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.

(Examiner)   George Zimmerman's wife Shellie's 911 call to Lake Mary, Florida police. After saying he threatened him with a gun, she admits she never saw a gun   (examiner.com) divider line 474
    More: Followup, George Zimmerman  
•       •       •

3282 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Sep 2013 at 9:16 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



474 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-10 04:51:09 AM
Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.
 
2013-09-10 05:16:39 AM
How many times is this guy going to be accused of a crime with a gun only to be cleared when the evidence is examined? I'm guessing 3. These things happen in threes.
 
2013-09-10 06:31:38 AM
JUSTICE 4 SHELLIE
 
2013-09-10 07:06:01 AM
The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.
 
2013-09-10 07:06:05 AM
Color me white-hispanic.
 
2013-09-10 07:14:48 AM
Convicted liar doing what she does best?

He really knows how to surround himself with all the right people and situations.
 
2013-09-10 07:29:28 AM
farm9.staticflickr.com
 
2013-09-10 07:35:52 AM

RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.


Especially when you consider that if he gets put under a restraining order, he's not allowed to possess a firearm under federal law.  And that puts him in much more danger than the typical person, because there is a significant (though small) fraction of the population that wants him dead, because "Justice for Trayvon".

If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.
 
2013-09-10 07:41:45 AM

Nabb1: JUSTICE 4 SHELLIE


Heh,

I wonder what her Fark handle is.
 
2013-09-10 07:42:24 AM
hinten:
He really knows how to surround himself with all the right people and situations.

Really vindicates my opinion of him.  While I believe the verdict was proper, the guy's a real schmuck all around.
 
2013-09-10 07:53:37 AM
Yay! Another Zimmerman AW thread! I've been missing those.
 
2013-09-10 07:57:18 AM

dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.



Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.
 
2013-09-10 08:04:01 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.


Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.
 
2013-09-10 08:06:44 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.


No, he can't.

Unless, of course, she has him pinned to the ground and is bashing his head into the concrete.  Then of course he could shoot her, because the law in every farkin' state in the Union allows you to use deadly force to defend yourself under those circumstances.  Even in the minority of so-called "duty to retreat" states.
 
2013-09-10 08:11:03 AM

Slaxl: How many times is this guy going to be accused of a crime with a gun only to be cleared when the evidence is examined? I'm guessing 3. These things happen in threes.


It's a shame how he has been powerless and had no part in these situations he keeps finding himself in where this dumb shiat happens.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-09-10 08:18:42 AM
Because People in power are Stupid:
Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Well, legally anyway.
 
2013-09-10 08:19:13 AM

dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

No, he can't.

Unless, of course, she has him pinned to the ground and is bashing his head into the concrete.  Then of course he could shoot her, because the law in every farkin' state in the Union allows you to use deadly force to defend yourself under those circumstances.  Even in the minority of so-called "duty to retreat" states.


So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)
 
2013-09-10 08:31:14 AM
"threatened with a gun" is not the same as "saw a gun"

"I might have to just TRAYVON your ass" is threatening with a gun. Coming from him, it'd be doubly so, and doubly menacing.
 
2013-09-10 08:32:12 AM
Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.
 
2013-09-10 08:33:08 AM

unlikely: "threatened with a gun" is not the same as "saw a gun"

"I might have to just TRAYVON your ass" is threatening with a gun. Coming from him, it'd be doubly so, and doubly menacing.


Ah, but guns are made out of metal, which is heavy, and you don't record heavy metal in doubly.
 
2013-09-10 08:33:29 AM
So he stuck his dick in crazy too?
 
2013-09-10 08:39:08 AM

vpb: Because People in power are Stupid:
Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Well, legally anyway.


No, that's not how it works. There must be a threat of imminent bodily harm.
 
2013-09-10 08:40:13 AM
I'm going to play a bit of Devil's Advocate here which I'm sure will inflame the fark masses.  Having been a police officer for a couple years, I've seen these stories go both ways.

Weren't they having marital troubles?  Isn't it possible that she embellished her story to get him out of the house?  I'm not saying one way or another what happened...that's why there's usually an investigation into these things.

If it was Joe Blow and not George Zimmerman we wouldn't be hearing about this.  I really don't know what happened in the house other than they had a heated argument...and odds are you don't know either.
 
2013-09-10 08:50:00 AM

basemetal: So he stuck his dick in crazy too?


Yeah, about that:  "Don't stick your dick in crazy" excludes both straight women and gay men by definition.  So you're left with lesbians, who don't want it, and what else?  Sheep?
 
2013-09-10 08:50:05 AM
He threatened her with a gun = she reached for a bag of potato chips.  It's pretty much the same thing, and she was really reaching.
 
2013-09-10 08:50:31 AM
img401.imageshack.us

Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.
 
2013-09-10 08:53:26 AM
♪ ♫
We love you Zimmerman
Oh yes we do
We love you Zimmerman
And we'll be true
When people question your motivations and call you a dangerous nutjob and insinuate that maybe you're a horrible person to be around
We're blue
Oh Georgie, we love you
♪ ♫
 
2013-09-10 08:54:15 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.


Is that a psychotic Oompaloompa?
 
2013-09-10 08:55:24 AM

dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.


Let me just get this clear. On every single "somebody has shot something" thread - you are on here defending the shooter. So... you are asking me to give it a rest?
 
2013-09-10 08:59:29 AM

Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.

Is that a psychotic Oompaloompa?


White people don't tan so well. (gotta go to work)
 
2013-09-10 09:05:04 AM
Well, she lied to help him.  And now she lied to hurt him.

I think...maybe...she might be a liar.
 
