If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Think a pack of Skittles looks like a gun? If you're holding a gun, probably   (newsinfo.nd.edu) divider line 1323
    More: Interesting, University of Notre Dame, Journal of Experimental Psychology  
•       •       •

22820 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Mar 2012 at 4:17 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1323 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-23 03:00:30 PM

9beers: At least I cite facts in addition to some speculations that try to fill in the unknown.


While continuing to cling onto the parts you want to believe while throwing away the parts which conflict with your preconceived notions about Martin and Zimmerman.

Honestly, who are you kidding at this point?
 
2012-03-23 03:00:57 PM

9beers: Mike Chewbacca: Aldon: 9beers: Aldon: 9beers: I think its pretty obvious that you're speculating.

We are all speculating, but there are a few facts.

Only Zimmerman had a deadly weapon, and even in the best case for the Zimmerman defenders Martin attacked Zimmerman with his bare hands, confirming he DID NOT have a deadly weapon. So at some point Zimmerman knew he had a deadly weapon and Martin did not (if Martin attacked him).

If both Zimmerman and Martin are sane there is only one scenario I can see would exonerate Zimmerman; if there was a struggle for control of the gun.

Wait, so now it can only be self defense if both people are armed with the same weapon? The hell are you talking about?


No, it can only be self defense worthy on deadly force if you have a reasonable belief your life is in danger. I define deadly force as something you think would probably kill someone (like a bullet shot from a gun)

I don't want people to justify deadly force if they get punched, do you? If you have a gun and the other person is sane, all you would have to do is show the gun to end any fist fight, there would be no need to kill the other person. I can see a few select scenarios where you might be justified to use deadly force if someone attacked you with their bare hands (expert fighter, someone big enough comparable to you that they could kill you with their bare hands, someone who has threatened your life before, someone insane), this story seems to have none of the elements necessary to justify deadly force.

If they struggled for the gun that is Zimmerman's only valid defense in my opinion.

And honestly, even that's very weak. You don't get to hunt down a kid and then lose a fist fight with him and then claim "self defense" when you are forced to shoot him because you hunted down a kid and lost a fist fight to him.

Oh so now he hunted him down. Keep on derping.


He did hunt him down. He even admits that he was following the kid, and the kid started running and he chased after the kid. I'm not speculating. I'm using George Zimmerman's own words on his 911 call.

s3.documentcloud.org
 
2012-03-23 03:02:30 PM
So in other words in the best case for Zimmerman I think his is at least civilly at fault and should loose all the money he has to Martin's parents.

Twenty-eight and just moved out of his parents' house. I suspect that would be a less than satisfying judgment.
 
2012-03-23 03:03:24 PM

9beers:

Your second sentence is accurate in and of itself, although I will remind you that if *Zimmerman* was the aggressor in the confrontation, *Martin* had the right, according to Florida law, to use force, including deadly force, to subdue Zimmerman.

What's your point, that in a matter of seconds, Zimmerman could have gained control of the situation and didn't need to shoot? I think it's pretty obvious that you don't go from being on the ground getting your ass kicked to standing on your feet pointing a gun at somebody in a few seconds. It probably took Zimmerman's fat ass a couple minutes to collect himself and get up after the shooting.


You think it's obvious, but *neither of us knows for sure.* And, I repeat, neither of us knows for sure whether Zimmerman was the aggressor; I repeat this because if he was, it changes the entire scenario and puts the Stand Your Ground law on *Martin's* side. Instead of jumping to conclusions--conclusions that are only obvious to some of us, apparently--why don't let's arrest Zimmerman for voluntary manslaughter, using as probable cause 1) his 911 call in which he says he is pursuing Martin on foot, 2) the cell phone logs that indicate that Martin was talking to his girlfriend immediately before the confrontation took place, and 3) Ms. Cutcher's assertions that it must have been Martin she overheard screaming, and have Zimmerman prove, in public, to a judge, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he was acting in legitimate self defense when he pulled the trigger of his pistol, in accordance with the law of the State of Florida?
 
2012-03-23 03:04:19 PM

Aldon: Mike Chewbacca: If they struggled for the gun that is Zimmerman's only valid defense in my opinion.

And honestly, even that's very weak. You don't get to hunt down a kid and then lose a fist fight with him and then claim "self defense" when you are forced to shoot him because you hunted down a kid and lost a fist fight to him.

