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.

(USA Today)   The audio "expert" who claims it was Trayvon and not Zimmerman screaming for help on the 911 tape will not be allowed to testify at trial   (usatoday.com) divider line 677
    More: Obvious, George Zimmerman, Mark O'Mara, the weekend, jury, screaming  
•       •       •

6083 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jun 2013 at 7:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-22 09:59:05 PM

bugontherug: The_Six_Fingered_Man: bugontherug: There is a doubt Zimmerman started the fight. It is not a reasonable one.

It also doesn't matter one whit under current Florida law if he started the altercation or not. Only whether he, or a reasonable person, felt in danger for their life at the time he pulled the trigger. Evidence will likely be introduced by the defense team that will purport to show that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and was assaulting him just prior to the firearm discharge. Evidence already known to the public supports this claim by Zimmerman.

In short, it doesn't matter who started the fight. The sooner everyone understands this (and the relevant Florida statutes have been copied into these threads since they began) the sooner we can all move on from "who started it."

It may be that the Florida legislature intended to privilege a course of conduct consisting of starting a physical fight with someone while carrying a loaded firearm, then killing your target when he gets the better of you. It may be. But it defies all reason, because it all but legalizes murder, so long as you start a fight and let them get the better of you first.

I can already hear your plaintive cry "but that's not what I said! I just said literally every other single fact in the case is completely irrelevant if Zimmerman reasonably thought he needed to use deadly force!" Yes, that is what you said. And when you said that, you said that the Florida legislature intended to privilege starting a fight with someone while carrying a lethal weapon and then killing them. This is true whether or not you believe that's what happened in this case.

So, it may be you're right. If so, then every member of the Florida legislature who voted for that bill should be dragged kicking and screaming from their beds in the middle of the night, hauled into the middle of the street, and shot without mercy or conscience.1

Or at least they need to rewrite their sh*tty statute, and then get roundly defeated i ...


It may be that the statute is horsecrap as you say, and it may be that I agree with you on that one particular. The point is effectively moot. The statute applies as written. The State has already testified that they have no evidence that Zimmerman initiated the altercation. Therefore, all we have is the word of Zimmerman that Martin initiated the confrontation and therefore Zimmerman, at all times, retained his right to self-defense. Should the prosecution then present evidence at trial that claims to show Zimmerman as the First Aggressor, they would effectively perjure themselves based on prior testimony, depending on the timeframe that the evidence became known to them. Of course, given the circus surrounding this trial, if the prosecution has such evidence, it likely would have been made public by now.
 
2013-06-22 09:59:18 PM

Lionel Mandrake: It's much easier to throw a blanket over hundreds of individual lives and righteously call them scum.


Let me guess, society is to blame for them being gang banging pieces of trash, right?
 
2013-06-22 09:59:52 PM

Mrtraveler01: ThatDarkFellow: He was and would have been continued to be a thug just like any other asshole that dresses like that.

I know. He was asking to get shot dressing like that amirght?


For dressing like that? Probably not. That's not what I said, though, did I? I just used it as a signifier for a thug. But hey, you can make up anything you like if it makes you feel better.
 
2013-06-22 10:00:25 PM

Satan's Girlfriend: ChaosStar: He said thug, you're the one who brought up skin color.
/whites, browns, and yellows can be thugs to

Do you think you're fooling anyone with your dog whistle terminology?


My "dog whistle terminology"?
Are you saying I'm using words only canines can hear? Or is this some other stupid term people like you use to sound educated?
Fact of the matter is the op said thug, you equated thug to black person not the op, then you called the op racist.
Tell me I'm wrong, please do.
 
2013-06-22 10:00:47 PM

ThatDarkFellow: One less thug dead, no one cares


Read that back to yourself. Slowly if you have to.
 
2013-06-22 10:00:59 PM

Mrtraveler01: Oh I see, you're just trolling. I thought you were really that stupid for a second.


Aaaaaaand when called out, the personal attacks. That's all you have left.

You blindingly folowed one of your simpleton narratives - as you always do. Did your very best to cram this story into one, failed, and now are on damage control. Hilarious to watch you squirm.

"Poor, noble black honor student murdered by rich, entitled white gun nut"

Having a little trouble cramming this story into that narrative these days, no?
 