2013-09-10 09:06:45 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.

Is that a psychotic Oompaloompa?

White people don't tan so well. (gotta go to work)


I just burn and peel. That's why I apply SPF 50 with a putty knife.
 
2013-09-10 09:09:56 AM
O'Mara's little gathering with the local press over this yesterday was pretty bad.  What he was saying was technically correct, but he said it really poorly.

"Do you mean you people think that just because a guy makes horrible choices and has terrible judgement, that he should be denied his 2nd amendment rights?"

I'm paraphrasing, of course.  But not by much.
 
2013-09-10 09:14:53 AM
More imbibe? Holy Fark I don't know if I can survive this man. I'd like to outlive him. He seems like a real asshole.
 
2013-09-10 09:16:42 AM

unlikely: "threatened with a gun" is not the same as "saw a gun"

"I might have to just TRAYVON your ass" is threatening with a gun. Coming from him, it'd be doubly so, and doubly menacing.


Thing is, though, threatening with a gun (like by saying "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," for instance) is a felony under Florida law. It's called Aggravated Assault and carries a maximum 5-year prison sentence (as opposed to Simple Assault, which is when you threaten someone but don't threaten to use deadly force, such as by saying something like "I'mma slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo")

I have to double-check the details on the law (and am currently too lazy to do it right this decade), but I'm fairly certain that the victim has to reasonably believe that the threat is in earnest and that the aggressor is willing and able to carry out the threat -- if someone tells you they're gonna slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo, it doesn't count as assault if the verbal exchange is over PSN while playing Grand Theft Auto online but does count as assault if the conversation is face-to-face and that person is carrying (or could reasonably be believed to be carrying) a giant purple dildo twice the size of a hoagie. Likewise, if someone tells you "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," it's not aggravated assault if it's via the headset while playing GTA but is if the conversation is in person -- and, as you sad, doubly so if the person threatening you is George Zimmerman.

Of course, there's no way he'd be convicted in criminal court on just hearsay. She would have had to have recorded him actually saying those words (or words to that effect) in order to meet the "reasonable doubt" standard, otherwise it's just he-said-she-said in a divorce trial.
 
2013-09-10 09:19:43 AM
I wonder what caused all this undue strain on their relationship.....
 
2013-09-10 09:20:54 AM

Makh: He threatened her with a gun = she reached for a bag of potato chips.  It's pretty much the same thing, and she was really reaching.


He pulls a gun, you pull a bag of potato chips. It's the Florida way.
 
2013-09-10 09:21:39 AM
♪♫♪ Stand by your man
Until the verdict's rendered... ♪♫♪
 
2013-09-10 09:21:53 AM
So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.
 
2013-09-10 09:22:03 AM
Firs of all, women named Shellie aren't to be trusted. Secondly, just look at her. She oozes low class white trash all day long.
 
2013-09-10 09:22:27 AM

Sybarite:


Well the better question is why wasn't she charged with making false statements to police?????

Because 911 operators aren't police.
 
2013-09-10 09:22:35 AM

nekom: hinten:
He really knows how to surround himself with all the right people and situations.

Really vindicates my opinion of him.  While I believe the verdict was proper, the guy's a real schmuck all around.


To paraphrase: He's not guilty, he's just an asshole.
 
2013-09-10 09:22:41 AM

King Something: unlikely: "threatened with a gun" is not the same as "saw a gun"

"I might have to just TRAYVON your ass" is threatening with a gun. Coming from him, it'd be doubly so, and doubly menacing.

Thing is, though, threatening with a gun (like by saying "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," for instance) is a felony under Florida law. It's called Aggravated Assault and carries a maximum 5-year prison sentence (as opposed to Simple Assault, which is when you threaten someone but don't threaten to use deadly force, such as by saying something like "I'mma slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo")

I have to double-check the details on the law (and am currently too lazy to do it right this decade), but I'm fairly certain that the victim has to reasonably believe that the threat is in earnest and that the aggressor is willing and able to carry out the threat -- if someone tells you they're gonna slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo, it doesn't count as assault if the verbal exchange is over PSN while playing Grand Theft Auto online but does count as assault if the conversation is face-to-face and that person is carrying (or could reasonably be believed to be carrying) a giant purple dildo twice the size of a hoagie. Likewise, if someone tells you "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," it's not aggravated assault if it's via the headset while playing GTA but is if the conversation is in person -- and, as you sad, doubly so if the person threatening you is George Zimmerman.

Of course, there's no way he'd be convicted in criminal court on just hearsay. She would have had to have recorded him actually saying those words (or words to that effect) in order to meet the "reasonable doubt" standard, otherwise it's just he-said-she-said in a divorce trial.


That's not hearsay. She can testify what words he used to threaten her because he is not an out-of-court declarant and the testimony is not offered to establish the truth of the matter asserted, but as to the utterance of a threat.
 
2013-09-10 09:22:41 AM
Doesn't matter whether she saw the gun. As far as the court is concerned, it only matters that she was threatened.
 
2013-09-10 09:23:28 AM

slayer199: Weren't they having marital troubles?


That's putting it kind of mildly.

She also wants him to take out a permanent life insurance policy on himself listing her as the sole beneficiary as a part of the divorce settlement. That seems pretty close to her hoping he gets killed so she can cash in.
 
2013-09-10 09:23:34 AM

basemetal: So he stuck his dick in crazy too?


In this case, crazy fatty A stuck his dick into crazy fatty B.
 
2013-09-10 09:23:45 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.

Let me just get this clear. On every single "somebody has shot something" thread - you are on here defending the shooter. So... you are asking me to give it a rest?


