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.

(PJ Media)   The U.S. Department of Justice helped organize Trayvon Martin protests, which is a totally unbiased and proper activity for the federal government   (pjmedia.com) divider line 247
    More: Unlikely, U.S. Department of Justice, Judicial Watch, PJM, media blackout, technical assistance, Attorney General Eric Holder, neighborhood watch, Seminole County  
•       •       •

2099 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Jul 2013 at 4:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-10 10:25:17 PM  

ongbok: MJMaloney187: Carth: spongeboob: Carth: spongeboob: Of course if Zimmerman was black and was acquitted there is no way that white people would riot, not sure why rioting before the trial is better though.

Got any links from the last 80 years?

How long ago was 1986 1982 or 1989

Much better examples thank you. I think they would better be described as lynch mobs or hate crimes than race riots  but they are better examples than things that happened a few decades before anyone  posting here was alive.

Those are very good examples of hate crimes (maybe). So let me ask you this: What do you think would be justice for the whites who committed these savage hate-motivated crimes?

Uh, what you just posted wasn't a hate related crime. The investigators that handled the case all said that everything pointed to it being non hate related and a random act of violence.

They didn't carjack and mutilate these people because they were out to kill white people, they did it because they wanted to steal a car and they were some sick farks. this is what the investigation found. That isn't a race related crime. But of course you believe that everybody is lying and covering up the truth, don't you?

The crowd in Bensonhurst beat and killed Yusef Hawkins because he was black and they thought he was dating a white girl in the neighborhood. That is a race related crime.


If a man hates his ex-wife and kills her, is he charged with a hate crime? Probably not.

If white people twittered threats against Cobbins, organized mobs to draw and quarter Thomas or actually killed-by-mob-action Davidson, then I believe you would consider these race related crimes.

I believe that certain groups in the United States are held to an affirmative interpretation of the law.
 
2013-07-10 10:46:21 PM  

MJMaloney187: ongbok: MJMaloney187: Carth: spongeboob: Carth: spongeboob: Of course if Zimmerman was black and was acquitted there is no way that white people would riot, not sure why rioting before the trial is better though.

Got any links from the last 80 years?

How long ago was 1986 1982 or 1989

Much better examples thank you. I think they would better be described as lynch mobs or hate crimes than race riots  but they are better examples than things that happened a few decades before anyone  posting here was alive.

Those are very good examples of hate crimes (maybe). So let me ask you this: What do you think would be justice for the whites who committed these savage hate-motivated crimes?

Uh, what you just posted wasn't a hate related crime. The investigators that handled the case all said that everything pointed to it being non hate related and a random act of violence.

They didn't carjack and mutilate these people because they were out to kill white people, they did it because they wanted to steal a car and they were some sick farks. this is what the investigation found. That isn't a race related crime. But of course you believe that everybody is lying and covering up the truth, don't you?

The crowd in Bensonhurst beat and killed Yusef Hawkins because he was black and they thought he was dating a white girl in the neighborhood. That is a race related crime.

If a man hates his ex-wife and kills her, is he charged with a hate crime? Probably not.

If white people twittered threats against Cobbins, organized mobs to draw and quarter Thomas or actually killed-by-mob-action Davidson, then I believe you would consider these race related crimes.

I believe that certain groups in the United States are held to an affirmative interpretation of the law.


Here is the definition of a hate crime

Congress has defined a hate crime as a "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation."

In order to get that enhancement there has to be proof that the crime was motivated by one of those factors. And usually in these cases the proof of one of those factors being involved comes from either one of the assailants admitting that it was a reason or something they said during or before the crime and was witnessed by a third party.

The only one of those that you linked that may have been a hate crime is the saxophone playing girl, but unfortunately it seems nobody was there to corroborate what was said. In the other ones it doesn't seem the the victim or a witness ever mentioned hearing anything racial being said, nor did the perpetrators ever claim that any of the factors to get a hate crime were a motivating factor.
 
2013-07-10 11:09:56 PM  

El_Swino: Is it possible that PJ Media is some sort of false-front operation, run by lefties, with the intent of convincing folks that conservatives are complete retards who haven't a f*cking clue how their own government works? Honestly, I can't think of another reason for this article's existence.


Sure, because it's highly improbable there would be a large group of conservatives who are complete retards without a f*cking clue how their own government works. It's much more likely that impression only exists because of "noise in the machine" introduced by false-flag lefties.

