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.

(Cincinnati Enquirer)   Ohio group dedicates itself to making sure Zimmerman has more guns   (news.cincinnati.com) divider line 227
    More: Strange, Ohio, certified mail, U.S. Department of Justice  
•       •       •

4146 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jul 2013 at 12:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



227 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-26 11:45:46 AM  
Interpretation: Group of Ohio men want to have sex with George Zimmerman, have money to burn and are in deep denial about their homosexuality.
 
2013-07-26 12:16:06 PM  
shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.
 
2013-07-26 12:16:14 PM  
Here's a proposal - George Zimmerman gets to shoot Ariel Castro and redeem himself in the media.  Can we at least agree to that?
 
2013-07-26 12:17:31 PM  
And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.
 
2013-07-26 12:17:32 PM  
Does he still have his CCW permit or did they take that away?
 
2013-07-26 12:18:24 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.


Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.
 
2013-07-26 12:18:30 PM  
Al Sharpton has a lot in common with these retards. and vice-versa.
 
2013-07-26 12:19:25 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: Al Sharpton has a lot in common with these retards. and vice-versa.


Because what's called for here is a bizarre, unexplained false equivalence.
 
2013-07-26 12:20:09 PM  
My hedgehog killed and ate an earthworm. Is there any organization out there that would arm my hedgie?

btw... the earthworm was wearing a hoodie.
 
2013-07-26 12:20:24 PM  
Indicative of the idiocy of this country's gun fetishists.
 
2013-07-26 12:20:25 PM  

ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.


They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.
 
2013-07-26 12:21:20 PM  

ikanreed: bigsteve3OOO: Al Sharpton has a lot in common with these retards. and vice-versa.

Because what's called for here is a bizarre, unexplained false equivalence.


Yet it still makes sense. Al Sharpton, like this group, are just inflaming the situation.
 
2013-07-26 12:21:51 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.


True, but since he was acquitted of murder, and legally was found to have used self defense, I'm not sure if that applies.
 
2013-07-26 12:21:58 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.


I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know gun laws that well, but that doesn't sound like a tort the U.S. would ever pass.
 
2013-07-26 12:22:19 PM  

drew46n2: Indicative of the idiocy of this country's gun fetishists.


This.
 
2013-07-26 12:22:32 PM  
George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.
 
2013-07-26 12:23:05 PM  

SithLord: Here's a proposal - George Zimmerman gets to shoot Ariel Castro and redeem himself in the media.  Can we at least agree to that?


Imokaywiththis.jpg
 
2013-07-26 12:23:56 PM  
Something something you're not helping...
 
2013-07-26 12:24:10 PM  
The derp in this thread is strong.
 
2013-07-26 12:24:11 PM  

TerminalEchoes: Yet it still makes sense. Al Sharpton, like this group, are just inflaming the situation.


What situation? A jury found him not guilty. Whatever you THINK happened, they had the chance to convict and did not see sufficient evidence to convict. Any further "situation" that comes out of this is solely because people are pissed off and emotionally hyped up because of events they *believe* happened, not that were *proven*. Otherwise, if what they had *believed* to be true was supported by the evidence, Zim would've been convicted.

People do bad shiat, and when it can't be proven, they get to walk.  It's the same protection that keeps wrongfully accused people of being convicted of a crime, and the specific reason for our legal system working the way it does. Unless you can PROVE a crime, you're not convicted. just believing it to be true doesn't make it so.
 
2013-07-26 12:24:49 PM  
Will having more guns make Zimmerman feel safer, thereby making it less likely that he'll harass total strangers in the street for just walking along minding their own business?
 
2013-07-26 12:25:09 PM  

Good for him. The more I read about Trayvon Martin the more I think Zimmerman did us all a huge favor.



And anything that pisses off the people that somehow think this has anything to do with race is a good thing.
 
2013-07-26 12:25:32 PM  
Next these same people will tell you how everyone only cares about this case and nobody cares about the other cases of violence that happen everyday.
 
2013-07-26 12:25:52 PM  

ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.


I'll bite Mr Troll. Shiat like this is how we know that not everyone has the same interpretation of what happened.

/Gun rights guy who doesn't even want to own a gun and would never give one to Zimmerman.
 
2013-07-26 12:25:53 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.


A jury already said none of that happened, no matter what it is you "choose" to believe. He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

But flame on.... it's your story, I'll let you tell it.
 
2013-07-26 12:25:55 PM  

ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know gun laws that well, but that doesn't sound like a tort the U.S. would ever pass.


Want to bet? Not only are there civil laws in place against that.. there are criminal laws. What do you think will happen to you if you knowingly provide, not sell, a weapon to someone and they use that in a murder?

I'll give a hint:

http://www.theeagle.com/news/local/article_3abc77d2-bff6-53a4-89ae-e 95 06b60d210.html
 
2013-07-26 12:26:22 PM  

cowgirl toffee: My hedgehog killed and ate an earthworm. Is there any organization out there that would arm my hedgie?

btw... the earthworm was wearing a hoodie.


He wants something like this, but without the stoopid hat.

img22.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-26 12:27:19 PM  

S10Calade: Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

A jury already said none of that happened, no matter what it is you "choose" to believe. He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

But flame on.... it's your story, I'll let you tell it.


Tell me something.. If you are involved in a domestic violence case and it is dismissed or you are acquitted and you later get involved in ANOTHER domestic violence case.. what do you think the chances of that prior case will be brought up AND used against you? I'll give a massive hint: 100%.
 
2013-07-26 12:27:34 PM  

Bravo Two: Princess Ryans Knickers: They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

True, but since he was acquitted of murder, and legally was found to have used self defense, I'm not sure if that applies.


And they sent him money, not guns.
 
2013-07-26 12:27:46 PM  
It's great how gun nerds always pool their money to help out people tried and released on gun crimes.
 
2013-07-26 12:27:51 PM  
Every time someone mentions Zimmerman, god rapes a newborn koala bear and gives an extreme nice person ass cancer.
 
2013-07-26 12:28:27 PM  
*extremely
 
2013-07-26 12:29:03 PM  

Farkage: Bravo Two: Princess Ryans Knickers: They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

True, but since he was acquitted of murder, and legally was found to have used self defense, I'm not sure if that applies.

And they sent him money, not guns.


And if you provide directions to someone and they commit murder...
And if you drive them to a location and they rob a bank or kill someone...

Accomplice or accessory charges.
 
2013-07-26 12:29:32 PM  
These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.
 
2013-07-26 12:30:01 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.


This is why you should put NO QUESTIONS ASKED in all your gun store advertisments.  For legal protection, of course.
 
2013-07-26 12:30:18 PM  

ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.


You know their real hearts, even if they don't.  Everything you read reinforces your ideology because it's the truth.
 
2013-07-26 12:32:37 PM  
This is a violation of Zimmerman's rights, but there is a bona fide need for it: the weapon is evidence in an ongoing federal investigation. As long as that investigation continues and the feds are practicing due diligence with respect to it, it is fair for them to keep it. (The legitimacy of the investigation, given his acquittal, is another issue, but I believe that it's currently out of scope.)

But the man does need protection, no doubt about it. If some group wants to use its own money to provide that, let them.
 
2013-07-26 12:32:49 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.


He's only number one with a small faction of racists. All the other racists hate him.
 
2013-07-26 12:32:51 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Bravo Two: Princess Ryans Knickers: They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

True, but since he was acquitted of murder, and legally was found to have used self defense, I'm not sure if that applies.

And they sent him money, not guns.

And if you provide directions to someone and they commit murder...
And if you drive them to a location and they rob a bank or kill someone...

Accomplice or accessory charges.


It was money, not a weapon.  You have to get the gun through a legal transfer.  Anyone sending someone money is fine.  Regarding anyone selling him the gun, who knows, but since he was found not giulty and still has a valid permit I'd say they are fine as well.
 
2013-07-26 12:32:57 PM  

TerminalEchoes: ikanreed: bigsteve3OOO: Al Sharpton has a lot in common with these retards. and vice-versa.

Because what's called for here is a bizarre, unexplained false equivalence.

Yet it still makes sense. Al Sharpton, like this group, are just inflaming the situation.


Yes, pointing out the racism of racists is inflammatory.
 
2013-07-26 12:33:01 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: S10Calade: Princess Ryans Knickers: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

They aren't a gun seller. If you knowingly provide a weapon to someone who has a history of violent action and/or has committed a murder you can potentially be sued.

A jury already said none of that happened, no matter what it is you "choose" to believe. He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

But flame on.... it's your story, I'll let you tell it.

Tell me something.. If you are involved in a domestic violence case and it is dismissed or you are acquitted and you later get involved in ANOTHER domestic violence case.. what do you think the chances of that prior case will be brought up AND used against you? I'll give a massive hint: 100%.


If you have any sort of decent lawyer, none. It was dismissed and irrelevant. Things like that can't be used used against you in a future case. That's pretty common knowledge.... for most.
 
2013-07-26 12:33:06 PM  
Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...
 
2013-07-26 12:33:14 PM  

drew46n2: Indicative of the idiocy of this country's gun fetishists.


Idiocy?  This is PR.  PR can make you rich.

www.loveyourdash.com
 
2013-07-26 12:33:29 PM  

DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.


Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.
 
2013-07-26 12:34:23 PM  
Not Guilty.  Can ya say it without spitting? Ha!
 
2013-07-26 12:34:55 PM  

Aristocles: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.

He's only number one with a small faction of racists. All the other racists hate him.


It's gotta be confusing for a racist to cheer for a Latino Jew.
 
2013-07-26 12:35:04 PM  
Send lawyers, guns, and money.
 
2013-07-26 12:35:33 PM  
Welcome to Ohio. You should've checked what the flag looked like before you moved here.
ak4.picdn.net
 
2013-07-26 12:36:08 PM  
Does Zimmerman even want a new gun(s)?

He probably needs one for protection, but at the same time, he seems like a guy who would only use one as a last resort and who's now trying to lay low.
 
2013-07-26 12:36:25 PM  

boredofedu: Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...


Maybe, but the gun didn't cause the trouble, and Zimmerman's got enough of a head on his shoulders to recognize that.
 
2013-07-26 12:36:28 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Interpretation: Group of Ohio men want to have sex with George Zimmerman, have money to burn and are in deep denial about their homosexuality.


The joke's on them. I'm pretty sure they're in manlove with  pre-trial George Zimmerman. They must not have seen any of the pictures where he'd porked up  after the trial.
 
2013-07-26 12:37:39 PM  

Aristocles: Does Zimmerman even want a new gun(s)?


He's asked for it, so presumably he does.