2013-06-22 10:01:49 PM

ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: bugontherug: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Have you ever heard the term "Objection, calls for speculation?" that's what you are claiming here. If a witness were to testify that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation based on what you say, that's call to speculation and would be objected to by the defense and likely upheld.

Witnesses provide evidence, counselor. Attorneys in closng arguments argue. That is, they use the methods of inference and deduction to prove or disprove a case. An objection to attorney "speculation" based on logical presentation of arguments for inferences from evidence might draw a laugh from the judge, if it didn't anger him.

From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.

You're wasting your time. I've been in these threads with Bug and he thinks he knows everything about this case when he blatantly does not. He will defend his ignorance with walls of text though.


The thing about Bug is that he's relatively intelligent, or is a passable facsimile of an intelligent person who can provoke lively debate without being a troll about it. I like those kind of people in a adversarial sort of way. He attempts to make factual, logical arguments and doesn't try to resort to emotion or name calling, which I respect. So while he may be wrong, I don't feel as though I am wasting my time in pointing out his inaccuracies.
 
2013-06-22 10:02:39 PM

WhoopAssWayne: You blindingly folowed one of your simpleton narratives - as you always do. Did your very best to cram this story into one, failed, and now are on damage control. Hilarious to watch you squirm.


He's moved the goal posts so many times since this story broke that I lost count about 6 months ago.
 
2013-06-22 10:03:28 PM

Bravo Two: MagSeven: Satan's Girlfriend: Popcorn Johnny: I started to respond to your points, but then realized how ignorant of the actual facts you are that it wasn't worth the time. I'm amazed that there can still be people in these threads with your level of ignorance.

In other words you got nothin. Pretty typical of Z supporters. They only base their arguments on emotion and ignorance.

George Zimmerman has placed at least 46 calls to 911 in the last eight years. In the last year, his calls focused on blacks in his gated community:
April 22, 2011: Reports "black male, 7 to 9 years old with skinny build," walking around the neighborhood.
Aug. 3, 2011: Calls in a black male he "believes is involved in
recent burglaries in the neighborhood."
Aug. 6, 2011: Fingers two black teens he thinks "have been burglarizing homes in this area."
Oct. 1, 2011: Reports two black males, approximately 20 to 30 years old, whom he does not recognize. He says he's "concerned due to recent burglaries in the area."
Feb. 2, 2012: Drops dime on a black male because it is "unknown what he is doing."
Feb. 26: Calls about Trayvon Martin
Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there is a real suspicious guy.
Asked by the dispatcher what the suspect looks like, he says:
He looks black ... Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband.
 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/cop_wannabe_on_paranoid_patro l_l fV4L1N0W6y0mEwgoU0L7K/1

46 calls to 911 in 8 years? I made about that many in two years just driving through Denver on a daily commuting basis, reporting accidents, aggressive drivers, drunk drivers, and so on.


I'm going to take a wild guess here...you have been prominently featured in Consumerist many times.
 
2013-06-22 10:03:42 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Bravo Two: Meanwhile in Chicago, people die by the dozens and no one gives a shiat because its gang violence.

We should care about scum wiping out scum?


Didn't say that. Just said that the only reason anyone cares about Martin is because Zimmerman is white/looks white.

People get killed all over the world every day. No one cares. Only time they do is if it's a white person/people killing other races, or if the victim is white.

How many Hispanic folks are killed as drug mules every year? How many innocent black folks die to gang violence? How many Asians die in sweat shops or as they're smuggled to the US? Not exactly headline farking news.

White guy kills a black kid? Stop the presses. White girl missing for five minutes? National manhunt.

Hell, look at those women in Ohio. The only reason the media cared was because of the natural desire to look at something heinous and gruesome, which the crime certainly was. Had it been any more ordinary, not one fark would have been given.

What's my point? fark I dunno. Our country really has a problem with sensationalism and having its priorities all screwed up. And it's threads like these that make me shake my head. People arguing like they give a flying shiat about the victim. People arguing like somehow seeing someone out of place is not a reason to be suspicious. People arguing capriciously about the morality of defending yourself when they don't know farkall about what happened immediately prior to the shooting.

Go on, enjoy your national theater and arguing as though it somehow proves you are a good person and give a damn about every precious snowflake and showing faux disdain because people don't care about Martin.