Sure.
 
2013-07-11 12:00:01 AM  
Because fark you racist junior-crime-fighter assholes like Zimmerman, that's why.
 
2013-07-11 12:00:52 AM  
There is nothing that says "Dumbass" more than a White Guilt Liberal whining "Justice for Trayvon".

Obviously the kid tried to play Polar Bear Hunt on Zimmerman...and lost

If Trayvon Martin was white there would have been no charges
 
2013-07-11 12:13:48 AM  
They want me to believe that Trayvon sought out Zimmerman to beat the fark out of him while talking on the phone with mommy? Is this real?
 
2013-07-11 12:55:07 AM  

FloridaFarkTag: There is nothing that says "Dumbass" more than a White Guilt Liberal whining "Justice for Trayvon".

Obviously the kid tried to play Polar Bear Hunt on Zimmerman...and lost

If Trayvon Martin was white there would have been no charges


Pardon me as I point at you and laugh. Every word you've written here is wrong, including "a," "and," and "the."
 
2013-07-11 12:59:04 AM  

lockers: Why does anyone have a hard on for some loser who shot and killed an unarmed kid who's only suspicious action was walking down a public street? Seriously, why are the wing nuts so worked up about this? Are they just desperate to prove their racist narrative?


You skipped a few steps there idiot.  I don't really know Zimmerman or Martin's state of mind in the few minutes before the shooting, and I am curious how things really happend on a few details.  It could have been that Martin backtracked a bit, confronted Zimmerman and initiated the physical altercation.  If that is true, I don't have a problem with the shooting.

Zimmerman may have been a loser, but there are good people in this world that truly care about crime in their community.  The police may care, but they have more immediate concerns than solving break ins.
 
2013-07-11 01:21:49 AM  

hasty ambush: Chicago


DRINK!

hasty ambush: IRS


DRINK!!!
 
2013-07-11 01:30:50 AM  

knbwhite: Zimmerman may have been a loser, but there are good people in this world that truly care about crime in their community.


Except they don't go out and play vigilante.
 
2013-07-11 01:45:57 AM  

Peter von Nostrand: The article is filled with conjecture and opinion from the Judicial Watch. Sounds legit

As well:

Bryan PrestonBryan Preston has been a leading conservative blogger and opinionator since founding his first blog in 2001. Bryan is a military veteran, worked for NASA, was a founding blogger and producer at Hot Air, was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas.


aka Gigantic Republican Asshole
 
2013-07-11 01:47:25 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: bromah: so what is the original purpose of this little know unit?  Is it's job to help minority groups or something?  Does it help coordinate any protest?

For more than 45 years, CRS has been asked to provide its experienced mediators to help local communities resolve conflicts and disturbances relating to race, color, or national origin. Each year CRS' highly skilled conciliators bring hundreds of community-wide conflicts to peaceful closure across America and its territories.

CRS lends its services when requested or accepted by the parties. The Service uses impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution procedures to help local leaders resolve problems and restore stability. CRS has no law enforcement authority and does not impose solutions, investigate, prosecute, or assign blame and fault. All CRS mediators are required by law to conduct their activities in confidence, without publicity, and are prohibited from disclosing confidential information. Link


What kinda commie shiat is that?
 
2013-07-11 01:51:43 AM  

Corvus: I don't get why people think Zimmerman gets to defend himself, by shooting someone but Martin isn't allowed to defend himself by punching someone.


Did you not get the part that Martin is black, and Zimmerman is not-black? QED. I thought that was pretty clear.
 
2013-07-11 01:57:35 AM  

knbwhite: lockers: Why does anyone have a hard on for some loser who shot and killed an unarmed kid who's only suspicious action was walking down a public street? Seriously, why are the wing nuts so worked up about this? Are they just desperate to prove their racist narrative?

You skipped a few steps there idiot.  I don't really know Zimmerman or Martin's state of mind in the few minutes before the shooting, and I am curious how things really happend on a few details.  It could have been that Martin backtracked a bit, confronted Zimmerman and initiated the physical altercation.  If that is true, I don't have a problem with the shooting.

Zimmerman may have been a loser, but there are good people in this world that truly care about crime in their community.  The police may care, but they have more immediate concerns than solving break ins.