He probably needs one for protection, but at the same time, he seems like a guy who would only use one as a last resort and who's now trying to lay low.

Probably, but you can't use a gun as a last resort if you don't have one.
 
2013-07-26 12:37:42 PM  
Do you have to pay taxes on that?
 
2013-07-26 12:37:48 PM  

boredofedu: Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...


I'm pretty sure that he's moved out of the neighborhood, so he's got that covered.  Regarding the gun...self-defense is something that's even more vitally important for the man.  Not like the FBI or Florida Troopers are going to be protecting him.  And as they say, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away."
 
2013-07-26 12:38:00 PM  

DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.


I think it has more to do with being angry about how this poor guy was completely railroaded by the media and the freaking President of the United States and damn near lynched by popular demand. In reality, he's likely twice the douche bag his enemies paint him as, but he wasn't a murderer or even a manslaughter-er, and he'll go down in history as the text book example of what happens when the media and the left wing establishment decide they don't like you.


Not that anyone asked, but this was the last straw that made be write off this president for good after vigorously defending him for 5 years.
 
2013-07-26 12:41:15 PM  

stevarooni: boredofedu: Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...

I'm pretty sure that he's moved out of the neighborhood, so he's got that covered.


When he pulled those people out of that car wreck, it was very close to where he'd lived before the trial. He might be planning to move, but if so, he hasn't done it yet.
 
2013-07-26 12:41:20 PM  

Aristocles: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.

He's only number one with a small faction of racists. All the other racists hate himhave decided that he's white.


FTFY
 
2013-07-26 12:41:45 PM  

AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.


Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.
 
2013-07-26 12:42:11 PM  

Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.


Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.
 
2013-07-26 12:42:46 PM  

anfrind: Aristocles: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.

He's only number one with a small faction of racists. All the other racists hate himhave decided that he's white.

FTFY


He's latino. So glad to see the conservatives suddenly loving latinos.
 
2013-07-26 12:43:26 PM  

Magnanimous_J: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

I think it has more to do with being angry about how this poor guy was completely railroaded by the media and the freaking President of the United States and damn near lynched by popular demand. In reality, he's likely twice the douche bag his enemies paint him as, but he wasn't a murderer or even a manslaughter-er, and he'll go down in history as the text book example of what happens when the media and the left wing establishment decide they don't like you.


Not that anyone asked, but this was the last straw that made be write off this president for good after vigorously defending him for 5 years.


I noticed a lot of people were trying to rub one out until they found out he wasn't white or racist. Then they had to figure out how to make him white and racist so they could finish.
 
2013-07-26 12:44:17 PM  

Millennium: boredofedu: Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...

Maybe, but the gun didn't cause the trouble, and Zimmerman's got enough of a head on his shoulders to recognize that.


*sigh*

Any grown man who can't fight a teenager gains a certain amount of "courage" once armed. Without the gun a pussy like Zimmerman likely doesn't leave his vehicle.
 
2013-07-26 12:44:31 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.


What if it's counterfeit money?  Or sent in the middle of a case of C-4 explosives?  Would it be okay to send money, then? :D
/ Pedantic Princess is pedantic
 
2013-07-26 12:45:03 PM  
Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.
 
2013-07-26 12:45:17 PM  

Crabs_Can_Polevault: Because People in power are Stupid: Interpretation: Group of Ohio men want to have sex with George Zimmerman, have money to burn and are in deep denial about their homosexuality.

The joke's on them. I'm pretty sure they're in manlove with  pre-trial George Zimmerman. They must not have seen any of the pictures where he'd porked up  after the trial.


You noticed that too? I think George's motive was that he wanted to eat those skittles.
 
2013-07-26 12:46:26 PM  
And the hero worship of a situation which had no heroes continues unabated.
 
2013-07-26 12:47:01 PM  

DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.


How dare we glorify your right to self-defense!  It's a bad thing!
 
2013-07-26 12:47:18 PM  
Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!
 
2013-07-26 12:47:33 PM  

abhorrent1: Does he still have his CCW permit or did they take that away?


Why would they revoke his CCW for a justified and legal shooting?
 
2013-07-26 12:48:30 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!


Three strikes in one sentence.  Good job.
 
2013-07-26 12:48:51 PM  

Wangiss: How dare we glorify your right to self-defense!  It's a bad thing!


I think I found the problem in your statement. You should be glorifying avoiding the need to use your right to self-defense.

The fact that when you exercise that right, at least one person ends up dead, and two lives end up destroyed should give you pause in your zealousness. There's a difference in being PREPARED to defend yourself, and in going out and actively seeking out situations which give you justification to use it.
 
2013-07-26 12:49:00 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!


He wanted those goddamn Skittles!!!!
 
2013-07-26 12:51:23 PM  

Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.


What's the IPA? I remember have one of their rotator series (I think it was Rye IPA) and it was pretty good. Then I tried a different one that was brewed with grapefruit peel and it was trash.
 
2013-07-26 12:51:26 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!


still with that? You're going to keep running that up until it sticks? Repeat a lie often enough I guess. The jury saw it differently. So kick rocks and find another crusade, you lost this one. It was a weak case to hitch your race baiting wagon too to begin with. The prosecution let him off the hook. The case was limp and their star witness was farking retarded for crissakes. There wasnt much they could do
 
2013-07-26 12:51:35 PM  

drew46n2: Millennium: boredofedu: Onr would think that if one were involved in a year-long court case involving killing someone with a gun, one may want to stay away from the very thing that caused the trouble in the first place...

Just sayin'...

Maybe, but the gun didn't cause the trouble, and Zimmerman's got enough of a head on his shoulders to recognize that.

*sigh*

Any grown man who can't fight a teenager gains a certain amount of "courage" once armed. Without the gun a pussy like Zimmerman likely doesn't leave his vehicle.


Even if that weren't crass projection on your part, it still goes through far too many levels of indirection to reasonably be called a "cause."
 
2013-07-26 12:52:18 PM  
400 guns?
 
2013-07-26 12:53:39 PM  

Onkel Buck: creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!

still with that? You're going to keep running that up until it sticks? Repeat a lie often enough I guess. The jury saw it differently. So kick rocks and find another crusade, you lost this one. It was a weak case to hitch your race baiting wagon too to begin with. The prosecution let him off the hook. The case was limp and their star witness was farking retarded for crissakes. There wasnt much they could do


I think your sarcasm detector is buggy.
 
2013-07-26 12:54:20 PM  
Princess Ryans Knickers:

Tell me something.. If you are involved in a domestic violence case and it is dismissed or you are acquitted and you later get involved in ANOTHER domestic violence case.. what do you think the chances of that prior case will be brought up AND used against you? I'll give a massive hint: 100%.

None.

An amateur prosecutor may try to bring it up but a judge will quickly dismiss it as irrelevant.   A experienced prosecutor won't even go down that road because it may be grounds for an appeal.    The prosecutor may only present evidence related to the crime at hand.   He may try present a previous record as character reference but that is risky.

Now if the asshat was convicted then you may present it as prior and show a pattern of abuse.
 
2013-07-26 12:55:48 PM  

TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.


He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.
 
2013-07-26 12:56:00 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!


*checks join date*

Trollin, trollin, trollin.......
 
2013-07-26 12:56:29 PM  

Wangiss: ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.

You know their real hearts, even if they don't.  Everything you read reinforces your ideology because it's the truth.


No, it's because guns aren't a fundamental right, have nothing to do with being human, and everything to do with adolescent power fantasies.  Real rights protect your right to be your own person.  Mythological rights help you kill people.
 
2013-07-26 12:58:40 PM  

DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.


To be fair, he didn't know when he did that he was going to be a national spectacle for how racist he was.  He thought it would just be some private racism between him and the "thug".
 
2013-07-26 01:00:02 PM  

S10Calade: creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!

*checks join date*

Trollin, trollin, trollin.......


Hell, you didn't even have to look at his join date, just look at his name...
 
2013-07-26 01:00:15 PM  
Zimmerman will probably not die of old age. He may have escaped justice in this case but with his history of violence and stupidity eventually he will pick a fight with somebody who will take him down first. I predict it will happen before he turns 40.
 
2013-07-26 01:00:21 PM  

Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.


I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.
 
2013-07-26 01:02:01 PM  

Lord Apathy: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.


Sorry. I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome Angry Orchard Crisp Apple is.
 
2013-07-26 01:02:50 PM  

Lord Apathy: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.


Total Wine was selling 120 Minute for $10 a bottle (12oz bottle), I was curious so I gave it a try, now I want my $10 back. But I've been enjoying Lost Rhino's IceBreaker IPA, growler refills $2 off on Sundays.
 
2013-07-26 01:02:53 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!


A police dispatcher can not ORDER anyone to do anything.  Zimmerman had just as much right to be there at Martan did.
 
2013-07-26 01:04:08 PM  

Lord Apathy: creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!

A police dispatcher can not ORDER anyone to do anything.  Zimmerman had just as much right to be there at Martan did.


A doctor can't order you to take your medication for your heart either. But it's generally a good idea to listen to both if continually living is your desired outcome.
 
2013-07-26 01:04:22 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.


It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?
 
2013-07-26 01:05:13 PM  

Aristocles: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

What's the IPA? I remember have one of their rotator series (I think it was Rye IPA) and it was pretty good. Then I tried a different one that was brewed with grapefruit peel and it was trash.


It's actually a lager (pilsner maybe?) that they hopified.  It's not extremely hoppy and very refreshing.  There were four in the pack - the other two were their standard hefeweisen which I'm not big on as a style, and citra blond which is pretty good too.
 
2013-07-26 01:05:45 PM  

Lord Apathy: creepy ass-cracka: Zimmerman MURDERED a young black boy because he didn't STAY IN HIS CAR like he was ORDERED!

A police dispatcher can not ORDER anyone to do anything.  Zimmerman had just as much right to be there at Martan did.


But 1000 times more right to stand his ground than Martin.
 
2013-07-26 01:05:56 PM  

Lord Apathy: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.


I would definitely drink a beer called that.  I bet it goes good with bacon.
 
2013-07-26 01:07:12 PM  

Aristocles: Lord Apathy: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.

Total Wine was selling 120 Minute for $10 a bottle (12oz bottle), I was curious so I gave it a try, now I want my $10 back. But I've been enjoying Lost Rhino's IceBreaker IPA, growler refills $2 off on Sundays.


yeah that's silly.  I like 60 and 90 but there are other IPAs I favor much more than theirs.
 
2013-07-26 01:07:19 PM  

Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?


It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.
 