You ask questions like one of the people in power
 
2013-09-10 09:23:46 AM
Odds of her writting a book? Something like "The True Story of George Zimmerman" or something similar?

I'm putting it at 1:3
 
2013-09-10 09:24:12 AM
One does not have to be in current possession of a firearm to commit a crime of threatening a person with use of a firearm.

"biatch, if you don't shut your mouth I'm ganna shoot you  like I shot that kid"
 
2013-09-10 09:24:13 AM
What's wrong with this country? A white man is supposed to have the freedom to go for his gat at the slightest provocation. It's in the constitution!
 
2013-09-10 09:24:30 AM
The police didn't find a gun at the scene? What kind of crappy bodyguard doesn't carry a gun, I'd want my money back.
 
2013-09-10 09:25:03 AM
i184.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-10 09:25:39 AM
So, did he punch his father in law in the nose or not?
 
2013-09-10 09:26:14 AM
So he gets to retain the Greatest American Hero belt, right?
 
2013-09-10 09:26:22 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


wkow.images.worldnow.com
Agrees.
 
2013-09-10 09:26:47 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


She didn't save anyone, she has left him already and he's moved on.

If I were him I would move out of the country.
 
2013-09-10 09:27:29 AM
I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute
 
2013-09-10 09:27:41 AM

max_pooper: One does not have to be in current possession of a firearm to commit a crime of threatening a person with use of a firearm.

"biatch, if you don't shut your mouth I'm ganna shoot you  like I shot that kid"


It is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony in most states.
 
2013-09-10 09:27:43 AM
Hey, guys. How do I act surprised about this? I gotta know how to fake surprise. I used all my fake surprise last night on the rig.
 
2013-09-10 09:27:44 AM

Carth: nekom: hinten:
He really knows how to surround himself with all the right people and situations.

Really vindicates my opinion of him.  While I believe the verdict was proper, the guy's a real schmuck all around.

To paraphrase: He's not guilty, he's just an asshole.


Chance of accuracy: 100%
 
2013-09-10 09:28:23 AM

Three Crooked Squirrels: So, did he punch his father in law in the nose or not?


Should be easy to tell. Was the father-in-law's nose broken? Those things break at the slightest touch and it is really just a minor injury
 
2013-09-10 09:28:59 AM

Three Crooked Squirrels: So, did he punch his father in law in the nose or not?


No the police said there were no marks on the father at all, she made it all up.

As I said in the previous thread, she's an attention whore and has been out for herself the entire time.
 
2013-09-10 09:29:21 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

No, he can't.

Unless, of course, she has him pinned to the ground and is bashing his head into the concrete.  Then of course he could shoot her, because the law in every farkin' state in the Union allows you to use deadly force to defend yourself under those circumstances.  Even in the minority of so-called "duty to retreat" states.

So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)


I see the Justice for Trayvon crowd is doubling down on stupid. How many months do you still need to understand the law?
 
2013-09-10 09:29:39 AM

hinten: Convicted liar doing what she does best?

He really knows how to surround himself with all the right people and situations.


See, the thing is: she lied for him. That's the thing. Now, she didn't have to do it, but...
 
2013-09-10 09:29:42 AM
yeah.  what a farking surprise.

figured.
 
2013-09-10 09:29:45 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: Let me just get this clear. On every single "somebody has shot something" thread - you are on here defending the shooter. So... you are asking me to give it a rest?


I am pretty sure that he was not at all supportive of the firearm owner in the National Park / 3 year old death thread.

Maybe I am remembering incorrectly (easy enough to do, and I am too lazy to check) but there were a number of normally pro-gun folks who were quite vocal about what a tragedy it was, and how there is definite assignable blame to the gunowner in that situation.
 
2013-09-10 09:30:28 AM

someonelse: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

[wkow.images.worldnow.com image 632x472]
Agrees.


Apparently the fact that the POLICE found NO GUN at the scene bears no weight at all.
 
2013-09-10 09:30:39 AM

p the boiler: I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute


Any woman named Shellie or a variation thereof are all crazy so steer clear.

Source: dated a woman named Shelly and worked with a coont of the same name.
 
2013-09-10 09:30:39 AM
Maybe his wife knows him better than the general public....
 
2013-09-10 09:30:58 AM

steamingpile: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

She didn't save anyone, she has left him already and he's moved on.

If I were him I would move out of the country.


Presumably he'd want to move someplace with gun laws at least as lenient as Fla. So, maybe Pakistan or East Timor?
 
2013-09-10 09:30:58 AM
I knew it.  It's been pretty obvious that there is a massive, long-running conspiracy to persecute this man.

July 2005:  Arrested for "resisting officer with violence" in an underage drinking bust.  George heroically had those charges waived in exchange for alcohol education.

August 2005:  A restraining order is filed against George by a woman alleging domestic violence.  She also alleged "molestation", but it's obvious from the facts of the case that the only thing molested was The Truth.

March 2012:  After being assaulted by known purple drank abuser Trarymart "THUG" Martin, George triumphantly puts-down the perp like the ruthless savage he is, only to be charged with a crime.  Once again, George defended his good name and was roundly pronounced "not-guilty".

September 2013:  Shellie "Judas" Martin, an obvious gold-digger, harlot, strumpet, and woman, lures George to her home with the intention of framing him for domestic violence.  George, being the good soul he is, arrives with the expectation of helping Shellie pass her GED exam - of which she is on her 4th attempt.  What George didn't count on was entrapment by both her and the parents that indoctrinated with poor values and a craven disregard for justice.

When will it end?
 