The problem is that Zimmerman escalated the situation by chasing Trayvon down, creating a situation where both men felt their lives were in danger.  Had he simply followed the advice of the 911 operator, Trayvon would be alive and Zimmerman would still be a free man.  Instead, Zimmerman tried to be a hero and quickly found himself outmatched, and here we are.
 
2013-07-11 01:58:42 AM  
SO ANOTHER LIE RIGHT THERE IN THE POLITICS TAB. PROUD, DREW?
 
2013-07-11 02:44:24 AM  

I_Am_Weasel: PJ Media...I wonder if one should click.

-ellipsis-

Why yes, yes one should.  If only to read the comment section.


F--k no, I'm smarter than that.

I read an article today that said, paraphrasing:

Even if it doesn't matter in the verdict, isn't it f--ked up that Zimmerman never even considered that Martin was someone who belonged (temporarily or otherwise) to the community he protected?  That he just assumed this kid was one of the thugs who always got away, never even considering this "thug" might be threatened by the same folks Zimmerman was worried about?

Then it went into "do (especially young) black men ever have the right to defend themselves" which was roundly depressing.
 
2013-07-11 02:45:25 AM  

zerkalo: SO ANOTHER LIE RIGHT THERE IN THE POLITICS TAB. PROUD, DREW?


You clicked and commented.

So probably yes.
 
2013-07-11 02:50:13 AM  

knbwhite: It could have been that Martin backtracked a bit, confronted Zimmerman and initiated the physical altercation.  If that is true, I don't have a problem with the shooting.


Really?

I can see you believing Zimmerman was justified, under the circumstances.  I don't agree with it, but I can see it.

But HONESTLY, other than dead men tell no tales, HOW was Martin not "standing his ground" at that point?  Where he was doing nothing wrong but had someone trailing him through dark lit areas?  You really don't have even the slightest bit of problem that an unarmed kid was shot and killed while walking through a neighborhood?  F--k you, then.  I can buy people who argue that in the heat of the confused moment, it was justified.  I don't agree, but I can understand the argument.  I don't understand on any level those who have no problem with the shooting whatsoever.
 
2013-07-11 03:00:39 AM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: zerkalo: SO ANOTHER LIE RIGHT THERE IN THE POLITICS TAB. PROUD, DREW?

You clicked and commented.

So probably yes.


Well. Commented in the thread. I left the bullshiat jizz-crusty pajamas media link unclicked, as is the custom.
 
2013-07-11 06:10:13 AM  

zerkalo: StreetlightInTheGhetto: zerkalo: SO ANOTHER LIE RIGHT THERE IN THE POLITICS TAB. PROUD, DREW?

You clicked and commented.

So probably yes.

Well. Commented in the thread. I left the bullshiat jizz-crusty pajamas media link unclicked, as is the custom.


Do you shake your tiny fist at all the trolling ads our Fark Gods keep on hand for great lulz as well? Dude, don't even pretend to deny that Drew has been trolling the fark out of this place, and his minions, for well over a decade now.
 
2013-07-11 06:42:55 AM  
Zimmerman strikes me as a fat, little loser, who got picked on when he was a kid... So he buys a gun, tries and fails to become a cop, and ends up a "neighborhood watchman". Little man with a gun in his hand...
 
2013-07-11 06:45:57 AM  

keylock71: Zimmerman strikes me as a fat, little loser, who got picked on when he was a kid... So he buys a gun, tries and fails to become a cop, and ends up a "neighborhood watchman". Little man with a gun in his hand...


So much this. And following a young black guy around when you have no business doing so is inviting an ass-beating. This pathetic little queef needs to rot in prison.
 
2013-07-11 07:35:23 AM  
"Hey who wrote Ni*ger on this painting ?"

images.politico.com
 
2013-07-11 07:40:59 AM  

keylock71: Zimmerman strikes me as a fat, little loser, who got picked on when he was a kid... So he buys a gun, tries and fails to become a cop, and ends up a "neighborhood watchman". Little man with a gun in his hand...


Little man with a blog and a lying fark headline in his hand
 
2013-07-11 07:45:43 AM  

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: "Hey who wrote Ni*ger on this painting ?"

[images.politico.com image 605x328]


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA H AHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH*GASP*HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*OMG !!*HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Retardlican "humor".
 
2013-07-11 08:06:51 AM  

Isitoveryet: jehovahs witness protection: There WILL be riots when GZ is found not guilty. Mark my words.

are you a wizard?