2013-07-26 01:07:26 PM  

max_pooper: Zimmerman will probably not die of old age. He may have escaped justice in this case but with his history of violence and stupidity eventually he will pick a fight with somebody who will take him down first. I predict it will happen before he turns 40.


His problem is that he's not a racist.  At least not the hood-wearing kind.
If he was, he could probably hook up with some supremacist group and be fine.
As it is, he's going to try and live his life as if everything is normal and he didn't get away with manslaughter.
 
2013-07-26 01:07:48 PM  

Carn: Aristocles: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

What's the IPA? I remember have one of their rotator series (I think it was Rye IPA) and it was pretty good. Then I tried a different one that was brewed with grapefruit peel and it was trash.

It's actually a lager (pilsner maybe?) that they hopified.  It's not extremely hoppy and very refreshing.  There were four in the pack - the other two were their standard hefeweisen which I'm not big on as a style, and citra blond which is pretty good too.


Durr forgot the name.  Hopside Down.
 
2013-07-26 01:08:11 PM  

DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.


That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.
 
2013-07-26 01:09:23 PM  

hardinparamedic: Lord Apathy: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

I tried a local brew, I think, called Naked Pig.  I found it to be a little bitter but at least it was drinkable.

Sorry. I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome Angry Orchard Crisp Apple is.


I like cider but it's generally a fall only beverage for me.
 
2013-07-26 01:09:26 PM  
Aristocles:
Total Wine was selling 120 Minute for $10 a bottle (12oz bottle), I was curious so I gave it a try, now I want my $10 back. But I've been enjoying Lost Rhino's IceBreaker IPA, growler refills $2 off on Sundays.

Nothing worse than local brands that are bad, well except for that swill they sell in the beer cave.  If you can see through it, then it isn't worth drinking.
 
2013-07-26 01:10:14 PM  

Carn: Aristocles: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

What's the IPA? I remember have one of their rotator series (I think it was Rye IPA) and it was pretty good. Then I tried a different one that was brewed with grapefruit peel and it was trash.

It's actually a lager (pilsner maybe?) that they hopified.  It's not extremely hoppy and very refreshing.  There were four in the pack - the other two were their standard hefeweisen which I'm not big on as a style, and citra blond which is pretty good too.


For some reason the weather dropped from the upper 90s to the low 80s in my area so I'm starting to drink Hefe and I'm looking for a good Marzen cuz I think it's Oktoberfest already. Currently I have some Harpoon Summer Ale (decent) and some Paulaner Hefe (pretty good) at home waiting for me. I'll need to check out that Rotator, though, if it's a pils, it might be good for doing yard work or grilling.
 
2013-07-26 01:10:46 PM  

ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

 
2013-07-26 01:11:31 PM  

TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.


You can't join Lynch Mob, they broke up.  No wait, they're still going!
 
2013-07-26 01:12:25 PM  

ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.


According to the jury, he killed his attacker in self defense.  And I'm not a Zimmerman "supporter", just a logical person.
 
2013-07-26 01:13:13 PM  

KrustyKitten: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.


Oh look, he had a motive in killing someone.  That's almost like everyone who's ever killed anyone.  We know he had a tough choice at the time.  We know the jury had to rule on that information.  A person died, and there's a gleeful bunch of people going "kill some more!!!!"
 
2013-07-26 01:13:17 PM  

Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.


Did your link get disapproved?
 
2013-07-26 01:13:36 PM  

Lord Apathy: Aristocles:
Total Wine was selling 120 Minute for $10 a bottle (12oz bottle), I was curious so I gave it a try, now I want my $10 back. But I've been enjoying Lost Rhino's IceBreaker IPA, growler refills $2 off on Sundays.

Nothing worse than local brands that are bad, well except for that swill they sell in the beer cave.  If you can see through it, then it isn't worth drinking.


The local brand (Lost Rhino) is pretty good, but the Dogfish Head 120 minute was a let down. I don't see what all the hype's about.
 
2013-07-26 01:13:52 PM  

Aristocles: Carn: Aristocles: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

What's the IPA? I remember have one of their rotator series (I think it was Rye IPA) and it was pretty good. Then I tried a different one that was brewed with grapefruit peel and it was trash.

It's actually a lager (pilsner maybe?) that they hopified.  It's not extremely hoppy and very refreshing.  There were four in the pack - the other two were their standard hefeweisen which I'm not big on as a style, and citra blond which is pretty good too.

For some reason the weather dropped from the upper 90s to the low 80s in my area so I'm starting to drink Hefe and I'm looking for a good Marzen cuz I think it's Oktoberfest already. Currently I have some Harpoon Summer Ale (decent) and some Paulaner Hefe (pretty good) at home waiting for me. I'll need to check out that Rotator, though, if it's a pils, it might be good for doing yard work or grilling.


Here too (Falls Church).  Yesterday the high was maybe 80.  It's supposed to be fairly mild and below average on the 10 day forecast too.  Bout time we got a break after 10 years of melting hot summers.

I've been thinking about marzen too, but that's one of my favorites.  Hopefully gonna brew one next weekend.
 
2013-07-26 01:14:25 PM  

Aristocles: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: George Zimmerman: not racist, but number one with racists.

He's only number one with a small faction of racists. All the other racists hate him.


Lol...10/10
/but only white people can be racist
 
2013-07-26 01:14:47 PM  

Wangiss: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

Did your link get disapproved?


haha, no link, but maybe there's a beer one.  To the interwebs!
 
2013-07-26 01:16:04 PM  
Nothing unexpected. The next thing he should do is make some appearances at gun shows. Maybe do some speaking engagements. And if he hasn't already started negotiating his book deal yet, he'd better get on that.

The money train is waiting, but it won't wait forever. The time to start cashing in is now.
 
2013-07-26 01:16:56 PM  

ikanreed: KrustyKitten: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

Oh look, he had a motive in killing someone.  That's almost like everyone who's ever killed anyone.  We know he had a tough choice at the time.  We know the jury had to rule on that information.  A person died, and there's a gleeful bunch of people going "kill some more!!!!"


Gleeful?  "Kill some more"?  Are you drunk?
 
2013-07-26 01:17:28 PM  

Farkage: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

According to the jury, he killed his attacker in self defense.  And I'm not a Zimmerman "supporter", just a logical person.


We know why he did it.  The supporters are the douchebags who are super enthusiastic about more guns and more killing of black people.  You can go back through all the threads on this on fark.  I've never been a "railroad zimmerman" person.  But the active supporters are KKK wannabes.  There's a line between "shiat that's tough; Zimmerman made a series of poor choices none of which were illegal or strictly immoral" and "fark yeah, zimmerman's in the right, that thug had it comming"
 
2013-07-26 01:18:05 PM  
Carn:

I've been thinking about marzen too, but that's one of my favorites.  Hopefully gonna brew one next weekend.

How difficult is that to do?  I've been thinking about rolling my own beer for awhile now.  Might as well since my career in politics was short lived.   I only had one person vote for me and even she thought I was to much of an ass.  Thanks mom.
 
2013-07-26 01:19:16 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: How dare we glorify your right to self-defense!  It's a bad thing!

I think I found the problem in your statement. You should be glorifying avoiding the need to use your right to self-defense.

The fact that when you exercise that right, at least one person ends up dead, and two lives end up destroyed should give you pause in your zealousness. There's a difference in being PREPARED to defend yourself, and in going out and actively seeking out situations which give you justification to use it.


Do you pretend to know that that's what happened in this case?
Me, I'm okay with a neighborhood watchman defending himself from lethal force.  I actually do think that's good.  If the testimony accepted by the jury is correct, he was assaulted for doing nothing more than his normal duty--things like asking what a person is doing out at night in your neighborhood when there's been a rash of break-ins is a legal, even neighborly thing to do.  It's sad he was assaulted.  It's sad someone felt the need to do that.  It's not sad that he defended himself with lethal force when (again, assuming the accepted testimony is correct) he was having lethal force used against him.  That's the natural right to self defense, which is nothing more than a corollary of the right to life, which is a very important part of our nation's heritage, and in many Americans' opinions, worthy of glorification.
 
2013-07-26 01:19:29 PM  
Hey , reality check people , good quality body armor isn't cheap!
 
2013-07-26 01:19:37 PM  

Farkage: ikanreed: KrustyKitten: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

Oh look, he had a motive in killing someone.  That's almost like everyone who's ever killed anyone.  We know he had a tough choice at the time.  We know the jury had to rule on that information.  A person died, and there's a gleeful bunch of people going "kill some more!!!!"

Gleeful?  "Kill some more"?  Are you drunk?


That's pretty farking apparent that they're "sticking it to the libs" here.  You see this mentality all the damn time in tea-party types, and it's farking sick.
 
2013-07-26 01:20:36 PM  

TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.


I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.
 
2013-07-26 01:22:02 PM  

DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.


Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.
 
2013-07-26 01:22:25 PM  

ikanreed: KrustyKitten: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

Oh look, he had a motive in killing someone.  That's almost like everyone who's ever killed anyone.  We know he had a tough choice at the time.  We know the jury had to rule on that information.  A person died, and there's a gleeful bunch of people going "kill some more!!!!"



Not at all.  There's a bunch of people going, you don't have to give up your right to defend yourself just because you've defended yourself once before!
Self defense is not like a one and done thing.
 
2013-07-26 01:23:31 PM  
I just realized how stupid those quotes look in my previous post.  They contain a much more elaborate implicit argument in them than anyone is ever going to assume.  Just pretend they're not there.
 
2013-07-26 01:25:57 PM  

ikanreed: Farkage: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

According to the jury, he killed his attacker in self defense.  And I'm not a Zimmerman "supporter", just a logical person.

We know why he did it.  The supporters are the douchebags who are super enthusiastic about more guns and more killing of black people.  You can go back through all the threads on this on fark.  I've never been a "railroad zimmerman" person.  But the active supporters are KKK wannabes.  There's a line between "shiat that's tough; Zimmerman made a series of poor choices none of which were illegal or strictly immoral" and "fark ...


Anyone banging my head against the pavement has it coming.  Prior to lethal force, though: yeah, a fist-fight you can run away from isn't grounds for a shooting.
 
2013-07-26 01:26:41 PM  

KrustyKitten: ikanreed: KrustyKitten: ikanreed: Farkage: Princess Ryans Knickers: Farkage: Anyone sending someone money is fine.

Look up 'providing material support to a terrorist organization'. And 'conspiracy'. So no, just sending someone money is not fine unless you fully disclaim knowledge of what the money will be used for. And even then it can backfire in terrorist cases.