2013-09-10 09:31:26 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: [img401.imageshack.us image 608x380]

Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.


Looks like a guidette that skipped the "G" of her GTL way too often.
 
2013-09-10 09:31:59 AM

dittybopper: RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.

Especially when you consider that if he gets put under a restraining order, he's not allowed to possess a firearm under federal law.  And that puts him in much more danger than the typical person, because there is a significant (though small) fraction of the population that wants him dead, because "Justice for Trayvon".

If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


So you're advocating that people should be liable for manslaughter even if they are not present when the incident occurred but a guy actually pulling a trigger and actually another guy should not be charged with anything.
Gun advocate logic at it's finest.
 
2013-09-10 09:33:23 AM

p the boiler: I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute


if she lost about 45-75 pounds, she'd almost approach pretty.
 
2013-09-10 09:33:57 AM
All we have learned in regards to zimmerman is that when MSNBC reports on him, the truth is opposite of what they say. They are determined to make George a millionaire in his lawsuit.
 
2013-09-10 09:34:11 AM
If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.
 
2013-09-10 09:35:23 AM

JNowe: Makh: He threatened her with a gun = she reached for a bag of potato chips.  It's pretty much the same thing, and she was really reaching.

He pulls a gun, you pull a bag of potato chips. It's the Florida way.


Doritos make amazing throwing stars... It's the Frito-Lay way!
 
2013-09-10 09:35:23 AM
Maybe she's lying about lying?  How do you know?

Let me know when she's lying about lying about lying.
 
2013-09-10 09:36:02 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.


Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.
 
2013-09-10 09:36:32 AM

philotech: someonelse: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

[wkow.images.worldnow.com image 632x472]
Agrees.

Apparently the fact that the POLICE found NO GUN at the scene bears no weight at all.


It doesn't make either of these nutjobs any saner or less trashy, or their relationship any less twisted and pathetic, if that's what you're asking. Ooooh, their domestic dispute didn't involve a gun! Let's elect the fat stupid man mayor of Gun Safetyville!
 
2013-09-10 09:36:37 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.


You left out, "...and no convictions..."
 
2013-09-10 09:36:45 AM

King Something: could reasonably be believed to be carrying a giant purple dildo twice the size of a hoagie

Go on

 
2013-09-10 09:36:47 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


Women never lie... especially in divorce situations..... never happens... never.
 
2013-09-10 09:37:10 AM
I see the Justice for Trayvon crowd is doubling down on stupid. How many months do you still need to understand the law?

According to Racheal, fiddy-fee or fiddy-fo months.
 
2013-09-10 09:37:14 AM
I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.
 
2013-09-10 09:37:41 AM

Slaxl: How many times is this guy going to be accused of a crime with a gun only to be cleared when the evidence is examined? I'm guessing 3. These things happen in threes.


That in no way clears him.  Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead",  that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for,   she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one.  The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him.  This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery.  Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same
 
2013-09-10 09:37:55 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.


His gun was taken away and not returned yet. Also he has a bodyguard, no need to carry if you have another guy to protect you, just ask Robby Benson.
 
2013-09-10 09:38:06 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.


If I was to meet Zimmerman, I would shake his hand, tell him to watch his ass, and that touring the kel-tec factory was in extremely poor taste and that he should use his brain a little better.

and to also not stick his dick in any more crazy.

and that there are alot of assholes out there that say and think ridiculous shiat.
 
2013-09-10 09:38:40 AM
I have a theory. She might be the start of all this trouble. Zimmerman is a henpecked man. He is struggling to find his manhood. That's why he wants to be a cop and overzealous neighborhood watchman. He wants to be a hero and prove his manhood. Now he has some fame, or infamy, and doesn't want to take her crap anymore.
 
2013-09-10 09:38:52 AM

steamingpile: Three Crooked Squirrels: So, did he punch his father in law in the nose or not?

No the police said there were no marks on the father at all, she made it all up.

As I said in the previous thread, she's an attention whore and has been out for herself the entire time.


This.  She was never to be trusted.  Poor George has been surrounded by low-lifes and false accusers his whole life.  They are always attempting to sabotage his life.

talkingpointsmemo.com
Even at TGI Friday's (the favorite restaurant of George Zimmerman and home of the Xtreme Taco Tower), he cannot avoid THUGS.
 
2013-09-10 09:39:16 AM

Elegy: I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.


It's only a matter of time, Dude is going to snap at some point, and sooner rather than later.
 
2013-09-10 09:39:31 AM

RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.


I have a friend going through that right now. He is being held without bail and it's tearing the family apart. Truly one of the worst things I've seen someone do to another person.
 
2013-09-10 09:39:33 AM

lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.


he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.
 
2013-09-10 09:39:51 AM
For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.
 
2013-09-10 09:40:41 AM

frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.


Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...
 
2013-09-10 09:40:46 AM

Warlordtrooper: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

Women never lie... especially in divorce situations..... never happens... never.


Silly. This is FARK. Women always lie in divorce situations, and men are always the victims. Duh.
 
2013-09-10 09:41:10 AM
Was he just happy to see her?
 
2013-09-10 09:41:20 AM
For someone who lies so much, she's not very good at it, is she?
 
2013-09-10 09:41:47 AM

Magorn: That in no way clears him. Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead", that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for, she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one. The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him. This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery. Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same


she lied, dude.  accept it.
 
2013-09-10 09:42:03 AM

RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.


Women are nuts like that. I had an ex pull that crap on me once.
 
2013-09-10 09:42:37 AM

slayer199: I'm going to play a bit of Devil's Advocate here which I'm sure will inflame the fark masses.  Having been a police officer for a couple years, I've seen these stories go both ways.