No, he's just taking some people at their word.  Whether they actually follow through or not remains to be seen.

Well, I guess we'll know in a few days either way though, won't we?  Would you like me to bookmark this in case there are actually some riots, so that I can point out how your snark was wrong?
 
2013-07-11 08:09:10 AM  
Mentat:
The problem is that Zimmerman escalated the situation by chasing Trayvon down, creating a situation where both men felt their lives were in danger.  Had he simply followed the advice of the 911 operator, Trayvon would be alive and Zimmerman would still be a free man.  Instead, Zimmerman tried to be a hero and quickly found himself outmatched, and here we are.

This. What kind of idiot gets out of his safe vehicle and follows what he assumes to be a dangerous criminal while having no backup, no training, and poor visibility? I really wish they managed to kill each other that night. Gets rid of short tempers and bad judgement all around.
 
2013-07-11 08:29:28 AM  

dittybopper: Isitoveryet: jehovahs witness protection: There WILL be riots when GZ is found not guilty. Mark my words.

are you a wizard?

No, he's just taking some people at their word.  Whether they actually follow through or not remains to be seen.

Well, I guess we'll know in a few days either way though, won't we?  Would you like me to bookmark this in case there are actually some riots, so that I can point out how your snark was wrong?


If we had a riot every time a kid was shot then maybe the authorities would actually care about inner city crime rates ...but that would also task them with explaining why their anti-gun and anti-drug policies are failing so miserably.

The only reason there's even a chance of a riot is because politicians were race baiting the situation for political gain.   Anyone who's watched a moment of the trial should have figured there's enough reasonable doubt for the court to rule either way. They'd know this wasn't a race based verdict.

Someone who goes so far as to throw a bottle after that is either ignorant of the facts or not doing so on account of Travon's death.

/There is still a great deal of racial tension in the US.
/Some folks will use any incident as a justification for unreasonable behavior.
 
2013-07-11 08:45:36 AM  

dittybopper: Isitoveryet: jehovahs witness protection: There WILL be riots when GZ is found not guilty. Mark my words.

are you a wizard?

No, he's just taking some people at their word.  Whether they actually follow through or not remains to be seen.

Well, I guess we'll know in a few days either way though, won't we?  Would you like me to bookmark this in case there are actually some riots, so that I can point out how your snark was wrong?


Yeah, like you,  I'm also worried that the radical gun lovers aren't going to take it will if Zimmerman is convicted. They seem very emotionally invested in this case.
 
2013-07-11 08:49:42 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: dittybopper: Isitoveryet: jehovahs witness protection: There WILL be riots when GZ is found not guilty. Mark my words.

are you a wizard?

No, he's just taking some people at their word.  Whether they actually follow through or not remains to be seen.

Well, I guess we'll know in a few days either way though, won't we?  Would you like me to bookmark this in case there are actually some riots, so that I can point out how your snark was wrong?

Yeah, like you,  I'm also worried that the radical gun lovers aren't going to take it will if Zimmerman is convicted. They seem very emotionally invested in this case.


"Well" not "will".
 
2013-07-11 09:24:23 AM  

keylock71: Zimmerman strikes me as a fat, little loser, who got picked on when he was a kid... So he buys a gun, tries and fails to become a cop, and ends up a "neighborhood watchman". Little man with a gun in his hand...


Yes -- why do you think so many batshiat crazy right-wingers on Fark sympathize with him?
 
2013-07-11 09:29:22 AM  

Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.


If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.
 
2013-07-11 09:32:56 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.


Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?
 
2013-07-11 10:05:08 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.


Except that's not the case. The CRS acts as moderators, they themselves demanded nothing, The "mob" wanted charges, the CRS served as an intermediary in an attempt to prevent violence. They've done this for years, have been involved in thousands of cases since the 60's. Look up some of their cases, they do a lot of good work without getting credit.
 
2013-07-11 10:05:28 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?




Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.
 
2013-07-11 10:08:14 AM  

way south: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?

Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.


Neighborhood WATCH also doesn't mean armed vigilantes.
 
2013-07-11 10:17:04 AM  

way south: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?

Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.