Well if they did struggle for the gun and Martin was shot, Zimmerman probably didn't violate any criminal statutes. On the other hand civilly I think it is pretty obvious that but for Zimmerman chasing Martin in a car and getting out to confront him, no one would have gotten hurt or died. I think Martin holds no responsibility for simply being a black kid walking from the store and looking 'suspicious'.

So in other words in the best case for Zimmerman I think his is at least civilly at fault and should loose all the money he has to Martin's parents.


I agree. I think he won't go down for murder because no one can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he intended to murder Trayvon Martin, but he'll probably get some jail time for manslaughter or something like that, and then the family will sue the pants off him. I wouldn't be sad if he got shanked in prison, too. I wouldn't be happy, per se, but I wouldn't be sad, either.
 
2012-03-23 03:07:33 PM

tirob: 9beers:

Your second sentence is accurate in and of itself, although I will remind you that if *Zimmerman* was the aggressor in the confrontation, *Martin* had the right, according to Florida law, to use force, including deadly force, to subdue Zimmerman.

What's your point, that in a matter of seconds, Zimmerman could have gained control of the situation and didn't need to shoot? I think it's pretty obvious that you don't go from being on the ground getting your ass kicked to standing on your feet pointing a gun at somebody in a few seconds. It probably took Zimmerman's fat ass a couple minutes to collect himself and get up after the shooting.

You think it's obvious, but *neither of us knows for sure.* And, I repeat, neither of us knows for sure whether Zimmerman was the aggressor; I repeat this because if he was, it changes the entire scenario and puts the Stand Your Ground law on *Martin's* side. Instead of jumping to conclusions--conclusions that are only obvious to some of us, apparently--why don't let's arrest Zimmerman for voluntary manslaughter, using as probable cause 1) his 911 call in which he says he is pursuing Martin on foot, 2) the cell phone logs that indicate that Martin was talking to his girlfriend immediately before the confrontation took place, and 3) Ms. Cutcher's assertions that it must have been Martin she overheard screaming, and have Zimmerman prove, in public, to a judge, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he was acting in legitimate self defense when he pulled the trigger of his pistol, in accordance with the law of the State of Florida?


It gets in the way of his white-knighting of Zimmerman while pretending to be the impartial observer who think we should wait for the facts in while in actuality he made up his mind about what happened a long time ago.
 
2012-03-23 03:10:46 PM

Facetious_Speciest: tirob

/caucasian

It is very hard to be Caucasian these days. Everyone thinks you are Armenian! But I tell Ilham, be proud Baijani! You know? Is nice.


I'm a Laz. Not to be confused with a Lazbian.

Aldon: tirob: CSB: When *I* was seventeen, I was driving around in my neighborhood; a buddy of mine was in the car with me. Another car--not a police car--pulled alongside of me and a passenger in it flashed a card, indicated that he was a cop, and told me to pull over. My snap conclusion was that the man in the other car was *not* a cop, and I hightailed it out of there. If the driver of the other car had tried to cut me off, I am sure I would have rammed him; if he had *succeeded* in cutting me off, I would have run away or fought depending on the circumstances.

/caucasian

In that case you both had deadly weapons (cars). And you both knew it.


My point was that when I was Martin's age, I did not automatically believe that everyone who said they were acting under color of law was telling the truth.
 
2012-03-23 03:11:55 PM
Okay this is hypothetical:

Say ya live in Sanford and you're a seedy looking, older fat fark, wearing a dirty, smelly, trench coat and you start protectively following a ten year old little girl (who you don't know) at night, through the apartment complex where you both have residences (to, ya know . . . make sure she gets where she's goin' safely. . . cause you've always considered yourself kind of "a special uncle" . . . to ALL little girls).

Little girl starts running, so you speed up, so ya don't "lose track of her".

Little girl gets scared and hides on a porch - while frantically calling her friend (where she was spending the night - before running over to her house to get a DVD her friend and her wanted to watch) telling her about being followed by a creepy stranger.

You (dirty, smelly, trench coat wearing, seedy old fat fark and guardian "special uncle" angel - to ALL little girls everywhere) see her there and helpfully lope over.

Ya unintentionally block the exit from the porch by fatly leaning over and leeringly (from the little girl's point of view) asking her in a concerned fashion, "Watcha doin' there little girl?"