It isn't a conspiracy unless he announced his intent to try to get a gun and kill someone.  Getting sent money for an alarm, or gun, for self defense purposes when he still legally has a permit to posess and carry a handgun does not make someone liable just because they sent him money.  Reread what is in bold a few times.  Then read it again.  It doesn't matter if you throw around words like terrorosm and all that, because that has nothing to do with this.  I can see you're having a litle trouble with logic though :)

If he used his own money to buy a new gun, would the entire justice department be liable since they didn't take away his legal permit to own one?  after all, by your logic they are just enabling him, aren't they?

It's the fact that they're specifically arming someone they know to have defended himself against an attacker killed an innocent person.  Understanding that sometimes making tough choices in dangerous situations is protected by law is different that actively encouraging a person to kill again.  Zimmerman was a tough case, Zimmerman's active "supporters" are universally bad human beings.

Oh look, he had a motive in killing someone.  That's almost like everyone who's ever killed anyone.  We know he had a tough choice at the time.  We know the jury had to rule on that information.  A person died, and there's a gleeful bunch of people going "kill some more!!!!"


Not at all.  There's a bunch of people going, you don't have to give up your right to defend yourself just because you've defended yourself once before!
Self defense is not like a one and done thing.


That stupid, idiotic right hasn't even remotely been infringed.  This is a clear case of people wanting to cause more of the same: namely people being shot.  I dare you to go to a site like the tea-party community and see what people say should be done.  It's not "kill less people".
 
2013-07-26 01:26:56 PM  

Lord Apathy: Carn:

I've been thinking about marzen too, but that's one of my favorites.  Hopefully gonna brew one next weekend.

How difficult is that to do?  I've been thinking about rolling my own beer for awhile now.  Might as well since my career in politics was short lived.   I only had one person vote for me and even she thought I was to much of an ass.  Thanks mom.


Not too hard at all though you will want to start with ales because they ferment at typical room temperatures (usually 65-75).  To do lagers you need a spare fridge or other cooling chamber and a compressor controller which they sell for like 40-50 bucks.  Although some people do a lager kit but just ferment room temp and it still comes out pretty tasty, although not as smooth and crisp as a true lager.  There are tons of different kits for damn near any type of beer, plus specific ones by different breweries.  You just need a big pot and a starter kit that runs about $50-$100 which will have a bucket, thermometer and other stuff, and a beer kit which start around $30 and go up from there depending on how many extra ingredients they have.  Check for brew stores near you or if there aren't any check out Northern Brewer or sites like that.
 
2013-07-26 01:28:03 PM  
Everyone should be appalled at the DoJ getting involved in this, regardless of your feelings on the topic.

Well...unless you want the DoJ to act on how many FB likes or twitter votes they get on an incident.
 
2013-07-26 01:28:28 PM  

Carn: Wangiss: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

Did your link get disapproved?

haha, no link, but maybe there's a beer one.  To the interwebs!


I'll be checking the Geek tab for your beer link, should you find one.
 
2013-07-26 01:29:59 PM  

ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.


Because M was just going to stop banging Z's head against the pavement out of the kindness of his soul?  He didn't stop once he had a chance to run away; he didn't stop once he had the upper hand.  What makes you 100% sure M wasn't going to finish Z off?  If Z had few fewer constitution points, he'd have died from what he'd sustained already.  Lethal force is lethal.

/poindexter
//D&D
///slashies
 
2013-07-26 01:31:58 PM  

Wangiss: Because M was just going to stop banging Z's head against the pavement out of the kindness of his soul? He didn't stop once he had a chance to run away; he didn't stop once he had the upper hand. What makes you 100% sure M wasn't going to finish Z off? If Z had few fewer constitution points, he'd have died from what he'd sustained already. Lethal force is lethal.


Actually, the point of lethal force, according to the defense was when M went for zimmerman's gun.  Funny how that escalated matters, huh?
 
2013-07-26 01:32:06 PM  
Carn:
Not too hard at all though you will want to start with ales because they ferment at typical room temperatures (usually 65-75).

Thanks I'll have to give it a try.  The worse thing I can do is poison myself.  All the beer talk keeps getting lost in the noise about guns and such.  Getting harder to filter it out.
 
2013-07-26 01:32:48 PM  

cowgirl toffee: My hedgehog killed and ate an earthworm. Is there any organization out there that would arm my hedgie?

btw... the earthworm was wearing a hoodie.


No horribly crappy MS paint of this incident? I feel disapointed.
 
2013-07-26 01:34:29 PM  
If the justice department took away the gun I used to murd...uh protect myself, I wouldn't worry. I have 32 more. I can defend myself 31 more times, and still have a gun to protect myself from angry families.
 
2013-07-26 01:35:46 PM  

ikanreed: Wangiss: Because M was just going to stop banging Z's head against the pavement out of the kindness of his soul? He didn't stop once he had a chance to run away; he didn't stop once he had the upper hand. What makes you 100% sure M wasn't going to finish Z off? If Z had few fewer constitution points, he'd have died from what he'd sustained already. Lethal force is lethal.

Actually, the point of lethal force, according to the defense was when M went for zimmerman's gun.  Funny how that escalated matters, huh?


I don't find it funny.  I also think they could have made a case for concrete-as-a-lethal-weapon if they had to.
 
2013-07-26 01:36:38 PM  

Aristocles: Carn: Wangiss: Carn: Can we be done with Zimmerman?  I'm damn tired of hearing about him.  Let's talk about good beers for summer.  I just bought a Widmer sampler and I like their Rotator IPA and Alchemy Ale.

Did your link get disapproved?

haha, no link, but maybe there's a beer one.  To the interwebs!

I'll be checking the Geek tab for your beer link, should you find one.


I actually found one that might be worthy of the main page.
 
2013-07-26 01:38:04 PM  

Lord Apathy: Carn:
Not too hard at all though you will want to start with ales because they ferment at typical room temperatures (usually 65-75).

Thanks I'll have to give it a try.  The worse thing I can do is poison myself.  All the beer talk keeps getting lost in the noise about guns and such.  Getting harder to filter it out.


Do it, it's fun.  And you get to drink your mistakes!
 
2013-07-26 01:39:28 PM  

bigsteve3OOO: Al Sharpton has a lot in common with these retards. and vice-versa.


===============

I don't know about that.  Sharpton certainly dresses better than your average NRA tard.  He also gets some fine-ass cootchie.

rollingout.com
 
2013-07-26 01:39:48 PM  

ikanreed: Wangiss: ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.

You know their real hearts, even if they don't.  Everything you read reinforces your ideology because it's the truth.

No, it's because guns aren't a fundamental right, have nothing to do with being human...


Actually, I'm going to say that you're right about this: gun rights, in particular, are not a fundamental human right. However, they emerge logically, inevitably, and undeniably from the application of two fundamental human rights to one another (self-defense and equal protection of the laws) in the current social/technological climate. You might call them an "emergent human rights" for that reason, but that makes them no less inalienable or important for any civilized society.

...and everything to do with adolescent power fantasies.

We get it. You're scared. But fear has no place in a discussion of rights.

Real rights protect your right to be your own person.

Which can, in some very dark and sad circumstances, include killing someone who is trying to violate them.
 
2013-07-26 01:41:09 PM  

ikanreed: Wangiss: Because M was just going to stop banging Z's head against the pavement out of the kindness of his soul? He didn't stop once he had a chance to run away; he didn't stop once he had the upper hand. What makes you 100% sure M wasn't going to finish Z off? If Z had few fewer constitution points, he'd have died from what he'd sustained already. Lethal force is lethal.

Actually, the point of lethal force, according to the defense was when M went for zimmerman's gun.  Funny how that escalated matters, huh?


...which is, incidentally, our only indication of any point when Martin knew Zimmerman had a weapon at all. Remove it, and you remove any reason for Martin to fear for his life, which destroys any self-defense claim he would otherwise have had.
 
2013-07-26 01:44:04 PM  

Wangiss: ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.

Because M was just going to stop banging Z's head agai ...


I wonder what would have happened if Zimmerman decided to stay in his car and not play Dirty Harry that day.
 
2013-07-26 01:46:00 PM  

IRQ12: Everyone should be appalled at the DoJ getting involved in this, regardless of your feelings on the topic.

Well...unless you want the DoJ to act on how many FB likes or twitter votes they get on an incident.


The only way the DoJ should be involved or FB/Twitter be a factor is if the DoJ is going to investigate all the death threats and seditious posts that went up on social media.  Any takers on the likelihood of that happening?
 
2013-07-26 01:47:02 PM  

ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.


Assuming Martin didn't end up killing Zimmerman.  Slamming someone's head against a sidewalk can do that you know.  I'm not saying that is what would have happened, but if you're presuming Zimmerman caused everything, then you are also presuming Martin did nothing wrong.  That isn't the case (at least that anyone can prove.)  He was found not guilty, which means that a jury that had more upfront, direct and personal access to the evidence than any of us will ever have found he acted in self defense.  The situation sucks all around, but don't pretend that "If only...everything would have been sunshine and rainbows", because that is pretty much baseless.
 
2013-07-26 01:54:24 PM  

DubyaHater: Wangiss: ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.

Because M was just going to stop banging Z's ...


If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?
 
2013-07-26 01:54:34 PM  

ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.


Inflammatory much?
 
2013-07-26 01:55:50 PM  

AngryDragon: IRQ12: Everyone should be appalled at the DoJ getting involved in this, regardless of your feelings on the topic.

Well...unless you want the DoJ to act on how many FB likes or twitter votes they get on an incident.

The only way the DoJ should be involved or FB/Twitter be a factor is if the DoJ is going to investigate all the death threats and seditious posts that went up on social media.  Any takers on the likelihood of that happening?


In a society that truly respects freedom of speech and thought, "sedition" is a null word. Nominally, it is null in the USA.
 
2013-07-26 01:56:38 PM  

DubyaHater: Wangiss: ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.

Because M was just going to stop banging Z's ...


I wonder what would have happened if Martin just kept walking instead of going back that day?

I'm not defending Zimmerman, I'm sick of hearing both sides.  Team Trayvon is completely nuts too.
 
2013-07-26 02:00:15 PM  
He was acquitted.  Get the fark over it.
 
2013-07-26 02:03:27 PM  

DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.


That's what I would expect unarmed women to react..just call the men with the guns and hide in fear till they show up...weak americans
 
2013-07-26 02:06:31 PM  

Farkage: Assuming Martin didn't end up killing Zimmerman. Slamming someone's head against a sidewalk can do that you know. I'm not saying that is what would have happened


Actually, it probably would have. As a quick aside, if Pierce Morgan's interview with Rachel Jeantel is any interview, Martin may honestly have not known that slamming Zimmerman's head into the concrete could kill him. That would make him unlikely to stop doing it, not because of any malice, but because it wouldn't have occurred to him that he was doing anything truly dangerous.
 