I'll continue to say this: no one gives a shiat about either of these shiatstains except on the basis of how they affect them: people looking to defend themselves legitimately are going to have to deal with not only the issues directly involved in shooting someone but also the ghost of George Zimmerman and the killing of Saint Trayvon making people who otherwise wouldn't bat an eye at self defense now questioning everything and making an already shiatty situation worse; and the uncomfortable truth that now you're going to question why someone is suspicious and grow even more leery of getting involved in anything that could possibly turn out to be a misunderstanding for fear of yet another circumstance just like this. I for one know that if before you were genuinely suspicious of someone who might be out to burglarize a place, I'd be less inclined to get involved lest it go sideways and end up getting someone injured or killed, legitimate or not.

Guess less security by our neighbors keeping an eye out for each other is the price we pay because one asshat took things a little too seriously and did something horrible, and being the wrong color combo to boot making it a case worthy of national attention and the vogue thing to question anyone who might report someone who is suspicious.

That's certainly the only reason I give a shiat.
 
2013-06-22 10:04:30 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Mrtraveler01: Oh I see, you're just trolling. I thought you were really that stupid for a second.

Aaaaaaand when called out, the personal attacks. That's all you have left.

You blindingly folowed one of your simpleton narratives - as you always do. Did your very best to cram this story into one, failed, and now are on damage control. Hilarious to watch you squirm.

"Poor, noble black honor student murdered by rich, entitled white gun nut"

Having a little trouble cramming this story into that narrative these days, no?


So you have no proof that the fight happened in Zimmerman's own front yard and you just pulled that out of your ass then?
 
2013-06-22 10:04:47 PM

ChaosStar: My "dog whistle terminology"?
Are you saying I'm using words only canines can hear? Or is this some other stupid term people like you use to sound educated?
Fact of the matter is the op said thug, you equated thug to black person not the op, then you called the op racist.
Tell me I'm wrong, please do.


Let's see here. He called Martin a thug. Martin is black. Yeah, how could I ever make that connection *rolls eyes*
 
2013-06-22 10:05:22 PM

The_Six_Fingered_Man: ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: bugontherug: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Have you ever heard the term "Objection, calls for speculation?" that's what you are claiming here. If a witness were to testify that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation based on what you say, that's call to speculation and would be objected to by the defense and likely upheld.

Witnesses provide evidence, counselor. Attorneys in closng arguments argue. That is, they use the methods of inference and deduction to prove or disprove a case. An objection to attorney "speculation" based on logical presentation of arguments for inferences from evidence might draw a laugh from the judge, if it didn't anger him.

From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.

You're wasting your time. I've been in these threads with Bug and he thinks he knows everything about this case when he blatantly does not. He will defend his ignorance with walls of text though.

The thing about Bug is that he's relatively intelligent, or is a passable facsimile of an intelligent person who can provoke lively debate without being a troll about it. I like those kind of people in a adversarial sort of way. He attempts to make factual, logical arguments and doesn't try to resort to emotion or name calling, which I respect. So while he may be wrong, I don't feel as though I am wasting my time in pointing out his inaccuracies.


I can appreciate those traits as well, but when the contrary evidence to the claims made is flat out ignored by repeating the same incorrect claims, you've gone from intelligence to ignorance.
It's your time though friend, you do with it as you see fit.
 
2013-06-22 10:05:38 PM

ThatDarkFellow: I just used it as a signifier for a thug.


So that means that he deserved to get shot!
 
2013-06-22 10:05:53 PM

Bravo Two: Didn't say that. Just said that the only reason anyone cares about Martin is because Zimmerman is white/looks white.


That's the only reason most black people care. If this was a black on black, nobody in the black community would give a shiat.
 
GBB [TotalFark]
2013-06-22 10:06:13 PM
Easy test for the "experts":

Take audio samples pilot and copilot before takeoff, try to match to the screams at 0:50 Here

\Humans make god-awful noises in life/death situations.
 
2013-06-22 10:07:20 PM

ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: bugontherug: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Have you ever heard the term "Objection, calls for speculation?" that's what you are claiming here. If a witness were to testify that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation based on what you say, that's call to speculation and would be objected to by the defense and likely upheld.

Witnesses provide evidence, counselor. Attorneys in closng arguments argue. That is, they use the methods of inference and deduction to prove or disprove a case. An objection to attorney "speculation" based on logical presentation of arguments for inferences from evidence might draw a laugh from the judge, if it didn't anger him.

From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.