And THEN - the feisty little girl promptly sprays you right in the eyes - with her tiny little can of pepper spray.

You are now blinded - so you can't see to flee - as well as terrified - cause you figure if this little sweetie is packin' pepper spray - she might very well ALSO be packin' an uzi for all you know (cause you're blinded, in pain and freakin' - and not a particularly bright, seedy old fat fark to begin with) . . .

Ya hate to do it - especially considering how "fond" ya are of ALL little girls - but self-defense is self-defense - so you pull out your Glock and start blindly shooting away.

A bullet hits the little girl and kills her.

There are no witnesses other than you.

So what I'm wanting to know is:

When the police arrive - are you (dirty, smelly, trench-coat wearing, seedy old fat fark) in the clear?????

You've obviously been injured and are even STILL BLINDED!

And right before ya got pepper-sprayed - you DID see a suspicious "lump" in her pocket - turned out to be her doll - but ya had no way of knowin' THAT before ya were temporarily blinded.

And you were only being a responsible, concerned citizen and making sure a little girl got where she was going safely.

So are you good to go in Sanford?????

Pats on the back all around????
Wrap it all up and everybody's outta there in 10 minutes?

Then (just following routine police procedure in Florida "self-defense" cases) the little girl's body is "officially" picked up, transported and thrown on a slab in the city morgue - where she remains for three days (till an underpaid morgue attendant happens to see the little girl's photo on a handmade "Missing" flyer stapled to a telephone pole and calls the phone number on the flyer for the reward).

During the resulting media frenzy it is discovered that "you" (dirty, smelly trench-coat wearing, seedy old fat fark) have previously had restraining orders placed on you (due to some unfortunate "misunderstandings" - regarding your protective habit of following little girls - to make sure they get where they're going safely) as well as other "items" on a police record showing questionable behavior on your part.

But no actual arrests or jail time.

And whatever the little girl was screaming into the phone to her friend right before she died - doesn't count; cause her friend knows her and therefore whatever the friend says about the phone conversation is biased and hearsay - plus the friend's a little girl anyway.

So are you still "okay" and free to frolic in Sanford, Florida?

Just wonderin'. . .
 
2012-03-23 03:12:25 PM

The_Sponge: What part of

[snip]

...don't you understand?


None. You're the one that fails to understand it. You are equating what happened to a sudden gun grab by the state. Only an irrational asshole would think that.
 
2012-03-23 03:20:22 PM
I think that we can all agree that Zimmerman's actions were questionable, and that the shooting of an innocent black kid (only guilty of "walking while black") by a white civilian should be thoroughly investigated. And part of our outrage is that the cops decided not to investigate this likely because the dead kid was black.
 
2012-03-23 03:21:58 PM

Mrtraveler01: 9beers: At least I cite facts in addition to some speculations that try to fill in the unknown.

While continuing to cling onto the parts you want to believe while throwing away the parts which conflict with your preconceived notions about Martin and Zimmerman.

Honestly, who are you kidding at this point?


I'm starting to suspect him and Chu are mods chumming for page-hits because I can't believe people this dense would survive to adulthood IRL.
 
2012-03-23 03:31:56 PM

amiable: Mrtraveler01: 9beers: At least I cite facts in addition to some speculations that try to fill in the unknown.

While continuing to cling onto the parts you want to believe while throwing away the parts which conflict with your preconceived notions about Martin and Zimmerman.

Honestly, who are you kidding at this point?

I'm starting to suspect him and Chu are mods chumming for page-hits because I can't believe people this dense would survive to adulthood IRL.


I dunno. I think 9Beers is for real. He's called Martin a thug numerous times solely based on the accounts of one eyewitness.

He's made up his own mind of what he thinks about Martin a long time ago. Don't let him fool you.
 
2012-03-23 03:33:41 PM

9beers: Mike Chewbacca: Aldon: 9beers: Aldon: 9beers: I think its pretty obvious that you're speculating.

We are all speculating, but there are a few facts.

Only Zimmerman had a deadly weapon, and even in the best case for the Zimmerman defenders Martin attacked Zimmerman with his bare hands, confirming he DID NOT have a deadly weapon. So at some point Zimmerman knew he had a deadly weapon and Martin did not (if Martin attacked him).

If both Zimmerman and Martin are sane there is only one scenario I can see would exonerate Zimmerman; if there was a struggle for control of the gun.