2013-07-26 02:07:51 PM  

DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.


I think that it is their wet dream to shoot someone who breaking down the door to their sacred, special place.
 
2013-07-26 02:11:25 PM  

Farkage: It was money, not a weapon. You have to get the gun through a legal transfer. Anyone sending someone money is fine. Regarding anyone selling him the gun, who knows, but since he was found not giulty and still has a valid permit I'd say they are fine as well.


Excellent point, and they no doubt are completely familiar with their rights and how to limit liability in such situations.  He may be a thug-slaying hero but they're not crazy, after all.

SithLord: Here's a proposal - George Zimmerman gets to shoot Ariel Castro and redeem himself in the media.  Can we at least agree to that?


Ariel Castro was thoughtful enough to remind us all just how audacious someone can be to proclaim their innocence.  With GZ there was limited evidence, a lot of gray area about aggression, so yeah even without hindsight his plea of "not guilty" makes sense.  Ariel Castro is basically saying I didn't do any of that sh*t and that is completely mind blowing.
 
2013-07-26 02:26:18 PM  

Farkage: If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?


Comparing a rape with a situation where it is reasonable to believe that both parties actions contributed to the event's outcome as it did is pretty intellectually dishonest, dude.
 
2013-07-26 02:27:42 PM  

factoryconnection: Farkage: It was money, not a weapon. You have to get the gun through a legal transfer. Anyone sending someone money is fine. Regarding anyone selling him the gun, who knows, but since he was found not giulty and still has a valid permit I'd say they are fine as well.

Excellent point, and they no doubt are completely familiar with their rights and how to limit liability in such situations.  He may be a thug-slaying hero but they're not crazy, after all.

SithLord: Here's a proposal - George Zimmerman gets to shoot Ariel Castro and redeem himself in the media.  Can we at least agree to that?

Ariel Castro was thoughtful enough to remind us all just how audacious someone can be to proclaim their innocence.  With GZ there was limited evidence, a lot of gray area about aggression, so yeah even without hindsight his plea of "not guilty" makes sense.  Ariel Castro is basically saying I didn't do any of that sh*t and that is completely mind blowing.


I never called him a hero either.  2 idiots tried to out-idiot each other.  One of them won, but he didn't break the law.
 
2013-07-26 02:31:14 PM  

Farkage: One of them won, but he didn't break the law.But there was not sufficient evidence to prove the case that he negligently contributed to the situation beyond reasonable doubt.


FTFY. In the end, all we are going to have from this situation is personal beliefs about what happened, because it is unreasonable to think that Zimmerman would be completely honest about this situation, especially when it would not benefit him to do so.

But I agree with you on the first part. Two lives are destroyed out of this. This should be a cautionary fable, NOT a hero-worship situation.
 
2013-07-26 02:33:03 PM  

hardinparamedic: Farkage: If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?

Comparing a rape with a situation where it is reasonable to believe that both parties actions contributed to the event's outcome as it did is pretty intellectually dishonest, dude.


I agree with you, just tired of the constant derp coming from the extremists on both sides.  (I was directing that at the "If Zimmerman stayed home that day!!!!" crowd).
 
2013-07-26 02:34:20 PM  

farkmedown: AngryDragon: IRQ12: Everyone should be appalled at the DoJ getting involved in this, regardless of your feelings on the topic.

Well...unless you want the DoJ to act on how many FB likes or twitter votes they get on an incident.

The only way the DoJ should be involved or FB/Twitter be a factor is if the DoJ is going to investigate all the death threats and seditious posts that went up on social media.  Any takers on the likelihood of that happening?

In a society that truly respects freedom of speech and thought, "sedition" is a null word. Nominally, it is null in the USA.


I'm fairly certain that inciting others to engage in a criminal and violent riot against innocent citizens because you are unhappy with a lawful court decision is the very poster child for seditious activity.  I'm also certain that every civilized nation on the planet defines it as such.
 
2013-07-26 02:35:10 PM  

hardinparamedic: This should be a cautionary fable, NOT a hero-worship situation.


^^^ This!
 
2013-07-26 02:47:35 PM  

Farkage: I agree with you, just tired of the constant derp coming from the extremists on both sides.  (I was directing that at the "If Zimmerman stayed home that day!!!!" crowd).


I'm tired of it from both sides, as someone who initially found himself in the "What a racist fark" camp thanks to his brother not helping things, and moved to the lines of "What a maroon" for putting himself in that situation in the first place.

The fact that people are glorifying this, and using it to encourage CCW holders to put themselves into situations where they would be likely to have to use their weapon is silly.
 
2013-07-26 02:47:48 PM  

farkmedown: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

Inflammatory much?


Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?  The second amendment serves no purpose.
 
2013-07-26 02:53:15 PM  

hardinparamedic: because it is unreasonable to think that Zimmerman would be completely honest about this situation, especially when it would not benefit him to do so


How do you figure? He's maintained that he acted in self-defense from day 1, he talked to police and was cooperative in the investigation. He was relieved when the investigators told him there was a recording of the incident. About what don't you think he's been completely honest?
 
2013-07-26 02:54:21 PM  

ikanreed: Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?


Possibly. Neither is an objectively evil thing.

The second amendment serves no purpose.

It has saved more lives, even -especially, maybe- lives of people who don't even carry weapons, than it has cost.
 
2013-07-26 02:55:47 PM  

ikanreed: farkmedown: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

Inflammatory much?

Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?  The second amendment serves no purpose.


Coming from someone who's second amendment rights protected his family during a home invasion, I can say without hesitation that you are wrong.
 
2013-07-26 02:55:57 PM  

S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.


Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".
 
2013-07-26 02:56:04 PM  
I'll just leave this right here...
"A few questions for those upset by the Zimmerman Verdict"
http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/

Probably all lies, eh?
 
2013-07-26 02:56:14 PM  

Farkage: hardinparamedic: This should be a cautionary fable, NOT a hero-worship situation.

^^^ This!


It's a triumph (sadly) for the state of Florida because a jury (rightly) acquitted a man who never should have been dragged into court. That's why I'm relieved and pleased with the verdict.

Zimmerman is a stand up guy, he's no hero for defending himself, but he's a good citizen all-around.
 
2013-07-26 02:56:15 PM  

Aristocles: About what don't you think he's been completely honest?


Because I know human nature. And because without corroborating eyewitnesses to say "Yeah, it went down exactly like that", It's far safer to assume details were withheld or altered for the benefit of someone.

The sun is 92.46 million miles from Earth. People lie. These are facts.
 
2013-07-26 02:57:19 PM  

hardinparamedic: Aristocles: About what don't you think he's been completely honest?

Because I know human nature. And because without corroborating eyewitnesses to say "Yeah, it went down exactly like that", It's far safer to assume details were withheld or altered for the benefit of someone.

The sun is 92.46 million miles from Earth. People lie. These are facts.


uh... so is that kinda like "guilty until proven innocent"? Cuz you know that's not the way things work, right?
 
2013-07-26 02:59:48 PM  

Aristocles: uh... so is that kinda like "guilty until proven innocent"? Cuz you know that's not the way things work, right?


Uh, no. It's not in any way, shape or form similar.

If you are unwilling to admit that you can understand that concept, I have some prime real estate on the moon for sale. Email me, and I'll send you my paypal so you can pay me for it.
 
2013-07-26 03:01:20 PM  

DubyaHater: Wangiss: ikanreed: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: DubyaHater: TheEdibleSnuggie: AngryDragon: DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.

Sort of like the racists trying to literally make a federal case out of something that the police, the FBI, and a jury all agreed didn't happen?  I'm seeing very little respect for the rule of law on their side.

Hence- why Zimmerman would need a gun.  He, his wife, his family, his wife's family?  They're all potential targets because out an outraged contingent who finds the only way justice can be served is through vengence.  The man should be allowed to protect himself accordingly.

He should have thought about that before he decided to play cop, follow this kid, ignore the request by the call center, get out of his car, approach this kid and initiate an altercation.  When I see suspicious behavior from my car, I make the intelligent decision and let the cops handle it.

That's kind of water over the dam, don't you think?

And that still doesn't justify the death threats against Zimmerman's family who's only guilt- is by association.  But don't let that stop you from joining the lynch-mob, however.

I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.

Regardless of the assertions of "self defense", this is one clear case that if there were one specific less legal gun in the country there would be one less corpse.

Because M was just going to stop banging Z's ...


Perhaps nothing.  Perhaps a break-in (not necessarily by Trayvon).  Perhaps a car accident.
It needs to be okay for citizens to walk around in their neighborhoods without being battered.  Even for Mr. Z.
 
2013-07-26 03:05:05 PM  

AngryDragon: ikanreed: farkmedown: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

Inflammatory much?

Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?  The second amendment serves no purpose.

Coming from someone who's second amendment rights protected his family during a home invasion, I can say without hesitation that you are wrong.


Uh huh.  Sure.  Confronting invaders with weapons is correlated with higher occupant injury rates and lower property loss rates in home invasions.  So you gambled with your family and got lucky.  Congratulations.
 
2013-07-26 03:05:11 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Interpretation: Group of Ohio men want to have sex with George Zimmerman, have money to burn and are in deep denial about their homosexuality.


You have no other argument so you resort to gay jokes. Thanks for posting this because it sums up the entire lib argument
 
2013-07-26 03:05:21 PM  

hardinparamedic: Farkage: If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?

Comparing a rape with a situation where it is reasonable to believe that both parties actions contributed to the event's outcome as it did is pretty intellectually dishonest, dude.


So do you think that all someone has to do is contribute to an outcome and they deserve to be battered?
Or do you think that everyone should be willing to take a pounding, trusting their assailant to stop before killing?
 
2013-07-26 03:07:24 PM  

Wangiss: So do you think that all someone has to do is contribute to an outcome and they deserve to be battered?
Or do you think that everyone should be willing to take a pounding, trusting their assailant to stop before killing?


Neither. I think when you escalate the situation from a point where you were able to flee, not in your own private dwelling, and where no one's life was in immediate danger - to the point where you have to use lethal force to defend yourself, you should not have civil protection and that the events leading up to this should be taken into account.

The fact that you pick a fight with someone doesn't mean you should have to get beaten to death, but it doesn't resolve you of the fact that you initiated the contact in the first place.
 
2013-07-26 03:13:33 PM  

AngryDragon: farkmedown: AngryDragon: IRQ12: Everyone should be appalled at the DoJ getting involved in this, regardless of your feelings on the topic.