But if you run around the neighborhood playing vigilante and then shoot to death a 17-year-old who isn't a criminal, you assume this risk of going to prsion for at least voluntary manslaughter unless you can prove that the innocent person you killed was actually the aggressor and you reasonably feared for your life. The affirmative defense of self defense puts the burden of proof on the defendant. You don't get to initiate a violent confrontation, then pull out your gun when you start to lose, and call it self defense.
 
2013-07-11 10:22:08 AM  

MagicianNamedGob: You don't get to initiate a violent confrontation, then pull out your gun when you start to lose, and call it self defense.


And this is exactly what happened.
 
2013-07-11 10:24:58 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: way south: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?

Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.

Neighborhood WATCH also doesn't mean armed vigilantes.




Zimmerman wasn't attempting to enforce laws himself. He didn't detain anyone. He was just an armed watch, no aspect of which is illegal in that state. Talking to strangers is legal. Having a gun for self defense is legal (and advisable, considering the risks). Working with the cops is legal. Patrolling your neighborhood and organizing neighbors, all legal.

What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.

Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.
 
2013-07-11 10:31:40 AM  
What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.
Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.

And NO ONE, including you, knows that this was the case.
 
2013-07-11 10:33:55 AM  

Whiskey Pete: The evidence shows


ahh ahhahahahahhhahahahahahhhh
 
2013-07-11 10:35:27 AM  

Jackson Herring: Whiskey Pete: The evidence shows

ahh ahhahahahahhhahahahahahhhh


I was quoting what's his face up there, BTW.
 
2013-07-11 10:42:56 AM  

way south: Zimmerman wasn't attempting to enforce laws himself. He didn't detain anyone. He was just an armed watch, no aspect of which is illegal in that state. Talking to strangers is legal. Having a gun for self defense is legal (and advisable, considering the risks). Working with the cops is legal. Patrolling your neighborhood and organizing neighbors, all legal.

What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.

Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.


No, ZImmerman escalated the situation by ignoring the advice of the 911 operator, chasing down Trayvon, and putting him in a position where he felt threatened.  It wasn't Zimmerman's job to chase down and question Trayvon.  Which brings us back to the question: Why can Zimmerman invoke Stand Your Ground in his defense and not Trayvon?  Why is it legal for Zimmerman to fatally shot someone in self-defense but it's illegal for Trayvon to punch someone in self-defense?
 
2013-07-11 10:50:10 AM  

Mentat: Which brings us back to the question: Why can Zimmerman invoke Stand Your Ground in his defense and not Trayvon? Why is it legal for Zimmerman to fatally shot someone in self-defense but it's illegal for Trayvon to punch someone in self-defense?


Because shooting a scary black kid is an NRAtards wet, sticky dream. That's why.
 
2013-07-11 10:54:11 AM  

way south: Philip Francis Queeg: way south: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?

Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.

Neighborhood WATCH also doesn't mean armed vigilantes.

Zimmerman wasn't attempting to enforce laws himself. He didn't detain anyone. He was just an armed watch, no aspect of which is illegal in that state. Talking to strangers is legal. Having a gun for self defense is legal (and advisable, considering the risks). Working with the cops is legal. Patrolling your neighborhood and organizing neighbors, all legal.

What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.

Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.


You know what else is legal? Walking to the store to buy skittles and an iced tea.
 
2013-07-11 11:02:16 AM  

MJMaloney187: SixOfDLoC: Corvus:
Zimmerman was forcing an altercation, Martin MAYBE punched him because of it (if you believe someone still talks on their phone when they hide in bushes to punch someone and punches them still holding the phone). This is what the DEFENSE is saying.

Yes, but he was forcing an altercation with a black male, and they don't have any right to stand their ground and defend themselves against creepy weirdos who stalk them as they walk home from the store, certainly no right to defend themselves against some creepy weirdo who GETS OUT OF HIS VEHICLE AND CHASES THEM, because minorities are all on double-secret probation.    But don't you dare call people who think this way "racist", or you're the real racist.

This case is conserviot jack-off fodder because they all fantasize about getting to shoot them some attractive and successful african americans.  If Martin had been a white teenager, the current members of the Zimmerman fan club would all be howling for Zimmerman's blood and demanding that he be "sent back to Mexico in a bag".  (Yes, I know he's not from Mexico)

Another poor soul burned by the farking censors.

Burned by the censors?  No.  I used that phrase because everyone here already knows what it's a substitute for.

