear the yelling and cries for help.. This from another article.. "Martin, meanwhile, was on the phone with a 16-year-old female friend, who told ABC News that she urged Martin to run. She said she heard some pushing, and then the line went dead. "He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," the girl told ABC News. "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" http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-shooter-couldnt-stop-crying-shooting/story?id=15997075&page=2 So from this person who was on the phone to Martin at the time,.. Martin lost Zimmerman but Zimmerman continued to hunt for him until he found him.. Could not Martin not also have acted in self-defense due to being hunted down by Zimmerman? Imo, it was Zimmerman that started the fight as Martin was on the phone and trying to get away from the nutbar.. jmo, of course

JstAnotherSub -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:07:37 AM)
It seems that any time a crime is committed by one race, against another race, the race card gets played. Perhaps, one day, we will move past this, but I do not expect it in my lifetime. Having personally known 2 murder victims, I remember, when my friends son was shot wile riding his bicycle to his moms house, we were "glad" that it was a white dude that did it. Took that element out of it. When my aunt was beaten to death by 2 16 yo punks, we were "glad" that one was white and one was black. Took the racial element out of it. There was plenty of other shit to be throw during the trials. I do not even want to imagine the fun the press would have had if it had been one race killing another. The press got so much shit wrong, from the killers ages and names, to the victims ages, jobs, hometowns, and other things I just can not recall at this time. A kid is dead. We need to know what happened, not because of his race, or the race of the one who shot him, but because it is the right thing to get all the facts. Sadly, all the race cards being thrown will hinder this, if not make it impossible. Add the crazy bassturds offering rewards, and we have a fucking circus that eclipses the greatest show on earth! What fun!! We are so far from being blind towards race, I wonder if we will ever cross the finish line. I do know that using race as the main topic of a young mans death will not help. Nor will black folks offering rewards for help in "forcing the government to do their job, or we will do it for them". Forget about such things as "Black Miss America", "Where Black Folks meet.com", and "United Negro College Fund". Black folks want to end racism and want everything to be equal for all. I am going to now go watch the "White Miss America pageant", find me a good man on "Where White Folks meet.com", and donate to the "United White Folks College Fund". Don't wait up for me. I may be a while.

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:11:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I will repeat. Winning is NOT agression. If you jump me, I was not the agressor. If you end up a broken mess, I was still not the agressor, you were. (by the way, there's no such thing as a 'lacerated skull'.) Glad you see things Zimmerman's way finally. He won, yet he wasn't the aggressor (by his own statements and witness testimony). So he was defending himself. Case dismissed. Nice try at strawmanning. Is your logic that incompetent or are you just being childish?

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:13:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam To quote you. How do you know. You weren't there. You have a nice timeline for things that you didn't see. Once again (since you seemed to have ignored it the first dozen times); I don't need to have seen it. Zimmerman's account of the incident is his account. As he is the "accused" I don't have to prove his version true. His accusers have to prove he's guilty of a crime. Period. You don't need to have seen it but keep insisting it is impossible he is guilty of wrongdoing. Got any lottery numbers for me this weekend Miss Cleo?

tj444 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:15:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I wear a hoodie.. joggers wear hoodies.. sheesh.. i never thought I looked like a criminal cuz of wearing a hoodie.. [8\|] Oh yeah? Try wearing sunglasses and that hoodie and walk into a bank and see what they say. Also: hoodies have been banned from lots of schools....wonder why.... I have done that.. did that yesterday as a matter of fact.. but sunglasses are not part of what Martin was wearing, from what I have read.. Maybe I need to put bright lettering on my hoodie declaring that "I am not a criminal, I am wearing a hoodie to stay warm". they are banned from schools? man, this country really has gone mad.. no mini-skirts and now no hoodies? [:o]

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:16:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I wear a hoodie.. joggers wear hoodies.. sheesh.. i never thought I looked like a criminal cuz of wearing a hoodie.. [8\|] Oh yeah? Try wearing sunglasses and that hoodie and walk into a bank and see what they say. Also: hoodies have been banned from lots of schools....wonder why.... The reason hoodies and sunglasses are not allowed in banks is because of the video recording systems installed by homeland security. It messes with the facial recognition software they use to hunt for the whereabouts of known terrorists. As ex military, you should know that.

Kirata -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:20:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 It basically makes any ground,anywhere, a place where a gun toter can shoot someone.......and the police can`t do much unless there`s a witness or video tape showing the victim was completely innocent. That's simply not true, and the relevant statute has already been quoted. 776.012 - A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force... The use of deadly force is protected only when there is a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. The protection turns on the word "reasonable." The problematic cases are typically gang fights and the like, i.e., situations where either side can legitimately claim such a "reasonable belief," one might in some cases say a certainty, so the survivor walks. Zimmerman, on the other hand, is going to have a tough row to hoe. K.

Kirata -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:24:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 no mini-skirts and now no hoodies? [:o] And no hugging! K.