You're wasting your time. I've been in these threads with Bug and he thinks he knows everything about this case when he blatantly does not. He will defend his ignorance with walls of text though.

The thing about Bug is that he's relatively intelligent, or is a passable facsimile of an intelligent person who can provoke lively debate without being a troll about it. I like those kind of people in a adversarial sort of way. He attempts to make factual, logical arguments and doesn't try to resort to emotion or name calling, which I respect. So while he may be wrong, I don't feel as though I am wasting my time in pointing out his inaccuracies.

I can appreciate those traits as well, but when the contrary evidence to the claims made is flat out ignored by repeating the same incorrect claims, you've gone from intelligence to ignorance.
It's your time though friend, you do with it as you s ...


I'm bored and I have writer's block on this article I am supposed to write.

Others, however, when they present long debunked "evidence" as gospel are well worth trouncing into a mudhole.
 
2013-06-22 10:07:22 PM

The_Six_Fingered_Man: From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.


Do you understand what an argument by inference is? Because it doesn't look like you do. "Inference" claims that a given fact makes another fact more or less likely to be true.

Let's look at an example from this very thread. I'll spell it out more for illustration.

 The 911 recording is evidence. The 911 tape holds evidencre that Zimmerman used foul language, and referred to Trayvon by the epithets "punk" and "asshole."

Argument:

1) A person who calls another person a "punk" and "asshole" is likely to be angry at them.
2) A person who is angry at another person is more likely to start a fight than is a person who is not angry.

Conclusion:

The evidence of Zimmerman's use of epithets increases the strength of the inference that Zimmerman started the fight.

Now here, I've spelled it out more completely than usual. Usually, I just say "Zimmerman was angry with Trayvon, so he was more likely to start a fight." But the fact is, all of the inferences I've made are supported by evidence. My arguments would draw no admonition from any judge with a lick of sense.
 
2013-06-22 10:08:03 PM

Satan's Girlfriend: ChaosStar: My "dog whistle terminology"?
Are you saying I'm using words only canines can hear? Or is this some other stupid term people like you use to sound educated?
Fact of the matter is the op said thug, you equated thug to black person not the op, then you called the op racist.
Tell me I'm wrong, please do.

Let's see here. He called Martin a thug. Martin is black. Yeah, how could I ever make that connection *rolls eyes*


Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.
 
2013-06-22 10:10:57 PM

bugontherug: The 911 recording is evidence. The 911 tape holds evidencre that Zimmerman used foul language, and referred to Trayvon by the epithets "punk" and "asshole."

Argument:

1) A person who calls another person a "punk" and "asshole" is likely to be angry at them.
2) A person who is angry at another person is more likely to start a fight than is a person who is not angry.

Conclusion:

The evidence of Zimmerman's use of epithets increases the strength of the inference that Zimmerman started the fight.

Now here, I've spelled it out more completely than usual. Usually, I just say "Zimmerman was angry with Trayvon, so he was more likely to start a fight." But the fact is, all of the inferences I've made are supported by evidence. My arguments would draw no admonition from any judge with a lick of sense.


Your logic kind of sucks, no matter how well laid out it is.
 
2013-06-22 10:11:02 PM

gimmegimme: Bravo Two: MagSeven: Satan's Girlfriend: Popcorn Johnny: I started to respond to your points, but then realized how ignorant of the actual facts you are that it wasn't worth the time. I'm amazed that there can still be people in these threads with your level of ignorance.

In other words you got nothin. Pretty typical of Z supporters. They only base their arguments on emotion and ignorance.

George Zimmerman has placed at least 46 calls to 911 in the last eight years. In the last year, his calls focused on blacks in his gated community:
April 22, 2011: Reports "black male, 7 to 9 years old with skinny build," walking around the neighborhood.
Aug. 3, 2011: Calls in a black male he "believes is involved in
recent burglaries in the neighborhood."
Aug. 6, 2011: Fingers two black teens he thinks "have been burglarizing homes in this area."
Oct. 1, 2011: Reports two black males, approximately 20 to 30 years old, whom he does not recognize. He says he's "concerned due to recent burglaries in the area."
Feb. 2, 2012: Drops dime on a black male because it is "unknown what he is doing."
Feb. 26: Calls about Trayvon Martin
Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there is a real suspicious guy.
Asked by the dispatcher what the suspect looks like, he says:
He looks black ... Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband.
 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/cop_wannabe_on_paranoid_patro l_l fV4L1N0W6y0mEwgoU0L7K/1

46 calls to 911 in 8 years? I made about that many in two years just driving through Denver on a daily commuting basis, reporting accidents, aggressive drivers, drunk drivers, and so on.