Wait, so now it can only be self defense if both people are armed with the same weapon? The hell are you talking about?


No, it can only be self defense worthy on deadly force if you have a reasonable belief your life is in danger. I define deadly force as something you think would probably kill someone (like a bullet shot from a gun)

I don't want people to justify deadly force if they get punched, do you? If you have a gun and the other person is sane, all you would have to do is show the gun to end any fist fight, there would be no need to kill the other person. I can see a few select scenarios where you might be justified to use deadly force if someone attacked you with their bare hands (expert fighter, someone big enough comparable to you that they could kill you with their bare hands, someone who has threatened your life before, someone insane), this story seems to have none of the elements necessary to justify deadly force.

If they struggled for the gun that is Zimmerman's only valid defense in my opinion.

And honestly, even that's very weak. You don't get to hunt down a kid and then lose a fist fight with him and then claim "self defense" when you are forced to shoot him because you hunted down a kid and lost a fist fight to him.

Oh so now he hunted him down. Keep on derping.


Yes, Zimmerman hunted him down Martin. What do you think he was doing when he following him down the street.

9beers I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again you're a racist sack of crap. Your 300 or so posts in this thread prove it.
 
2012-03-23 03:36:09 PM

borg: 9beers: Mike Chewbacca: Aldon: 9beers: Aldon: 9beers: I think its pretty obvious that you're speculating.

We are all speculating, but there are a few facts.

Only Zimmerman had a deadly weapon, and even in the best case for the Zimmerman defenders Martin attacked Zimmerman with his bare hands, confirming he DID NOT have a deadly weapon. So at some point Zimmerman knew he had a deadly weapon and Martin did not (if Martin attacked him).

If both Zimmerman and Martin are sane there is only one scenario I can see would exonerate Zimmerman; if there was a struggle for control of the gun.

Wait, so now it can only be self defense if both people are armed with the same weapon? The hell are you talking about?


No, it can only be self defense worthy on deadly force if you have a reasonable belief your life is in danger. I define deadly force as something you think would probably kill someone (like a bullet shot from a gun)

I don't want people to justify deadly force if they get punched, do you? If you have a gun and the other person is sane, all you would have to do is show the gun to end any fist fight, there would be no need to kill the other person. I can see a few select scenarios where you might be justified to use deadly force if someone attacked you with their bare hands (expert fighter, someone big enough comparable to you that they could kill you with their bare hands, someone who has threatened your life before, someone insane), this story seems to have none of the elements necessary to justify deadly force.

If they struggled for the gun that is Zimmerman's only valid defense in my opinion.

And honestly, even that's very weak. You don't get to hunt down a kid and then lose a fist fight with him and then claim "self defense" when you are forced to shoot him because you hunted down a kid and lost a fist fight to him.

Oh so now he hunted him down. Keep on derping.

Yes, Zimmerman hunted him down Martin. What do you think he was doing when he following him ...


I notice that 9beers fled the thread once I posted the text from Zimmerman's 911 call showing Z chasing Trayvon after the kid ran.
 
2012-03-23 03:40:22 PM
...a white mestizo civilian...

Leave the devil some work.
 
2012-03-23 03:47:52 PM

Aldon: I don't want people to justify deadly force if they get punched, do you?


What if it's, like, Chuck Norris, and he's on PCP?

If you have a gun and the other person is sane

Dangerous assumption to make, especially in Florida.
 
2012-03-23 04:07:55 PM

Brainsick: The_Sponge: Brainsick: States' rights?


States don't have the right to go against the Bill of Rights.

Yet they have the right to pass laws that allow this (new window)to happen; what an interesting world you must live in...

/you can't have your cake and shoot it too


Don't worry, when you are old and feeble you will have the right to call the police if attacked.
 
2012-03-23 04:10:36 PM

Facetious_Speciest: So in other words in the best case for Zimmerman I think his is at least civilly at fault and should loose all the money he has to Martin's parents.

Twenty-eight and just moved out of his parents' house. I suspect that would be a less than satisfying judgment.


Martin's parents can have all of Zimmerman's trophies and Super Bowl rings attached and sold.
 
2012-03-23 04:15:30 PM
And when you pack an Apache Helicopter, everything looks like an RPG.
 
2012-03-23 04:21:38 PM

sprawl15: None. You're the one that fails to understand it. You are equating what happened to a sudden gun grab by the state. Only an irrational asshole would think that.