Owner59 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:27:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 It basically makes any ground,anywhere, a place where a gun toter can shoot someone.......and the police can`t do much unless there`s a witness or video tape showing the victim was completely innocent. That's simply not true, and the relevant statute has already been quoted. 776.012 - A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force... The use of deadly force is protected only when there is a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. The protection turns on the word "reasonable." The problematic cases are typically gang fights and the like, i.e., situations where either side can legitimately claim such a "reasonable belief," one might in some cases say a certainty, so the survivor walks. Zimmerman, on the other hand, is going to have a tough row to hoe. K. We`ll see......won`t we? The law will be amended......I owe you a beer if it doesn`t.

Kirata -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:34:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 The law will be amended......I owe you a beer if it doesn`t. It won't be amended much, I hope. Any chance of you making that a bourbon? K.

Owner59 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 10:38:45 AM)
Maker`s Mark.....You buy the 2nd round..... General reply....... This....is what a broken nose looks like.... [image]http://www.moviespad.com/photos/geraldo-rivera-broken-nose-cb2ff.jpg[/image]

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 1:38:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Zimmerman claims self-defense. This is IRRELEVANT, as the place to make a motion to dismiss for self-defense is during the arraignment for Manslaughter. This is kinda tricky because according to the WIKI ARTICLE (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful. At least it was tricky at the time of the incident. To compound the befuddlement: 776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: [SNIP] (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless: (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; Perhaps the police were right to claim the ambiguity in the Law prevented them from making an arrest. IDK if this was mentioned earlier in this Thread. Just sayin, not excusing. Please Cite FLORIDA CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW which gives the police the powers of a Judge and Jury in deciding law and fact. Wikipedia is not an acceptable source for FLORIDA CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW. You can find the actual LAW easy enough, so if you're right, finding the citation to support your claim should be trivial.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 1:49:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 It basically makes any ground,anywhere, a place where a gun toter can shoot someone.......and the police can`t do much unless there`s a witness or video tape showing the victim was completely innocent. That's simply not true, and the relevant statute has already been quoted. 776.012 - A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force... The use of deadly force is protected only when there is a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. The protection turns on the word "reasonable." The problematic cases are typically gang fights and the like, i.e., situations where either side can legitimately claim such a "reasonable belief," one might in some cases say a certainty, so the survivor walks. Zimmerman, on the other hand, is going to have a tough row to hoe. K. Trayvon Martin's use of force against the guy who was stalking him at night was lawful, so Zimmerman doesn't enjoy .043 protection. AND to make that claim anyway, he needs to FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS or make that claim to a jury if the motion is denied. That way, the Judge can decide the Law in the case, and rule appropriately, or a Jury can decide fact. Since Zimmerman can't even get over that hurdle, the additional hurdles are impossible. Would a reasonable and prudent person gotten out of their car, armed, against professional advice, and followed Martin, and would a reasonable and prudent person fear for their safety at night when being followed by a potentially armed stranger? NO. A reasonable and prudent person would have stayed in their place of safety, knowing that Zimmerman COULD BE dangerous ( otherwise, why tell 9-1-1 you thought he was all doped up? ) YES. A reasonable and prudent person would fear for their safety when being chased or followed by a total stranger, not wearing a uniform and without lawful authority. So, it's LEGAL for Trayvon Martin, being followed at night by a stranger, in fear for his safety to defend himself, and it's not legal for Zimmerman to go hunting black people. Understand now? Of course, all this is secondary to the fact that if Zimmerman wants to make these claims in his defense, he NEEDS TO do it before a Judge.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 1:53:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Nope....it`s been pointed out that the police were basically powerless to arrest Zimmerman......which is the main flaw in the "stand your ground" law.... Anyone saying that needs to have their credentials checked, because they're nitwits. It means the Sanford PD engaged in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. That's why the Sanford PD fed Zimmerman to the alligators. So the Feds can't turn him into their star witness.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 1:55:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Why are you lying? The RECORD SHOWS that the Fire Department released Zimmerman without any significant treatment, and I can't believe a Sanford Fire Department paramedic would STITCH ANYONE UP at a crime scene, when you know, the hospital is so good at that stuff. And since Zimmerman's injuries DID NOT REQUIRE EVEN A VISIT TO THE ER, YOU'RE ALSO LYING WHEN YOU SAY HE HAD A BROKEN NOSE. Since when was a broken nose counted as "significant treatment?" It's not even reason enough to leave a football field mid-game. It's minor at best. Oh and using all caps and calling someone a liar repeatedly just makes you look childish. SAYING SOMEONE HAS AN INJURY WHICH YOU CANNOT DOCUMENT, AND IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION IS ABSENT, IS LYING. SAYING SOMEONE HAS AN INJURY WHICH YOU CANNOT DOCUMENT, AND IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION IS ABSENT, IS LYING. SAYING SOMEONE HAS AN INJURY WHICH YOU CANNOT DOCUMENT, AND IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION IS ABSENT, IS LYING. SAYING SOMEONE HAS AN INJURY WHICH YOU CANNOT DOCUMENT, AND IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION IS ABSENT, IS LYING. SAYING SOMEONE HAS AN INJURY WHICH YOU CANNOT DOCUMENT, AND IN THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION IS ABSENT, IS LYING.

Page: << < prev 22 23 24 [25] 26 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875