I'm going to take a wild guess here...you have been prominently featured in Consumerist many times.


Nope, never been to the site and don't read it. But when you witness people not paying attention in rush hour traffic slamming into each other, or are driving home after second shift and see people weaving all over the road, or come across stranded motorists... You either call 911, or in CO, you call *CSP.

I personally would rather the people were okay and they got help than saying "fark you" and going on with my day. But yes, actually doing the right thing is hard for you to grasp, isn't it gimme?
 
2013-06-22 10:11:21 PM

ChaosStar: Satan's Girlfriend: ChaosStar: My "dog whistle terminology"?
Are you saying I'm using words only canines can hear? Or is this some other stupid term people like you use to sound educated?
Fact of the matter is the op said thug, you equated thug to black person not the op, then you called the op racist.
Tell me I'm wrong, please do.

Let's see here. He called Martin a thug. Martin is black. Yeah, how could I ever make that connection *rolls eyes*

Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.


Surely he meant this guy.
img.fark.net
/Zimm was defending us all from Indian death cults.
 
2013-06-22 10:11:49 PM

MagSeven: ThatDarkFellow: One less thug dead, no one cares

Read that back to yourself. Slowly if you have to.


Heh, wow. I did fark that up didn't I? Oh well, it's still fairly obvious what I meant to say before I butchered it.
 
2013-06-22 10:11:49 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: It's much easier to throw a blanket over hundreds of individual lives and righteously call them scum.

Let me guess, society is to blame for them being gang banging pieces of trash, right?


Is that how you justify being an asshole?  By assuming to know what everyone thinks?

Holy f*ck.  I think I'm going to submit your picture to Webster's to include next to their entry for "asshole."  Although I suppose it would work just as well next to "douchebag" or "dipshiat" or "ignorant f*cktard"
 
2013-06-22 10:12:24 PM

The_Six_Fingered_Man: I'm bored and I have writer's block on this article I am supposed to write.

Others, however, when they present long debunked "evidence" as gospel are well worth trouncing into a mudhole.


It could be worse, you could have chosen gimmegimme.
That's one whackadoodle that doesn't have a firm grasp on much of anything, much less this case or the laws involved with it.
 
2013-06-22 10:12:39 PM

ChaosStar: Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.


Calling me names does not help your argument. When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy. Everybody here knows what you meant. You know deep down what you really meant. Why don't you just admit it?
 
2013-06-22 10:15:39 PM

bugontherug: The_Six_Fingered_Man: From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.

Do you understand what an argument by inference is? Because it doesn't look like you do. "Inference" claims that a given fact makes another fact more or less likely to be true.

Let's look at an example from this very thread. I'll spell it out more for illustration.

 The 911 recording is evidence. The 911 tape holds evidencre that Zimmerman used foul language, and referred to Trayvon by the epithets "punk" and "asshole."

Argument:

1) A person who calls another person a "punk" and "asshole" is likely to be angry at them.
2) A person who is angry at another person is more likely to start a fight than is a person who is not angry.

Conclusion:

The evidence of Zimmerman's use of epithets increases the strength of the inference that Zimmerman started the fight.

Now here, I've spelled it out more completely than usual. Usually, I just say "Zimmerman was angry with Trayvon, so he was more likely to start a fight." But the fact is, all of the inferences I've made are supported by evidence. My arguments would draw no admonition from any judge with a lick of sense.


The defense's countering inference from the non-emergency call would be that Zimmerman was in fear of Martin, given his description "he is walking towards me with his hand in his waistband" and the reluctance of Zimmerman to give out his full address given that he was unaware of Martin's whereabouts. From that evidence the defense could infer that Zimmerman was fearful of Martin and in no way looking to start an altercation. An inference could also be made from the very fact that Zimmerman called the police that he was not likely to start a fight with police on their way. After all, if Zimmerman were to start a fight and the police were to arrive while both men were still alive, Zimmerman could be looking at an assault and battery charge. The inference that can be made is that Zimmerman was more than willing to let the police handle the incident rather than start a fight, as supported by Zimmerman himself saying "See if you can get an officer over here."