Well...unless you want the DoJ to act on how many FB likes or twitter votes they get on an incident.

The only way the DoJ should be involved or FB/Twitter be a factor is if the DoJ is going to investigate all the death threats and seditious posts that went up on social media.  Any takers on the likelihood of that happening?

In a society that truly respects freedom of speech and thought, "sedition" is a null word. Nominally, it is null in the USA.

I'm fairly certain that inciting others to engage in a criminal and violent riot against innocent citizens because you are unhappy with a lawful court decision is the very poster child for seditious activity.  I'm also certain that every civilized nation on the planet defines it as such.


Inciting to riot and disobeying authority are two different things.
 
2013-07-26 03:17:00 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: So do you think that all someone has to do is contribute to an outcome and they deserve to be battered?
Or do you think that everyone should be willing to take a pounding, trusting their assailant to stop before killing?

Neither. I think when you escalate the situation from a point where you were able to flee, not in your own private dwelling, and where no one's life was in immediate danger - to the point where you have to use lethal force to defend yourself, you should not have civil protection and that the events leading up to this should be taken into account.

The fact that you pick a fight with someone doesn't mean you should have to get beaten to death, but it doesn't resolve you of the fact that you initiated the contact in the first place.


Oh, okay.  I thought we were talking about the Zimmerman case.
 
2013-07-26 03:17:42 PM  

ikanreed: We know why he did it.  The supporters are the douchebags who are super enthusiastic about more guns and more killing of black people.  You can go back through all the threads on this on fark.  I've never been a "railroad zimmerman" person.  But the active supporters are KKK wannabes.  There's a line between "shiat that's tough; Zimmerman made a series of poor choices none of which were illegal or strictly immoral" and "fark yeah, zimmerman's in the right, that thug had it comming"


static.comicvine.com
I wouldn't say "had it coming" so much as "statistical eventuality."
 
2013-07-26 03:20:32 PM  

ikanreed: farkmedown: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

Inflammatory much?

Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?  The second amendment serves no purpose.


If an automobile is used to kill someone deliberately, is the automaker liable? No. Automobiles are far deadlier weapons than civilian firearms.

The Second Amendment serves a very clear purpose that is often danced around. The British tried to disarm the colonists. They failed and one result of that failure is the entirety of the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment.

I do not support armed rebellion, but I do affirm that the right to keep and bear arms, an individual right, is a right that must not be infringed. The results of failing to affirm a right to armed self-defense (or, in some cases, any self-defense at all) is clearly on display in the UK.
 
2013-07-26 03:21:00 PM  

Wangiss: Oh, okay.  I thought we were talking about the Zimmerman case.


Remind me who made the initial confrontation, again? I must have missed the part about Trayvon Martin reaching through the window and dragging George Zimmerman behind a residence that was not his.
 
2013-07-26 03:26:00 PM  

hardinparamedic: The fact that you pick a fight with someone doesn't mean you should have to get beaten to death, but it doesn't resolve you of the fact that you initiated the contact in the first place.


"Initiating the contact" is not the same thing as "picking the fight." Zimmerman did indeed initiate the contact, but we have no reason to believe he picked the fight. In fact, if we are to look at the preponderance of the evidence, it seems far more likely that he did not. Ergo, no reasonable blame.
 
2013-07-26 03:31:44 PM  
By god, Drew gonna get his Zimmerman page views yet! One thread not doing it, green another one!
 
2013-07-26 03:33:27 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: Oh, okay.  I thought we were talking about the Zimmerman case.

Remind me who made the initial confrontation, again? I must have missed the part about Trayvon Martin reaching through the window and dragging George Zimmerman behind a residence that was not his.


There is nothing to remind.  People who refuse to accept Z/s testimony have absolutely nothing to go on in determining who assaulted whom initially.  That's the big double question mark in this case.  There are a lot of people who presume to know.  Some of them heard it one way and assumed they were listening to a credible source.  Some people beggar the question, claiming "that's what a racist like Z would do."  But there is not one scrap of evidence beyond Z's own testimony that was ever presented in court that points to who started the fight.
 
2013-07-26 03:37:14 PM  

farkmedown: ikanreed: farkmedown: ikanreed: Princess Ryans Knickers: And if he gets involved in another shooting they will immediately be held liable in a civil court for damages.

Nope, gun sellers have explicit legal protection from the murders they enable in the U.S.

Inflammatory much?

Oh, wouldn't want to hurt your feelings, that's almost as bad as shooting a person, am I right?  The second amendment serves no purpose.

If an automobile is used to kill someone deliberately, is the automaker liable? No. Automobiles are far deadlier weapons than civilian firearms.

The Second Amendment serves a very clear purpose that is often danced around. The British tried to disarm the colonists. They failed and one result of that failure is the entirety of the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment.

I do not support armed rebellion, but I do affirm that the right to keep and bear arms, an individual right, is a right that must not be infringed. The results of failing to affirm a right to armed self-defense (or, in some cases, any self-defense at all) is clearly on display in the UK.


If it was designed to be dangerous to be deadly, I would feel fine holding car manufacturers for deaths the cars cause.  It would've driven H2s out of the market so fast.
 
2013-07-26 03:39:38 PM  

Millennium: "Initiating the contact" is not the same thing as "picking the fight." Zimmerman did indeed initiate the contact, but we have no reason to believe he picked the fight. In fact, if we are to look at the preponderance of the evidence, it seems far more likely that he did not. Ergo, no reasonable blame.


For the purposes of a CCW/HCP holder, and for the purposes of civil responsibility, yeah it is. You see, most states don't have Florida's blanket civil protection statutes, and civil protection is based on a set of criteria that MUST be met in one form or another to come into play.

Even saying so much as an off word to someone can be taken as you initiated the fight.

Wangiss: People who refuse to accept Z/s testimony have absolutely nothing to go on in determining who assaulted whom initially.  That's the big double question mark in this case.  There are a lot of people who presume to know.  Some of them heard it one way and assumed they were listening to a credible source


Unless you come forward with a credible witness that saw everything from beginning to end, you're going on the exact opposite spectrum of what you're accusing me of.

Sorry to break this to you, but outside of the former, there will be nothing that can shake skepticism over the events of that night.

Wangiss: But there is not one scrap of evidence beyond Z's own testimony that was ever presented in court that points to who started the fight.


You're also the kind of person that figures someone who is found not guilty is automatically innocent of all wrongdoing too, right?
 
2013-07-26 03:44:44 PM  

vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".


You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing
 
2013-07-26 03:47:37 PM  

S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing


Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone.  Yep.  That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.
 
2013-07-26 03:50:29 PM  

Farkage: If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?


if a woman goes out, follows a guy around, confronts him, grabs his penis and crams it intoher vagina, then decrees it rape; then no, i don't think she should have the right to shoot her attacker.

yes, even if the guy happened to be a jerk.
 
2013-07-26 03:53:33 PM  

hardinparamedic: Millennium: "Initiating the contact" is not the same thing as "picking the fight." Zimmerman did indeed initiate the contact, but we have no reason to believe he picked the fight. In fact, if we are to look at the preponderance of the evidence, it seems far more likely that he did not. Ergo, no reasonable blame.

For the purposes of a CCW/HCP holder, and for the purposes of civil responsibility, yeah it is. You see, most states don't have Florida's blanket civil protection statutes, and civil protection is based on a set of criteria that MUST be met in one form or another to come into play.

Even saying so much as an off word to someone can be taken as you initiated the fight.

Wangiss: People who refuse to accept Z/s testimony have absolutely nothing to go on in determining who assaulted whom initially.  That's the big double question mark in this case.  There are a lot of people who presume to know.  Some of them heard it one way and assumed they were listening to a credible source

Unless you come forward with a credible witness that saw everything from beginning to end, you're going on the exact opposite spectrum of what you're accusing me of.

Sorry to break this to you, but outside of the former, there will be nothing that can shake skepticism over the events of that night.

Wangiss: But there is not one scrap of evidence beyond Z's own testimony that was ever presented in court that points to who started the fight.

You're also the kind of person that figures someone who is found not guilty is automatically innocent of all wrongdoing too, right?


I've qualified all my statements with phrases like "if the accepted testimony is to be believed" precisely because I don't know what happened.  Z was acquitted by the people who examined the most evidence.  I see no reason beyond personal bias to disagree with the acquittal.  You can choose to accept Z's testimony, in which case he didn't start it.  You can choose to reject his testimony, in which case you still have no concrete reason to believe he started it.  Your pick.  That doesn't make me an "automatically innocent of all wrongdoing" person.
 
2013-07-26 03:54:00 PM  

S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing


The dictionary is not your friend.
 
2013-07-26 03:58:09 PM  

Wangiss: I see no reason beyond personal bias to disagree with the acquittal.


Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.
 
2013-07-26 04:00:54 PM  

DubyaHater: I'm not joining any lynch mob.  This is human nature however.  When you take the law into your own hands, you risk the repercussions of violence against you and your family.  I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong.  It is reality however.  If Zimmerman was too stupid to realize that, he shouldn't have owned a firearm in the first place.  He certainly shouldn't own one now.




So what you saying is, if you do it.....

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
He waits until his wife and kids are in the ground and then he goes after the rest of the mob. He kills their kids, he kills their wives, he kills their parents and their parents' friends. He burns down the houses they live in and the stores they work in, he kills people that owe them money. And like that he was gone. Underground. Nobody has ever seen him since. He becomes a myth, a spook story that criminals tell their kids at night. "Rat on your pop, and Keyser Soze will get you." And no-one ever really believes.

/do it right
 
2013-07-26 04:06:22 PM  

stampylives: Farkage: If a women is getting raped and kills her rapist during the attack, do you ponder what would have happened if she hadn't left her house dressed so provocatively that day?

if a woman goes out, follows a guy around, confronts him, grabs his penis and crams it intoher vagina, then decrees it rape; then no, i don't think she should have the right to shoot her attacker.

yes, even if the guy happened to be a jerk.


That would be the equivalent of Zimmerman following Trayvon around, not losing him, not having him circle back, grabbing Trayvon's fist and punching himself in the face with it followed by using Trayvon's hands to slam his own head into the ground, wouldn't it?

Yeah, you're not even close.
 
2013-07-26 04:23:02 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: I see no reason beyond personal bias to disagree with the acquittal.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.


Is there some evidence you have in your possession that would change the minds of 6-12 members of a jury?  Is there something you think they didn't factor in?  I think it's too late.
 