This case is not conservative "jack-off fodder". You're over deflecting. This case actually removes any doubt that Martin's ilk fail to understand that we live in a constitutional republic, not some third world sh*t hole like Zimbabwe or colonial America. It's a Shakespearean irony that Florida law enforcement have to plan to prevent black mobs from lynching Zimmerman, all the while screaming about civil rights.
Sure it is.  And your response demonstrates exactly why.  It gives you your chance to perpetuate some horseshiat about how white people are the real victims of racism, all the while celebrating the murder of some unarmed 17 year old kid by one of your fellow authoritarian cosplayers.
 
2013-07-11 11:15:39 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.


Shouldn't you be back on Stormfront posting about how dangerous black people are?
 
2013-07-11 11:15:59 AM  

Mentat: way south: Zimmerman wasn't attempting to enforce laws himself. He didn't detain anyone. He was just an armed watch, no aspect of which is illegal in that state. Talking to strangers is legal. Having a gun for self defense is legal (and advisable, considering the risks). Working with the cops is legal. Patrolling your neighborhood and organizing neighbors, all legal.

What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.

Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.

No, ZImmerman escalated the situation by ignoring the advice of the 911 operator, chasing down Trayvon, and putting him in a position where he felt threatened.  It wasn't Zimmerman's job to chase down and question Trayvon.  Which brings us back to the question: Why can Zimmerman invoke Stand Your Ground in his defense and not Trayvon?  Why is it legal for Zimmerman to fatally shot someone in self-defense but it's illegal for Trayvon to punch someone in self-defense?




If you feel threatened, you run.
You can't run if someone mounts you and starts to rain blows on your face.

Trayvon could have sited self defense if he was the one pinned under Zimmerman. But here we've got that pesky evidence again, causing problems with the preferred narrative.

You'd imply that if Zimmerman didn't go near his would be assailant with that fat punchable face of his, everything would have been ok.
The law doesn't see it that way.
 
2013-07-11 11:17:59 AM  

way south: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mike Chewbacca: Is this the next Benghazi? This is the next Benghazi, isn't it? Gods, these people are grasping at straws. There are plenty of things to hate Obama for. Trying to keep the peace and prevent race riots isn't one of them.

If by "trying to keep the peace", you mean offering up an innocent person who was forced to defend himself to an angry mob, despite the fact that local officials saw no wrongdoing, then yeah, that's totally keeping the peace.

Who forced Zimmerman to run around his neighborhood looking for teenagers to harass?



Its a common response when a community feels threatened and isn't getting relief from the authorities.
There were crimes happening and the residents were trying to help prevent them by patrolling area.

Neighborhood watch doesn't mean offering yourself up as a punching bag to any passer by.


If by residents you mean one guy who volunteered because he had dreams of being a cop yet couldn't even hack it as security then that's correct.
 
2013-07-11 11:20:00 AM  

way south: Mentat: way south: Zimmerman wasn't attempting to enforce laws himself. He didn't detain anyone. He was just an armed watch, no aspect of which is illegal in that state. Talking to strangers is legal. Having a gun for self defense is legal (and advisable, considering the risks). Working with the cops is legal. Patrolling your neighborhood and organizing neighbors, all legal.

What isn't legal is throwing a punch at someone who questions you.
The evidence shows, and everyone seems to agree, that Trayvon escalated the encounter.

Whether Zimmerman responded appropriately is the question. But everything up to that point is above board.

No, ZImmerman escalated the situation by ignoring the advice of the 911 operator, chasing down Trayvon, and putting him in a position where he felt threatened.  It wasn't Zimmerman's job to chase down and question Trayvon.  Which brings us back to the question: Why can Zimmerman invoke Stand Your Ground in his defense and not Trayvon?  Why is it legal for Zimmerman to fatally shot someone in self-defense but it's illegal for Trayvon to punch someone in self-defense?

If you feel threatened, you run.
You can't run if someone mounts you and starts to rain blows on your face.

Trayvon could have sited self defense if he was the one pinned under Zimmerman. But here we've got that pesky evidence again, causing problems with the preferred narrative.

You'd imply that if Zimmerman didn't go near his would be assailant with that fat punchable face of his, everything would have been ok.
The law doesn't see it that way.


If Zimmerman felt so threatened by the sight of this teenager walking through the neighborhood that he felt compelled to call 911, why didn't he run rather than follow him and confront him?
 
Displayed 50 of 247 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report