Weren't they having marital troubles?  Isn't it possible that she embellished her story to get him out of the house?  I'm not saying one way or another what happened...that's why there's usually an investigation into these things.

If it was Joe Blow and not George Zimmerman we wouldn't be hearing about this.  I really don't know what happened in the house other than they had a heated argument...and odds are you don't know either.


And as a police officer, I'm also sure you've seen many women who've had the crap beat out of them turn around and refuse to press charges against the douche. That's also a good possibility.
 
2013-09-10 09:42:50 AM

give me doughnuts: Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.

You left out, "...and no convictions..."


Just like Casey Anthony, Robert Blake and Lizzie Borden. Sorry not stating the obvious.
 
2013-09-10 09:43:02 AM
I can't believe how easily people still get played in these threads.
 
2013-09-10 09:43:09 AM
biatches be trippin', amirite?
 
2013-09-10 09:43:41 AM

Carth: Odds of her writting a book? Something like "The True Story of George Zimmerman" or something similar?

I'm putting it at 1:3


"(If) I Did It, The Sequel"
 
2013-09-10 09:43:51 AM

frepnog: and to also not stick his dick in any more crazy.


To be fair, he is also a)crazy, and b)unable to see his dick beneath his gut. This is a distinct disadvantage.
 
2013-09-10 09:44:06 AM
Someone wants a book deal.
 
2013-09-10 09:44:06 AM

MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...


and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.
 
2013-09-10 09:44:30 AM

dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.


Give what a rest? Verdicts don;t change facts.  Fact is a teenage boy is dead and Zimmerman killed him.  Further fact is that the incident could have been entirely avoided if Zimmerman had done what he was told by competent law enforcement authorities.  Final fact is that the Zimmerman was not criminally convicted for his action because it was impossible to prove what happened that night beyond a reasonable doubt because the only other eyewitness to the entire altercation was dead by Zimmerman's hand.

from these facts it is entirely reasonable to conclude that Zimmerman is, like most of his supporters the exact sort of angry emotional  man-infant that makes me support gun control generally because it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so.
 
2013-09-10 09:44:30 AM
Page 2 and no one's played the misogyny card yet?
 
2013-09-10 09:45:06 AM

dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.


I think you should get a refund on your law degree from whatever cable TV series you got it from.
 
2013-09-10 09:45:21 AM

Nabb1: That's not hearsay. She can testify what words he used to threaten her because he is not an out-of-court declarant and the testimony is not offered to establish the truth of the matter asserted, but as to the utterance of a threat.


Okay, maybe I didn't use the best choice of words possible. Perhaps I should rephrase:

Her testimony in court under oath that GZ threatened to force her to help him reenact the Trayvon Martin incident with her playing the role of TM would not be enough to convict him of aggravated assault. It might help her in the civil (divorce) trial, depending on the standard of evidence in that court, but to render that testimony worthless in criminal court all GZ or his lawyer would have to do is ask for a video or audio recording of him actually threatening her ("sound bite or it didn't happen"). Without hard evidence that he actually threatened her with a gun, there's no way he could be convicted (and I doubt the prosecutors would even bother going about with the trial if all they had to work with was her word, even if her word would be worth more than hearsay).

_____________________


Princess Ryans Knickers: Doesn't matter whether she saw the gun. As far as the court is concerned, it only matters that she was threatened.


max_pooper: One does not have to be in current possession of a firearm to commit a crime of threatening a person with use of a firearm.

"biatch, if you don't shut your mouth I'm ganna shoot you  like I shot that kid"


This is true. Like I said earlier, the victim has to reasonably believe that the aggressor is willing and able to carry out the threat. If George Zimmerman tells someone that he's gonna go full Trayvon on them, they should reasonably believe that he's gonna do it at some point, even if he's wearing naught but a speedo when he says it.
 
2013-09-10 09:45:46 AM

MFAWG: Elegy: I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.

It's only a matter of time, Dude is going to snap at some point, and sooner rather than later.


Being railroaded for two years for politics will do that. Being called racist based on no actual facts and counter to actual facts by mainstream medua will do that. Being threatened every day of your life despite innocence will do that.

This man had his life ruined by the media, race victimization advocates, and even the president despite the facts and a finding of the jury.

Anybody would snap.
 
2013-09-10 09:46:40 AM

give me doughnuts: Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.

You left out, "...and no convictions..."


Trayvon Martin was never convicted of anything but that didn't stop some of the pro Zimmerman folks from making him out to be a major league criminal who was out buying drug supplies the night of his death.
 
2013-09-10 09:46:40 AM

Cataholic: Page 2 and no one's played the misogyny card yet?


The race and gun cards are good for pages 1-5
 
2013-09-10 09:46:57 AM

badhatharry: I have a theory. She might be the start of all this trouble. Zimmerman is a henpecked man. He is struggling to find his manhood. That's why he wants to be a cop and overzealous neighborhood watchman. He wants to be a hero and prove his manhood. Now he has some fame, or infamy, and doesn't want to take her crap anymore.


This too.  George gave her his youth, his looks, his world.  She just took and took and took until George was out at night patrolling the neighborhood to get away from her.  She's really to blame for this, and also Traylon Martin who jumped on George for absolutely no reason and wailed on him like a savage jungle beast.
 
2013-09-10 09:47:11 AM

frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.


Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...
 
2013-09-10 09:47:28 AM

LasersHurt: Slaxl: How many times is this guy going to be accused of a crime with a gun only to be cleared when the evidence is examined? I'm guessing 3. These things happen in threes.