No, I was merely pointing out that gun grabs have happened, even though people on Fark claim that they never happen.

Plus, it's very amusing that you're the one accusing me of being childish, and yet you're the one throwing out lame insults.
 
2012-03-23 04:43:35 PM

The_Sponge: No, I was merely pointing out that gun grabs have happened


All you 'pointed out' is that you don't research your own assertions before waving them around like a flag. Well, I take that back. You also pointed out that you really don't take criticism well. "The law was passed in 1989, not 2000" "OMG YOU LOVE STEALING GUNS".

The_Sponge: Plus, it's very amusing that you're the one accusing me of being childish, and yet you're the one throwing out lame insults.


I really couldn't care less if I hurt your feelings. People like you - ignorant and assertive - do more to hurt the pro-gun argument than they do to help it.
 
2012-03-23 05:19:31 PM

sprawl15: I really couldn't care less if I hurt your feelings. People like you - ignorant and assertive - do more to hurt the pro-gun argument than they do to help it.



I don't give a f*ck, it just says more about you than it does about me, that you can't debate without posting an insult. Oh...and it was definitely a bonus when you went full tough guy and said "you're barking up the wrong tree".

People like are the one who are hurting the pro-gun argument because you're more than willing to compromise your rights after they have already been infringed upon, and you fail to realize that when governments (state and federal) pass gun control laws, they'll keep doing it....and you need to draw a line somewhere. And for the record, I was in the California State Assembly Chamber when they passed ANOTHER gun control law that was in response to Columbine....less than a week after that tragedy too place. To actually see elected officials take our rights away in person is something I'll never forget.
 
2012-03-23 05:29:55 PM

ChuDogg: None of these conditions applied to Martin. At any point during the full minute that he was on top of Zimmerman punching him he was 1)Not under a risk of injury or death and 2) He could have fled the scene.


You're repeatedly claimed that Zimmerman never instigated anything, didn't start it, that ZImmerman was in fear for his life and had no way to avoid the situation. The kid jumped him, and was going to beat him to death for no reason, he had no choice but to shoot an unarmed kid.

You are just as dishonest as 9beers.

The 911 call the shooter makes shows that he instigated the situation. He was the only one that was armed. He didn't have to go pick a fight from this kid. The shooter himself says that the kid ran away. But just letting the kid go - oh, no, he couldn't have that. "These assholes, they always get away". But not this time. This time he chased one down and shot him.

And you think that's fine. You consider that acceptable. Would you want random people in your neighborhood doing that? Or is it only OK because he shot a black kid, so why the fark should you care?
 
2012-03-23 05:43:51 PM

JuggleGeek: "These assholes, they always get away".


See, there is your mistake. ChuDogg has concluded through his thorough analysis that Zimmerman's response to Martin running was, "awww shucks they always get away". Seriously, if you can't see that "These assholes, they always get away" and "farking punks" actually means, "awww shucks they always get away", well then, good sir, obviously, something is seriously wrong with your logical-thinky-mathingy.
 
2012-03-23 05:45:56 PM

borg: 9beers I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again you're a racist sack of crap.


I think it goes beyond that. 9beers outright admitted that the Florida SYG law allows you to murder anyone you want, claim "self defense" and as long as the police can't prove you're lying, they can't even arrest you. He doesn't just defend this law, he celebrates it.

On top of that, he screams at anyone who disagrees with him, and makes violent threads to those who say things he doesn't like.

He's been saying for days that people should look at the evidence and think for themselves. I've examined the evidence in this thread and I think 9beers is a sick and dangerous individual.
 
2012-03-23 05:46:51 PM

ImpendingCynic: On top of that, he screams at anyone who disagrees with him, and makes violent threats to those who say things he doesn't like.


Argh, FTFM.
 
2012-03-23 05:58:13 PM
If there were any people recording the incident, they've almost certainly erased it by now. Any recording would show how Zimmerman got a bloody nose, and if that happened because Martin laid so much as a finger on him, the angry mob would riot and burn the witnesses and their cameras for making the heroic martyr Trayvon look even the tiniest bit aggressive.
 
2012-03-23 06:02:09 PM

Tatterdemalian: If there were any people recording the incident, they've almost certainly erased it by now. Any recording would show how Zimmerman got a bloody nose, and if that happened because Martin laid so much as a finger on him, the angry mob would riot and burn the witnesses and their cameras for making the heroic martyr Trayvon look even the tiniest bit aggressive.