2013-07-26 04:23:55 PM  

hardinparamedic: Millennium: "Initiating the contact" is not the same thing as "picking the fight." Zimmerman did indeed initiate the contact, but we have no reason to believe he picked the fight. In fact, if we are to look at the preponderance of the evidence, it seems far more likely that he did not. Ergo, no reasonable blame.

For the purposes of a CCW/HCP holder, and for the purposes of civil responsibility, yeah it is. You see, most states don't have Florida's blanket civil protection statutes, and civil protection is based on a set of criteria that MUST be met in one form or another to come into play.

Even saying so much as an off word to someone can be taken as you initiated the fight.


I don't think I've seen this argument before, and it's interesting. Do more information on these statutes, or a link to them?

Wangiss: People who refuse to accept Z/s testimony have absolutely nothing to go on in determining who assaulted whom initially. That's the big double question mark in this case. There are a lot of people who presume to know. Some of them heard it one way and assumed they were listening to a credible source

Unless you come forward with a credible witness that saw everything from beginning to end, you're going on the exact opposite spectrum of what you're accusing me of.


Not the opposite end of the spectrum: the very same thing. It goes off in a different direction, but it's still looking at the unknown and saying "I know."

Sorry to break this to you, but outside of the former, there will be nothing that can shake skepticism over the events of that night.

I'm not sure how much of an issue skepticism is right now. I'm not seeing much in the way of questioning the events presented by the defense: what I'm seeing is summary denial. Certainly I've seen no "alternate" version put forward with stronger backing, and most have even weaker backing. That's not skepticism.

Wangiss: But there is not one scrap of evidence beyond Z's own testimony that was ever presented in court that points to who started the fight.

You're also the kind of person that figures someone who is found not guilty is automatically innocent of all wrongdoing too, right?


I don't know about Wangiss, but I'm not. I do, however, believe that it raises the bar for people who would treat them as guilty anyway: one must either show greater proof than was allowed at trial (e.g. OJ Simpson), or show that the trial itself was botched (e.g. Casey Anthony). Few of the pro-conviction folks even try to do this, and of those that do, most are easy to shut down with logical arguments.

Your arguments on the civil-protection statutes are interesting, though. I'd like to know more about them. Also, why do you think the prosecution didn't push this angle more strongly in the trial?
 
2013-07-26 04:26:25 PM  

ikanreed: S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing

Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone.  Yep.  That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.


It's all about intent but obviously that's beyond you. He intended to stop some jack-hole kid from beating his head in, not "damage" as you say. Enough of all the bleeding heart garbage. Get over it people. It was justified. I would have done exactly the same thing and sleep just fine knowing I did.
 
2013-07-26 04:42:35 PM  

S10Calade: ikanreed: S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing

Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone.  Yep.  That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.

It's all about intent but obviously that's beyond you. He intended to stop some jack-hole kid from beating his head in, not "damage" as you say. Enough of all the bleeding heart garbage. Get over it people. It was justified. I would have done exactly the same thing and sleep just fine knowing I did.


It's hilarious that you are so head-up-ass with the need to see this whole thing as a righteous kill that you are completely missing the point.
 
2013-07-26 04:45:43 PM  

vrax: S10Calade: ikanreed: S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing

Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone.  Yep.  That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.

It's all about intent but obviously that's beyond you. He intended to stop some jack-hole kid from beating his head in, not "damage" as you say. Enough of all the bleeding heart garbage. Get over it people. It was justified. I would have done exactly the same thing and sleep just fine knowing I did.

It's hilarious that you are so head-up-ass with the need to see this whole thing as a righteous kill that you are completely missing the point.


Honestly, it feels like it's reaffirming my feeling earlier, that Zimmerman's most ardent defenders harbor secret fantasies of killing minorities themselves.  Re-read what he said, and pretend he hasn't imagined himself going through the process of "totally justifiably" killing black people attacking him in his head at least a few hundred times.  You can smell the adolescent power fantasies coming off every word.
 
2013-07-26 04:47:19 PM  

Wangiss: Is there some evidence you have in your possession that would change the minds of 6-12 members of a jury?  Is there something you think they didn't factor in?  I think it's too late.


Apparently you're welcome to your opinion, but I'm not allowed to have mine. And I'm making an argument from a civil responsibility prospective, not a criminal. A shooting can be entirely criminally justifiable, but the negligence of the individual can have lead up to that point.

Millennium: Your arguments on the civil-protection statutes are interesting, though. I'd like to know more about them. Also, why do you think the prosecution didn't push this angle more strongly in the trial?


My arguments on civil protection are made from the basis of my understanding of the law as I was taught when I took a HCP in Tennessee. Civil Protection either requires you to have been accosted with no preceding contact (i.e. someone walked up and shoved a gun in your face), or someone forcibly entered a dwelling or vehicle which you have a legal right to be in (i.e. kicked in your door, or tried to pull you out of your car). Which I honestly agree with. Florida, on the other hand, imposes blanket civil immunity if a shooting is ruled justified despite the events leading up to it.

The prosecution didn't push that angle IMHO, because at that point, it didn't matter from a criminal prospective - but towards a civil one. You are under no obligation to get beat to death because you picked a fight. Your only obligation is to try to clearly disengage, or be able to prove you attempted to do so. Once you do that, and the fight continues, you have grounds for lethal force.

My opinion is that you should still be able to be held civilly responsible in that case.
 
2013-07-26 04:53:31 PM  

ikanreed: vrax: S10Calade: ikanreed: S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence.  Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing

Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone.  Yep.  That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.

It's all about intent but obviously that's beyond you. He intended to stop some jack-hole kid from beating his head in, not "damage" as you say. Enough of all the bleeding heart garbage. Get over it people. It was justified. I would have done exactly the same thing and sleep just fine knowing I did.

It's hilarious that you are so head-up-ass with the need to see this whole thing as a righteous kill that you are completely missing the point.

Honestly, it feels like it's reaffirming my feeling earlier, that Zimmerman's most ardent defenders harbor secret fantasies of killing minorities themselves.  Re-read what he said, and pretend he hasn't imagined himself going through the process of "totally justifiably" killing black people attacking him in his head at least a few hundred times.  You can smell the adolescent power fantasies coming off every word.


You have to wonder.  I was making a simple point about Zimmerman's supposed non-violent self-defense.  I guess that's too much to handle.

It reminds me of the time I tried to point out that football was a violent sport.  Yeah, rabid football fans apparently can't process that.  The injured players understand.  Fans?  No!
 
2013-07-26 04:54:25 PM  

S10Calade: ikanreed: S10Calade: vrax: S10Calade: He did not commit an act of violence or murder anyone. He defended himself.

Oh, FFS, Zimmerman most certainly did commit an act of violence. Now, that may have been in self-defense, but don't pretend that he hugged a hole in Martin's chest when you say "he defended himself".

You really need to look up the definition of violence. He was defending himself, there was no intent of violence.

vi·o·lence(v
n.1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing

Yep, he sure didn't defend himself by damaging anyone. Yep. That means to the end of safety just vanishes in a puff of smoke.

It's all about intent but obviously that's beyond you. He intended to stop some jack-hole kid from beating his head in, not "damage" as you say. Enough of all the bleeding heart garbage. Get over it people. It was justified. I would have done exactly the same thing and sleep just fine knowing I did.


Careful with your wording there. There are people who assume that "I had to kill him" means "He needed killing," and a lot of them will read something into your words that I don't think you meant.

By the time Zimmerman pulled his gun, one of those two was doomed. The clincher here is in Jeantel's testimony and later interviews, and stating (I believe with reasonable certainty) that what Martin was going for was "just bash." In other words, when Martin was slamming Zimmerman's head into the pavement, he was acting from ignorance, not malice: Zimmerman wasn't supposed to die.

The problem with this is that even though Zimmerman wasn't supposed to die, he almost certainly would have: head plus concrete does not equal a happy ending. And truth be told, Martin really should have known better. But he didn't, and so he wouldn't have stopped, not because of malice, but because it wouldn't have occurred to him that he had to stop.

This is a sad story. We should feel sorry for Trayvon Martin. We should also feel sorry for George Zimmerman. There are no heroes or villains here.
 
2013-07-26 04:57:59 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: Is there some evidence you have in your possession that would change the minds of 6-12 members of a jury?  Is there something you think they didn't factor in?  I think it's too late.

Apparently you're welcome to your opinion, but I'm not allowed to have mine. And I'm making an argument from a civil responsibility prospective, not a criminal. A shooting can be entirely criminally justifiable, but the negligence of the individual can have lead up to that point.


You're entitled to an opinion.  This is what it looks like when someone disagrees with it.  Did it seem to you like I was trying to silence you forcibly somehow?
 
2013-07-26 05:01:20 PM  

Millennium: This is a sad story. We should feel sorry for Trayvon Martin. We should also feel sorry for George Zimmerman. There are no heroes or villains here.


Well, the douchebags in the article are villains, but that comes from a terrible black and white(hah) view of the world.  Zimmerman himself at worst made some moderately bad choices, and likely made a racist judgement about what Martin was doing in the neighborhood.  Most people are just trying to get through their life.
 
2013-07-26 05:01:29 PM  

hardinparamedic: Wangiss: Oh, okay.  I thought we were talking about the Zimmerman case.

Remind me who made the initial confrontation, again? I must have missed the part about Trayvon Martin reaching through the window and dragging George Zimmerman behind a residence that was not his.


He didn't have to, all he had to do was walk inside his daddy fiancee house, just walk inside. But instead he decided to turn around and confront Zimmerman. Even then, Martin could have just asked "Why you following me for?" without getting violent, but he didn't.
 
2013-07-26 05:10:06 PM  

hardinparamedic: My arguments on civil protection are made from the basis of my understanding of the law as I was taught when I took a HCP in Tennessee. Civil Protection either requires you to have been accosted with no preceding contact (i.e. someone walked up and shoved a gun in your face), or someone forcibly entered a dwelling or vehicle which you have a legal right to be in (i.e. kicked in your door, or tried to pull you out of your car). Which I honestly agree with.


I'm not sure I understand this. From the quote above, it sounds to me like unless someone actually gets the drop on you, it doesn't matter who started the fight. If there was any nonviolent interaction beforehand, neither party has any recourse if the other party escalates. I can't say I'd agree with that, but I'm not sure I'm correctly understanding the law either.
 
2013-07-26 05:18:29 PM  

Onkel Buck: Not Guilty.  Can ya say it without spitting? Ha!


President Obama.  Can ya say it without acting like a crazy person?
 
2013-07-26 05:19:26 PM  

Bravo Two: TerminalEchoes: Yet it still makes sense. Al Sharpton, like this group, are just inflaming the situation.