It's a shame how he has been powerless and had no part in these situations he keeps finding himself in where this dumb shiat happens.


It's Florida, Jake :)
 
2013-09-10 09:47:54 AM

MFAWG: Elegy: I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.

It's only a matter of time, Dude is going to snap at some point, and sooner rather than later.


Daily reminder that you're a welcher and never paid up on our bet.

You are the lowest sort of person.
 
2013-09-10 09:48:52 AM

Magorn: Fact is a teenage boy is dead and Zimmerman killed him. Further fact is that the incident could have been entirely avoided if Zimmerman had done what he was told by competent law enforcement authorities. Final fact is that the Zimmerman was not criminally convicted for his action because it was impossible to prove what happened that night beyond a reasonable doubt because the only other eyewitness to the entire altercation was dead by Zimmerman's hand.


"we don't need you to do that"
"ok" and could be clearly heard to stop running and breathing normalized.

you are an idiot willfully ignorant of the facts.  fact is that zimmerman was not convicted because there was no evidence that he committed a crime and ample evidence that he was defending himself from an attacker.

I am not telling you to start supporting Zimmerman, but defending Trayvon is a stupid idea.  Travyon attacked the man because he was, in fact, a gangsta wanna be thug.  his actions, his telephone, his friend rachel, his own parents, his school confirm it.  Face it.
 
2013-09-10 09:49:10 AM

Magorn: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...


The only evidence of assault was Trayvon hitting Zimmerman. There was no evidence the other way besides the gun shot. If someone is not fighting back as you hit them, that is assault.
 
2013-09-10 09:49:37 AM
Only knuckle-dragging misogynists believe that women sometimes make bogus allegations against men.
 
2013-09-10 09:49:41 AM

Magorn: it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so


Why you gotta be hatin' on police officers?
 
2013-09-10 09:49:57 AM

frepnog: Magorn: That in no way clears him. Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead", that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for, she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one. The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him. This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery. Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same

she lied, dude.  accept it.


based on...?  I mean other than your need to believe that a man with prior domestic violence charges, Charges of attacking a cop, and charges of murdering a teenager, is some sort of upstanding citizen and modern-day saint with absolutely no anger control issues....
 
2013-09-10 09:50:06 AM

doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.


More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.
 
2013-09-10 09:50:21 AM

Latinwolf: give me doughnuts: Uranus Is Huge!: If I was in Florida and I saw George Zimmerman, I would assume he's carrying. Because if I was a paranoid unaccredited law enforcement enthusiast with violent tendencies and a vigilante streak, I would be carrying.

You left out, "...and no convictions..."

Trayvon Martin was never convicted of anything but that didn't stop some of the pro Zimmerman folks from making him out to be a major league criminal who was out buying drug supplies the night of his death.


Fact.  Treyzon "Grimace" Martin found with skittles and a fruity soda.  All you need to make purple drank is jolly ranchers, fruity soda, and the drugs.  This makes him clearly 1/3rd of the way to doing drugs.  Drugs!
 
2013-09-10 09:50:46 AM
Hard to tell who is lying in these situations, especially when the parties are a killer with a history of violence or a dumb biatch who married a killer with a history of violence.
 
2013-09-10 09:50:51 AM

Cataholic: Page 2 and no one's played the misogyny card yet?


The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

Women are nuts like that. I had an ex pull that crap on me once.
 
2013-09-10 09:51:03 AM

Magorn: Give what a rest? Verdicts don;t change facts.  Fact is a teenage boy is dead and Zimmerman killed him.  Further fact is that the incident could have been entirely avoided if Zimmerman had done what he was told by competent law enforcement authorities.  Final fact is that the Zimmerman was not criminally convicted for his action because it was impossible to prove what happened that night beyond a reasonable doubt because the only other eyewitness to the entire altercation was dead by Zimmerman's hand.

from these facts it is entirely reasonable to conclude that Zimmerman is, like most of his supporters the exact sort of angry emotional  man-infant that makes me support gun control generally because it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so.


Killing someone is legalized in certain situations, war or armed conflicts typically its legal; self defense is another time it's legal.

They determined he didn't kill Martin illegally, that he did it in self defense.

Get over it already.
 
2013-09-10 09:51:26 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.


I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.
 
2013-09-10 09:51:32 AM
 
2013-09-10 09:51:53 AM

Carth: max_pooper: One does not have to be in current possession of a firearm to commit a crime of threatening a person with use of a firearm.

"biatch, if you don't shut your mouth I'm ganna shoot you  like I shot that kid"

It is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony in most states.


Florida is not one of those states. The threat itself is enough, especially if the person who makes the threat to fatally shoot someone actually has fatally shot someone in the past and references that past shooting when making the threat.
 
2013-09-10 09:52:00 AM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


Oh, it could well be abused spouse behavior.  Which is part of what makes these cases such a joy for law enforcement, lawyers, and child protective services...
 
2013-09-10 09:52:05 AM

Farce-Side: Magorn: it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so

Why you gotta be hatin' on police officers?


Have you met most cops?  I worked with hundreds of them on their side in PG county courts, and against them doing criminal defense work in Cook County, and the number of them I trust or consider to be honest, law-abiding citizens of sober character and good judgment I could fit on one hand
 
2013-09-10 09:52:24 AM

King Something: If George Zimmerman tells someone that he's gonna go full Trayvon on them, they should reasonably believe that he's gonna do it at some point, even if he's wearing naught but a speedo when he says it.


It's far too early for that visual.
 
2013-09-10 09:53:27 AM
"Gun was not shown" =/= "there was no gun."