If that's true, then how is George Zimmerman still alive?
 
2012-03-23 06:02:30 PM

ChuDogg: So he stopped, made arrangements to meet the police


That's an outright lie. Learning from 9beers as you go?

He didn't make arrangements to meet the police. The dispatcher tried to get him to do that, but he was intent on following the kid, so he told the dispatcher to call him when they go there. He couldn't follow the kid and wait for the police, so he told them to call them.

Claiming that he "made arrangements to meet the police" is a lie.

ChuDogg: The proper response is to call the police


And the proper response to seeing a black kid in your neighorhood is to start running after them, then shoot them dead? You're such an asshole.

All of that stuff about how the kid was hiding and jumped out and started a fight, that's stuff the shooter made up, because he knows damn well that he chased the kid down. He even said on the 911 call that he was following him, and the kid was running.

A reasonable person isn't going to believe the kid ran away, got away, then circled around so he could hide in someones backyard between this maniac and his car and attack that guy. That's an extremely implausible story.

ChuDogg: He did the right thing,


Yes, killing an unarmed kid who had the audacity to buy Skittles, that sounds like the right thing.

ChuDogg: 4chan is currently hacking his facebook. Apparently Martin was a drug dealer named "Slim" and other interesting tidbits.


Ah, 4chan. If we can't trust 4chan, who can we trust? I must admit, I'm not surprised to learn you're one of them.

ChuDogg: He was being followed in full compliance with the law. There is no statute anywhere in the country that suggests you can attack somebody simply for being followed.


Lets say a woman is walking down the street when a man she doesn't know pulls up next to her, staring, talking on his phone. She starts walking faster down the street, he follows in his car. She turns and runs between houses, he gets out of the car and starts running after her, chases her down, corners her. Are you saying she shouldn't feel threatened and that if she were to spray him with mace or shoot him, that she should go to jail, because he did nothing wrong? What happens if just as the guy runs up behind her, she goes around a corner and there is a cop there? Do you think the cop is going to let the guy just keep chasing her? Or is he going to bust that guy for assault or attempted rape or something? Do you think the fact that the guy chasing her had a loaded weapon would work in his favor when the cop questioned him?

Does your answer change based on whether the woman is black or white? Would the color of the man chasing her matter?
 
2012-03-23 06:03:42 PM

tirob: You think it's obvious, but *neither of us knows for sure


I've said time and time and time and time again that we can't be sure. Really, I'm getting tired of saying it.

What we do know for sure is that Zimmerman claimed self defense meaning that the burden of proof falls on the state to prove otherwise. Florida law also prohibits Zimmerman from being arrested unless there's evidence to dispute his version of the events.

I have no idea how anybody can not understand that by now.
 
2012-03-23 06:10:32 PM

tirob: And, I repeat, neither of us knows for sure whether Zimmerman was the aggressor;


That 911 call Zimmerman made shows that he's the aggressor. He says during that call that the kid is running. He says during that call that he's following. The dispatcher tries to talk him into not following the kid - which obviously he ignored.

His "these assholes always get away" stuff on the phone, and then following the kid who was trying to run away, make it clear that he's the aggressor.
 
2012-03-23 06:12:13 PM

JuggleGeek: That's an outright lie. Learning from 9beers as you go?


You're just being an immature little kid at this point. I haven't lied about a goddamn thing and you you know it. You're just pissed off because you want Zimmerman to be guilty but can't provide any evidence to prove it. Go join the angry mob, the love speculation and accusations just like you do.
 
2012-03-23 06:13:07 PM

Mike Chewbacca: Tatterdemalian: If there were any people recording the incident, they've almost certainly erased it by now. Any recording would show how Zimmerman got a bloody nose, and if that happened because Martin laid so much as a finger on him, the angry mob would riot and burn the witnesses and their cameras for making the heroic martyr Trayvon look even the tiniest bit aggressive.

If that's true, then how is George Zimmerman still alive?


Police protection. You don't think he's been kept hidden so reporters can't interview him, do you? Especially since he hasn't been arrested or charged, as the cable news networks keep reminding us.
 
2012-03-23 06:14:09 PM

ChuDogg: He might have mistook the skittles for a gun, but I'll bet he was pretty sure about the fist that was connecting to his dome while he begged for his life.