I would argue that the inferences that can be made from the police call more heavily favor Zimmerman NOT being the initial aggressor, but rather Martin. Of course, if it comes to that, this is what I expect O'Mara to do.
 
2013-06-22 10:15:52 PM

Lionel Mandrake: s that how you justify being an asshole?  By assuming to know what everyone thinks?


Shouldn't you be out feeding sandwiches and giving fresh rounds to unfortunate gang bangers?
 
2013-06-22 10:16:18 PM
It looks like vigilante justice will prevail in this case. Thanks but no thanks State of Florida, you had you chance. Your legal system is a sick joke.
 
2013-06-22 10:16:47 PM

Popcorn Johnny: WhoopAssWayne: You blindingly folowed one of your simpleton narratives - as you always do. Did your very best to cram this story into one, failed, and now are on damage control. Hilarious to watch you squirm.

He's moved the goal posts so many times since this story broke that I lost count about 6 months ago.


Is that conjecture or did you mean that to be a factual statement?
 
2013-06-22 10:17:57 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: If Johnny ever had credibility, that would be the end of it.

Maybe you should stop posting until you've actually taken 10 minutes to learn the basic facts of the case. You still think that a police officer ordered Zimmerman not to leave his vehicle, don't you?

No.  They told him he "didn't need to do that."  That bit of misinformation has always bugged me, too.


Those in charge often phrase their orders as requests. "May I see your license and registration, please?" What's your point?
 
2013-06-22 10:18:14 PM

gimmegimme: Is that conjecture or did you mean that to be a factual statement?


i49.tinypic.com
 
2013-06-22 10:18:41 PM

ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: I'm bored and I have writer's block on this article I am supposed to write.

Others, however, when they present long debunked "evidence" as gospel are well worth trouncing into a mudhole.

It could be worse, you could have chosen gimmegimme.
That's one whackadoodle that doesn't have a firm grasp on much of anything, much less this case or the laws involved with it.


Calling me names does not help your argument.
 
2013-06-22 10:19:07 PM

Satan's Girlfriend: When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy.


Seconded.
 
2013-06-22 10:19:24 PM
I think it's really awesome how something like this can turn into a spectator sport, with fans on both Team Zimm, and Team Trayvon.  I mean sure, a kid is dead, but hey, at least one side will get to pretend that all their views were justified when the verdict finally comes down.
 
2013-06-22 10:20:19 PM

Satan's Girlfriend: ChaosStar: Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.

Calling me names does not help your argument. When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy. Everybody here knows what you meant. You know deep down what you really meant. Why don't you just admit it?


Gee, I use the word "thug" to refer to someone who is a criminal and/or uses violence or the threat of violence to achieve a goal. Guys who broke knees for unions were thugs the same as the guys who enforced for Capone, verenzano(sp?), whitey bulger, the IRA, etc.

I even consider people like Bloomberg who use heavy-handed tactics to try and achieve a goal to be thugs.

So, yes, "thug" is totally code for African American gangsta.

Personally, I think "gangsta", as a term coined by rap to refer to black gang members, is a much more understood term.
 
2013-06-22 10:20:21 PM

Oh_Enough_Already: [img.fark.net image 850x472]


Meanwhile, in a few weeks . . .


Doubtful.  The rule of law must be maintained.
 
2013-06-22 10:20:27 PM

fredklein: Those in charge often phrase their orders as requests.


Even if a civilian dispatcher held that authority, you do realize that Zimmerman responded "okay" and stopped running, right?
 
2013-06-22 10:22:12 PM

Satan's Girlfriend: ChaosStar: Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.

Calling me names does not help your argument. When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy. Everybody here knows what you meant. You know deep down what you really meant. Why don't you just admit it?


I'm glad to know that the authority on what people mean when they say certain words has decided to slum it with us normal people on the internet. How did you get that position anyway? Is it passed down like royalty or did you have to apply?

From Wikipedia: Thug, a common criminal, who treats others violently and roughly, often for hire
Odd, no mention of race in there.
Lets try Websters
Definition of THUG: a brutal ruffian or assassin

Damn, still no race or skin color mentioned.

Lets go to a more modern source, Urban Dictionary
1.thug
As Tupac defined it, a thug is someone who is going through struggles, has gone through struggles, and continues to live day by day with nothing for them. That person is a thug. and the life they are living is the thug life. A thug is NOT a gangster.