What situation? A jury found him not guilty. Whatever you THINK happened, they had the chance to convict and did not see sufficient evidence to convict. Any further "situation" that comes out of this is solely because people are pissed off and emotionally hyped up because of events they *believe* happened, not that were *proven*. Otherwise, if what they had *believed* to be true was supported by the evidence, Zim would've been convicted.

People do bad shiat, and when it can't be proven, they get to walk.  It's the same protection that keeps wrongfully accused people of being convicted of a crime, and the specific reason for our legal system working the way it does. Unless you can PROVE a crime, you're not convicted. just believing it to be true doesn't make it so.


I think you misunderstood my point. Yes, there IS a situation. The situation: someone was found not guilty yet the flames are still being fanned by pro-Martin zealots like Al Sharpton. In response, pro-Zimmerman folks have popped up in response to strongly support Zimmerman either financially or in spirit. That's the situation. Sharpton, Martin's parents, Fark, the media, and even the White House have turned this situation into "black vs. white" instead of what it actually was: an argument over self-defense. I don't think comparing these Ohio dudes to Al Sharpton is a false equivalence. At all. Both sides, either purposefully or accidentally, are still blowing this whole (finished) case way out of proportion. People need to get over it just like they got over the Casey Anthony case and let all involved people the hell alone.
 
2013-07-26 05:20:41 PM  

ikanreed: Uh huh.  Sure.  Confronting invaders with weapons is correlated with higher occupant injury rates and lower property loss rates in home invasions.  So you gambled with your family and got lucky.  Congratulations.


I hope you never have to be in that situation at 5:00 AM with 3 armed men in your house protected only with your statistical correlation and a phone connecting you to the police.

Scratch that.  I hope you do.  Your opinion will change rapidly, if you survive.
 
2013-07-26 05:22:33 PM  

DubyaHater: These gun nuts must be rubbing one out daily on the thought of shooting someone and getting away with it.  This must be the all-time fantasy.  Oh, and thanks for sending George Zimmerman money and glorifying this act.  Glad these people have no problem sleeping at night.


Hell, I'd send him money if I knew where to send it. His court battles aren't over yet. Butthurt libtards like you will make sure his life gets ruined, court verdicts be damned.
 
2013-07-26 05:22:54 PM  

AngryDragon: ikanreed: Uh huh.  Sure.  Confronting invaders with weapons is correlated with higher occupant injury rates and lower property loss rates in home invasions.  So you gambled with your family and got lucky.  Congratulations.

I hope you never have to be in that situation at 5:00 AM with 3 armed men in your house protected only with your statistical correlation and a phone connecting you to the police.

Scratch that.  I hope you do.  Your opinion will change rapidly, if you survive.


I'm sorry you have an emotional response, and I have a data-driven response.  I know what I prefer in the cold hard light of day.
 
2013-07-26 05:28:07 PM  

ikanreed: AngryDragon: ikanreed: Uh huh.  Sure.  Confronting invaders with weapons is correlated with higher occupant injury rates and lower property loss rates in home invasions.  So you gambled with your family and got lucky.  Congratulations.

I hope you never have to be in that situation at 5:00 AM with 3 armed men in your house protected only with your statistical correlation and a phone connecting you to the police.

Scratch that.  I hope you do.  Your opinion will change rapidly, if you survive.

I'm sorry you have an emotional response, and I have a data-driven response.  I know what I prefer in the cold hard light of day.


I prefer to think of it as an experiential response vs your theoretical one.  Statistically you are unlikely to be in that situation.  Denying others the right to choose for themselves is unjust in my opinion.
 
2013-07-26 05:35:14 PM  

AngryDragon: ikanreed: AngryDragon: ikanreed: Uh huh.  Sure.  Confronting invaders with weapons is correlated with higher occupant injury rates and lower property loss rates in home invasions.  So you gambled with your family and got lucky.  Congratulations.

I hope you never have to be in that situation at 5:00 AM with 3 armed men in your house protected only with your statistical correlation and a phone connecting you to the police.

Scratch that.  I hope you do.  Your opinion will change rapidly, if you survive.

I'm sorry you have an emotional response, and I have a data-driven response.  I know what I prefer in the cold hard light of day.

I prefer to think of it as an experiential response vs your theoretical one.  Statistically you are unlikely to be in that situation.  Denying others the right to choose for themselves is unjust in my opinion.


And the Angry Dragon claims another victim.

Nice name.
 
2013-07-26 05:43:02 PM  

3StratMan: I'll just leave this right here...
"A few questions for those upset by the Zimmerman Verdict"
http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/

Probably all lies, eh?


Saw that posted a few days ago. Great source of info for those on Team Trayvon that still don't know the basic facts surrounding this case.
 
2013-07-26 06:25:48 PM  

ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.


Then why would they arm a minority?  You're logic is strange.
 
2013-07-26 07:20:34 PM  
Sometimes worlds collide. When an idiot encounters an asshole a conflict often occurs.


That is EXACTLY what happened.

Nothing more, nothing less. That simple.

Zimmerman was a wannabe cop and showed gross incompetence.
Martin was a wannabe roughneck with a history of violence and attacked someone for being too "provocative"

Zimmerman's irresponsibility is what initiated the incident but Martin committed the felony (assault) which got him shot. Both are to blame. period.

no "hero" no "villain"
....just a nation of stupid people jumping to idiotic conclusions based on moronic assumptions.
 
2013-07-26 07:51:44 PM  

ikanreed: shiat like this is why we know that guns-rights people are just have a secret dream of killing minorities without repercussions.


I only got 2 posts into the thread before I saw something so farking stupid I just had to close the page.
 
Rat
2013-07-26 08:10:28 PM  
So much to say to the soapboxers, but momma said to keep my mouth shut and not piss people off.

©
 
2013-07-26 08:14:12 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: Interpretation: Group of Ohio men want to have sex with George Zimmerman, have money to burn and are in deep denial about their homosexuality.


/// done in one

i36.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-26 08:42:58 PM  
Treyvon was a thug, it's only people looking his character through rose tinted spectacles who think otherwise.
 
2013-07-26 08:53:27 PM  
TerminalEchoes:

Hell, I'd send him money if I knew where to send it. His court battles aren't over yet. Butthurt libtards like you will make sure his life gets ruined, court verdicts be damned.


Send it to me. I'll make sure he gets it.
 
2013-07-26 08:55:11 PM  
Sidecrab  "Treyvon[sic] was a thug"

He was a 17 year old boy.
I know a lot L O T of folks who did worse than him when in their teens.
Many of these are my friends and are now mature and responsible moms and dads.

You are an insensitive asshole.
Do you have kids?

Make no mistake. A man has a right to use lethal force for defense. If a young man is killed why can't you be less a f*cking dick about it?
 
2013-07-26 09:13:38 PM  
maybe he should get weapons training so he knows where to shoot people (not in the heart)
 
2013-07-26 09:21:08 PM  

craigdamage: Sidecrab  "Treyvon[sic] was a thug"


Make no mistake. A man has a right to use lethal force for defense. If a young man is killed why can't you be less a f*cking dick about it?


And that's what the pro-zimmerman crowd doesn't get. He still shot and killed a kid. He admits that he did so, and even bragged about it being "God's Plan" on television.

fark that asshole.
 
2013-07-26 09:39:51 PM  

megarian: Every time someone mentions Zimmerman, god rapes a newborn koala bear and gives an extremely nice person ass cancer.


Just buried a close family friend today who died of colon cancer. He was an extremely nice person, and only 1 year older than me.

/you're not funny
//not a good way for anyone to go
///get your butt checked out regularly
 
2013-07-26 10:14:57 PM  

Wretched: ///get your butt checked out regularly


I'm sure she does.
 
2013-07-26 10:51:18 PM  

cretinbob: craigdamage: Sidecrab  "Treyvon[sic] was a thug"


Make no mistake. A man has a right to use lethal force for defense. If a young man is killed why can't you be less a f*cking dick about it?

And that's what the pro-zimmerman crowd doesn't get. He still shot and killed a kid. He admits that he did so, and even bragged about it being "God's Plan" on television.


Bragging? Last I checked, people tend to talk about things like "God's Plan" in the wake of terrible tragedies. If Zimmerman is saying this about what happened, then it sounds to me like he's got a good attitude about it, in whatever way the term "good" can be said to apply: he knows exactly what a terrible thing it is that he wound up having to do, and is trying to make sense of it and move forward in the most constructive way he can. That's not bragging.

We get that he killed a kid. How could we not? It has never even been in dispute. We simply don't think he should be punished for doing what he had to do to survive.
 
2013-07-26 11:04:48 PM  

Millennium: Bragging? Last I checked, people tend to talk about things like "God's Plan" in the wake of terrible tragedies


thesportsquotient.com
keep farking that chicken
 
2013-07-27 10:44:15 AM  

cretinbob: Millennium: Bragging? Last I checked, people tend to talk about things like "God's Plan" in the wake of terrible tragedies

[thesportsquotient.com image 576x324]
keep farking that chicken


Huh? I don't understand. What chicken am I supposed to be farking here? The verse Tim Tebow refers to in this picture is part of a letter from Paul to a particular congregation, in part explaining how he is about to be sentenced and giving them instructions for when he is gone. Part of that is to keep "God's Plan" in mind. Sounds suitably tragic to me.

Tebow isn't really quoting the verse at an appropriate time, what with it being the middle of a football game and all that. Then again, I don't know exactly when this picture was taken; he might be making some kind of statement, depending on what was going on in his life at the time. But the verse itself still fits into the context I asserted: people don't talk about "God's Plan" when something happens that they feel good about.
 
2013-07-27 01:32:52 PM  

MythDragon: cowgirl toffee: My hedgehog killed and ate an earthworm. Is there any organization out there that would arm my hedgie?

btw... the earthworm was wearing a hoodie.

No horribly crappy MS paint of this incident? I feel disapointed.


Must... not... dis-appoint...

img46.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-27 06:43:17 PM  

cowgirl toffee: MythDragon: cowgirl toffee: My hedgehog killed and ate an earthworm. Is there any organization out there that would arm my hedgie?

btw... the earthworm was wearing a hoodie.

No horribly crappy MS paint of this incident? I feel disapointed.

Must... not... dis-appoint...


Awesome.
 
2013-07-27 11:49:36 PM  

Albert911emt: Will having more guns make Zimmerman feel safer, thereby making it less likely that he'll harass total strangers in the street for just walking along minding their own business?


As long as they're not carrying skilttles with intent.
 
Displayed 227 of 227 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report