You keep making this claim that the kid was beating him to death, that the kid beat him for over a minute, etc. Shouldn't he have been sent to the hospital? After all, according to you, the kid beat the crap out of him, he was about to die, he was begging for his life....
 
2012-03-23 06:16:11 PM

JuggleGeek: You keep making this claim that the kid was beating him to death, that the kid beat him for over a minute, etc. Shouldn't he have been sent to the hospital? After all, according to you, the kid beat the crap out of him, he was about to die, he was begging for his life....


So Zimmerman wasn't being beaten? So now your ignorant ass knows more than a farking eyewitness? fark you dude, you're a moron.
 
2012-03-23 06:17:44 PM

9beers: I haven't lied about a goddamn thing


Funny that so many people in this thread are calling you a liar, you being a bastion of truth and honesty and such.

/You're a liar and an asshole.
 
2012-03-23 06:20:34 PM
So Zimmerman wasn't being beaten? So now your ignorant ass knows more than a farking eyewitness? fark you dude, you're a moron.

There was a fight, no doubt. But the Chudogg version of that fight, where the kid started the fight, then beat him nearly to death, is obviously bullshiat. If you beat the crap out of someone for over a minute, they don't come out of it with just a bloody nose and a tiny cut on the back of your head.
 
2012-03-23 06:20:51 PM
9beers
Account created: 2011-12-25 13:36:40
Submitted links approved: 4

Any chance this dude's a mod? The thread slows down and 9beers shows up trolling and suddenly it's alive again.
 
2012-03-23 06:24:50 PM

9beers:
What we do know for sure is that Zimmerman claimed self defense meaning that the burden of proof falls on the state to prove otherwise.


You are very much mistaken about this, at least if it comes to a hearing:

Florida judge Frank Baker, at a preliminary hearing where he rejected the claim of a man who attempted to use the Stand Your Ground defense: "I'm not convinced by a preponderance of the evidence ---the blood flows, the spatters, and the knifing---that Stand Your Ground applies."

The burden will be on Zimmerman at any preliminary hearing to show that it is more likely than not ("a preponderance of the evidence") that his claim of legitimate self defense is valid.

Thanks to redmid17 for the link in another thread.
 
2012-03-23 06:28:23 PM

JuggleGeek: /You're a liar and an asshole.


You're an immature little fark that can't handle the fact you're wrong. Zimmerman isn't guilty, deal with it.
 
2012-03-23 06:34:19 PM

Mike Chewbacca: 9beers
Account created: 2011-12-25 13:36:40
Submitted links approved: 4

Any chance this dude's a mod? The thread slows down and 9beers shows up trolling and suddenly it's alive again.


No dude, you're trolling. I'm discussing a case, you're being an idiot calling people liars and trolls when you can't dispute their claims with facts of your own.
 
2012-03-23 06:36:03 PM

9beers: Florida law also prohibits Zimmerman from being arrested unless there's evidence to dispute his version of the events.


There is now evidence (Zimmerman's 911 call, Martin's cell phone logs, and Cutcher's continued assertions), unavailable to the police officers who arrived at the shooting scene, that calls into question Zimmerman's version of events. Remains to be seen if a Florida prosecutor will consider this evidence sufficient to vitiate the law that prevents Zimmerman from being arrested.

I don't think the Feds will be able to prosecute Zimmerman for violating Martin's civil rights. If Zimmerman is prosecuted, it will have to be under state law.
 
2012-03-23 06:47:25 PM

tirob: There is now evidence (Zimmerman's 911 call, Martin's cell phone logs, and Cutcher's continued assertions), unavailable to the police officers who arrived at the shooting scene, that calls into question Zimmerman's version of events.


No they don't. Zimmerman gave a statement to the police that he was following Martin, nobody is disputing that.

What does Martin having made a phone call mean to the case? A record of a phone call means nothing. I'll even give the girlfriend the benefit of the doubt and believe that what she says is true. There's nothing in her statements about the phone conversation that disputes anything Zimmerman has said.

Cutcher didn't witness anything until after the shot was fired and is making statements that completely destroy her credibility. "Zimmerman was twice as big, he didn't need to shoot him", "I'm sure it wasn't self defense", "I know it was Martin yelling for help", "There was no fight". She goes between giving opinions and giving an account that is inconsistent with an eyewitness. She has an obvious agenda since she's already convinced herself that it wasn't self defense.
 