Zimmerman's own attorney has already stated that he did have a gun but that it wasn't shown.

FTA: "Later, during an interview on CNN, O'Mara admitted Zimmerman did have a gun on him, but 'He never took the weapon out.'"

I'm also pretty darn sure one can imply that I'm going to shoot you without ever showing you a gun.
 
2013-09-10 09:53:34 AM

Magorn: Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.


had trayvon not been shot, the police would have arrested him on felony assault charges based on the fact that he attacked the man and based on the fact that Zimmerman had injuries that shown that he had been attacked and eyewitness statements that placed trayvon on top of zimmerman, and the forensic evidence on the clothing that clearly showed that trayvon had been straddling the man.  Don't be a fool.

the cops were about 1 minute away when trayvon was shot.  had he not been shot, cops would have dragged trayvon off Zimmerman and cuffed him.
 
2013-09-10 09:54:43 AM

someonelse: basemetal: So he stuck his dick in crazy too?

In this case, crazy fatty A stuck his dick into crazy fatty B.


I just know I'm going to regret asking this....but are there any kids?

Because, you know, I'd like to mentally prepare myself for another generation of Zimmerman Jr. stories coming down the pike...
 
2013-09-10 09:54:45 AM

Magorn: frepnog: Magorn: That in no way clears him. Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead", that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for, she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one. The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him. This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery. Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same

she lied, dude.  accept it.

based on...?  I mean other than your need to believe that a man with prior domestic violence charges, Charges of attacking a cop, and charges of murdering a teenager, is some sort of upstanding citizen and modern-day saint with absolutely no anger control issues....


Good thing our system doesn't convict based on charges but evidence. Imagine how happy prosecutors and dictators would be to have your desired level of evidence, being charged equals conviction.
 
2013-09-10 09:55:24 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.

I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.


http://www.bust.com/women-more-often-the-aggressors-in-domestic-violen ce.html

You were saying dumbfark?
 
2013-09-10 09:55:51 AM

Magorn: frepnog: Magorn: That in no way clears him. Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead", that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for, she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one. The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him. This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery. Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same

she lied, dude.  accept it.

based on...?  I mean other than your need to believe that a man with prior domestic violence charges, Charges of attacking a cop, and charges of murdering a teenager, is some sort of upstanding citizen and modern-day saint with absolutely no anger control issues....


Zimmerman is either a criminal mastermind that gets away with multiple crimes, or a simple man that keeps getting shiat dumped in his lap.

since he has yet to be actually convicted of any crimes and is obviously no criminal mastermind, what the fark do you think, dude?
 
2013-09-10 09:56:02 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.


This is now a men's rights thread. The dankest depths of the non-scat-pr0n regions of the Internet. Proceed at your own peril.
 
2013-09-10 09:56:11 AM

QueenMamaBee: slayer199: I'm going to play a bit of Devil's Advocate here which I'm sure will inflame the fark masses.  Having been a police officer for a couple years, I've seen these stories go both ways.

Weren't they having marital troubles?  Isn't it possible that she embellished her story to get him out of the house?  I'm not saying one way or another what happened...that's why there's usually an investigation into these things.

If it was Joe Blow and not George Zimmerman we wouldn't be hearing about this.  I really don't know what happened in the house other than they had a heated argument...and odds are you don't know either.

And as a police officer, I'm also sure you've seen many women who've had the crap beat out of them turn around and refuse to press charges against the douche. That's also a good possibility.


She's already moved out. God, y'all just love making up these hypotheticals.
 
2013-09-10 09:56:22 AM

whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.


They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.
 
2013-09-10 09:56:24 AM

frepnog: Magorn: Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.

had trayvon not been shot, the police would have arrested him on felony assault charges based on the fact that he attacked the man and based on the fact that Zimmerman had injuries that shown that he had been attacked and eyewitness statements that placed trayvon on top of zimmerman, and the forensic evidence on the clothing that clearly showed that trayvon had been straddling the man.  Don't be a fool.

the cops were about 1 minute away when trayvon was shot.  had he not been shot, cops would have dragged trayvon off Zimmerman and cuffed him.


Or at the least had he lived through the shot
 
2013-09-10 09:56:34 AM

Rapmaster2000: badhatharry: I have a theory. She might be the start of all this trouble. Zimmerman is a henpecked man. He is struggling to find his manhood. That's why he wants to be a cop and overzealous neighborhood watchman. He wants to be a hero and prove his manhood. Now he has some fame, or infamy, and doesn't want to take her crap anymore.

This too.  George gave her his youth, his looks, his world.  She just took and took and took until George was out at night patrolling the neighborhood to get away from her.  She's really to blame for this, and also Traylon Martin who jumped on George for absolutely no reason and wailed on him like a savage jungle beast.


She's not to blame for Trayvon getting killed. That would be Trayvon's fault for jumping the wrong guy.
 
2013-09-10 09:56:45 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.

I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.


It's pretty well known dude. Look it up.
 
2013-09-10 09:57:13 AM

frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.


What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.
 
2013-09-10 09:58:06 AM
frepnog:

Zimmerman is either a criminal mastermind that gets away with multiple crimes, or a simple man that keeps getting shiat dumped in his lap.

Exactly.  Like most things in life, this is clearly a True Dichotomy.  It is one thing or it is the other thing.  It couldn't possibly be a combination of things or some other third thing altogether.

I took Logic in the Army.  I'm not dumb.
 
2013-09-10 09:58:12 AM

Latinwolf: dittybopper: RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.