Damn I thought you might really have a shot with UD, but nope, still no mention of skin color or race.
/get the picture yet skippy?
 
2013-06-22 10:23:17 PM

jaytkay: Satan's Girlfriend: When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy.

Seconded.


Thug Life shirts used to be popular in black culture.

If someone were to wear a shirt that says Pedophile 4 Life....would you give them the benefit of the doubt?
 
2013-06-22 10:24:41 PM

gimmegimme: ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: I'm bored and I have writer's block on this article I am supposed to write.

Others, however, when they present long debunked "evidence" as gospel are well worth trouncing into a mudhole.

It could be worse, you could have chosen gimmegimme.
That's one whackadoodle that doesn't have a firm grasp on much of anything, much less this case or the laws involved with it.

Calling me names does not help your argument.


I don't have to help my argument with you whackadoodle. anyone with even a passing grasp of logic and reason can see you know jack shiat about anything pertaining to anything dealing with this case, self defense laws, or the legal system as a whole.
 
2013-06-22 10:25:12 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Garble: It is so beyond pathetic and sad that you look at this case in this way.

What's pathetic is that people like you want to send a person to prison based on speculation. It's pretty much the most disgusting thing I can imagine.


I have you tagged as "Captain Dumbass", but stuff like this almost makes me reconsider.
 
2013-06-22 10:26:02 PM

Delay: It looks like vigilante justice will prevail in this case. Thanks but no thanks State of Florida, you had you chance. Your legal system is a sick joke.


So, you've just decided then that that's what this is? Not simple self defense or murder? It has to be vigilante justice, and it has to be the justice system that failed, and not simply a shiatty case with poor evidence and a shiatty outcome either way, since we can't PROVE what happened either way?

That's some fine writing off of a vastly complex situation there, Lou.
 
2013-06-22 10:26:10 PM

ChaosStar: get the picture yet skippy?


Calling me names does not help your argument. I see you're still in denial as well. Sad really. If you had any decency you'd apologize to everyone in this thread and stop posting. Cause right now you're skating on thin ice mister.
 
2013-06-22 10:26:48 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: s that how you justify being an asshole?  By assuming to know what everyone thinks?

Shouldn't you be out feeding sandwiches and giving fresh rounds to unfortunate gang bangers?


My goodness, aren't you witty.  I think I've soiled myself by stepping into your pathetic world enough for one day.  Enjoy your self-righteous hatred.  What satisfaction it must bring to judge so many people with so little effort or care.

The last word is all yours.  Make it good, but rest assured that I won't waste valuable seconds by reading what you manage to squeeze out.  Unlike you, I have better things to do than revel in hate.

Good luck.
 
2013-06-22 10:27:31 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Just what I said would happen.


yeah this whole thing has been one huge dive taken by the prosecution.
Justice for Trayvon will not be had in this county, not through their "justice" system
From the prosecutor over-charging with murder 2 to the 5 white women on the jury to one black woman this has been a travesty
This was only ever going to end one way and they're going to make damned sure of it.
 
2013-06-22 10:27:32 PM

Thingster: Popcorn Johnny: Garble: It is so beyond pathetic and sad that you look at this case in this way.

What's pathetic is that people like you want to send a person to prison based on speculation. It's pretty much the most disgusting thing I can imagine.

I have you tagged as "Captain Dumbass", but stuff like this almost makes me reconsider.


You're thinking maybe "Colonel Dumbass?"
 
2013-06-22 10:27:50 PM

Thingster: I have you tagged as "Captain Dumbass", but stuff like this almost makes me reconsider.


How about Captain Ass?
 
2013-06-22 10:28:32 PM

Giltric: jaytkay: Satan's Girlfriend: When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy.

Seconded.

Thug Life shirts used to be popular in black culture.

If someone were to wear a shirt that says Pedophile 4 Life....would you give them the benefit of the doubt?


Hey, man.  It was just proven that "thug" has NOTHING to do with "black culture."

Get with it.
 
2013-06-22 10:28:46 PM

ChaosStar: still no race or skin color mentioned.

Lets go to a more modern source, Urban Dictionary


Let's go to millions of posts from conservatives in social media in the past several years..

/ We know what you mean my "thug"
// Don't be a dishonest asshole
 
Displayed 50 of 677 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report