2012-03-23 06:53:49 PM

9beers: JuggleGeek: /You're a liar and an asshole.

You're an immature little fark that can't handle the fact you're wrong. Zimmerman isn't guilty, deal with it.


Forgive me for believing that you not only think that Zimmerman isn't guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but that there isn't even probable cause to arrest him--which is a much more difficult proposition to defend, IMHO, given the facts and the law in this case.
 
2012-03-23 06:54:46 PM
Yeah, if the witness says it wasn't self defense, then we should discount anything she has to say, she's obviously biased against shooting unarmed black kids.
 
2012-03-23 06:59:08 PM

tirob: Forgive me for believing that you not only think that Zimmerman isn't guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but that there isn't even probable cause to arrest him--which is a much more difficult proposition to defend, IMHO, given the facts and the law in this case.


With the evidence we know so far, there is no cause to arrest and charge him. As has been stated, it's actually illegal under Florida law to arrest him. Now if some other evidence comes out that discredits Zimmerman's claims, they can arrest him and then charge him with a crime. To this point, that hasn't occurred. The fact that you say "the law in this case" shows that you still don't get it. The laws in this case are exactly why Zimmerman hasn't been arrested or charged.
 
2012-03-23 07:05:00 PM

9beers: tirob: There is now evidence (Zimmerman's 911 call, Martin's cell phone logs, and Cutcher's continued assertions), unavailable to the police officers who arrived at the shooting scene, that calls into question Zimmerman's version of events.

No they don't. Zimmerman gave a statement to the police that he was following Martin, nobody is disputing that.

What does Martin having made a phone call mean to the case? A record of a phone call means nothing. I'll even give the girlfriend the benefit of the doubt and believe that what she says is true. There's nothing in her statements about the phone conversation that disputes anything Zimmerman has said.

Cutcher didn't witness anything until after the shot was fired and is making statements that completely destroy her credibility. "Zimmerman was twice as big, he didn't need to shoot him", "I'm sure it wasn't self defense", "I know it was Martin yelling for help", "There was no fight". She goes between giving opinions and giving an account that is inconsistent with an eyewitness. She has an obvious agenda since she's already convinced herself that it wasn't self defense.


Did Zimmerman tell police that he had been following Martin even though the police dispatcher recommended that he not do so?

Martin's phone call is evidence that he was minding his own business when the confrontation broke out, or just beforehand, and that he did not jump Zimmerman as Zimmerman claimed. And this especially if Martin's girlfriend is telling the truth about the content of their call; if she is, *all* of Zimmerman's credibility is impeached.

I don't know whether Cutcher is telling the truth or lying or even whether she has an agenda. I suggest to you that her credibility should be assessed by a trier of fact. In public, in a courtroom, and under oath and subject to prison for perjury.
 
2012-03-23 07:07:50 PM

9beers: With the evidence we know so far, there is no cause to arrest and charge him.


And yet a few minutes ago, you said "Zimmerman isn't guilty, deal with it." You've clearly made up your mind, even though you admit contradictory evidence may not have been found yet.

I can't begin to fathom why you're so eager to defend this law. You sound like you need professional help.
 
2012-03-23 07:09:51 PM

ImpendingCynic: And yet a few minutes ago, you said "Zimmerman isn't guilty, deal with it." You've clearly made up your mind,


I have made up my mind, given the evidence we have now, he's innocent. I've also said 20 farking times that it could change if new evidence comes to light. Stop being willfully ignorant in order to argue a point.
 
2012-03-23 07:17:54 PM

9beers: tirob: Forgive me for believing that you not only think that Zimmerman isn't guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but that there isn't even probable cause to arrest him--which is a much more difficult proposition to defend, IMHO, given the facts and the law in this case.

With the evidence we know so far, there is no cause to arrest and charge him.


If by "cause" you mean probable cause, there may have not been enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman on the night of the shooting. I am not so sure that is still the case, given the evidence I have already recited here.

9beers: tirob:

The fact that you say "the law in this case" shows that you still don't get it. The laws in this case are exactly why Zimmerman hasn't been arrested or charged.


The law I was referring to was Florida law as it relates to self-defense as an affirmative defense. I've discussed this here already so I won't repeat myself.
 
Displayed 50 of 1323 comments

First | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report