Especially when you consider that if he gets put under a restraining order, he's not allowed to possess a firearm under federal law.  And that puts him in much more danger than the typical person, because there is a significant (though small) fraction of the population that wants him dead, because "Justice for Trayvon".

If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.

So you're advocating that people should be liable for manslaughter even if they are not present when the incident occurred but a guy actually pulling a trigger and actually another guy should not be charged with anything.
Gun advocate logic at it's finest.



The below information has been copied directly the source dittybopper used, please read carefully:

"TheDomestic Violence Offender Gun Ban ...which bans access to firearms by people  convicted of crimes of domestic violence. "

"The definition of 'convicted' can be found in the chapter 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) and has exceptions:
(33) (B)
(i) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter, unless-
(I) the person was represented by counsel in the case, or knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and
(II) in the case of a prosecution for an offense described in this paragraph for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried, either
(aa) the case was tried by a jury, or
(bb) the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise.
(ii) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense) unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms."


Restraining orders do not require a trial, a jury or legal defense and can be obtained by anyone who can tell a convincing lie to the judge.  As these things do not constitute a conviction, they cannot be used to stop you from owning and carrying a fire-arm (as far as Federal Law is concerned).
 
2013-09-10 09:58:32 AM

MFAWG: What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


Let me know what's illegal about the above so far please.
 
2013-09-10 09:58:46 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?


I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.
 
2013-09-10 09:58:50 AM

QueenMamaBee: slayer199: I'm going to play a bit of Devil's Advocate here which I'm sure will inflame the fark masses.  Having been a police officer for a couple years, I've seen these stories go both ways.

Weren't they having marital troubles?  Isn't it possible that she embellished her story to get him out of the house?  I'm not saying one way or another what happened...that's why there's usually an investigation into these things.

If it was Joe Blow and not George Zimmerman we wouldn't be hearing about this.  I really don't know what happened in the house other than they had a heated argument...and odds are you don't know either.

And as a police officer, I'm also sure you've seen many women who've had the crap beat out of them turn around and refuse to press charges against the douche. That's also a good possibility.


Except nobody had a mark on them and Zimmerman was outside the whole time yet no neighbors saw anything and the father didn't either. You're acting like this is just he said/she said when there were numerous witnesses this time.
 
2013-09-10 09:58:55 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.

I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.

It's pretty well known dude. Look it up.


http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm
 
2013-09-10 09:59:46 AM

steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.


Have they released the police report yet? I've read 3-4 stories on CNN and local affiliates but hadn't seen that yet.
 
2013-09-10 09:59:50 AM
If these two could just stay out of the press and reconcile they'd could potentially have a terrific marriage based on mutual paranoia with a whiff of gun

It'd be like Bonnie and Clyde or Natural Born Killers

"Honey? The whole world is out to get us - and yes, yes, you DO know what I am capable of. Let's shop our story and make money while creating a world of two. You LIED - admit it - we are made for each other!"
 
2013-09-10 10:00:40 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.


Here you are for starters:


http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm
 
2013-09-10 10:00:59 AM

supayoda: "Gun was not shown" =/= "there was no gun."

Zimmerman's own attorney has already stated that he did have a gun but that it wasn't shown.

FTA: "Later, during an interview on CNN, O'Mara admitted Zimmerman did have a gun on him, but 'He never took the weapon out.'"

I'm also pretty darn sure one can imply that I'm going to shoot you without ever showing you a gun.


Don't bother. Zim has already been canonized as the saint of downtrodden, henpecked, and imaginarily persecuted men everywhere. The faithful are already making a pilgrimage to Florida to pinch his chubby, beatified cheeks.
 
2013-09-10 10:01:12 AM
badhatharry:

She's not to blame for Trayvon getting killed. That would be Trayvon's fault for jumping the wrong guy.

The point is, none of these things that happen to George are George's fault.  They are someone else's fault.  I still believe in George Zimmerman.
 
2013-09-10 10:01:44 AM

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


it was not out of the clear blue sky.  trayvon knew zim was watching.  he tried to intimidate zim and then RAN ALL THE WAY HOME, as confirmed by his friend rachel.  he then returned to teach zimmerman a lesson, to "whoop cracka ass" as rachel put it.  as is apparent, the only reason trayvon and zimmerman met again that night was because it was what trayvon wanted.

you can try to defend thuglike behavior all you like, but the fact is that trayvon attacked zimmerman and got himself shot for it.
 
2013-09-10 10:02:03 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.

Let me just get this clear. On every single "somebody has shot something" thread - you are on here defending the shooter. So... you are asking me to give it a rest?


Actually, that's not true.

It was true for the Zimmerman case, because it was patently obvious to anyone who actually *LOOKED* at the evidence before making their mind up that it was a pretty straight-up case of self-defense.

And before you say anything, I was skeptical of both sides, reserving judgement until the facts came in.   This is my Boobies on the subject:

dittybopper  [TotalFark]                                  2012-03-21 02:22:09 PM  
vpb: Probably not. Possibly the opposite. The word "coon" doesn't end in a hard "K" sound, the right is going to claim that this is an example of "playing the race card" and try to make this into a major scandal.
Heres the link to the audio:
Link (new window)

Sounds to me like he says "f*cking punks".

/Haven't formed an opinion yet
//The "facts" being presented are still to variable, this thread being a perfect example.

///Guy does seem like a major Mall Ninja though.


Notice that I was influenced by media coverage a bit, thinking of Zimmerman as a "Mall Ninja" (think Paul Blart, Mall Cop with a gun).

But as all the alleged evidence on the Martin side was shown to be either completely false, or misleading, while all the actual confirmed evidence and eyewitness testimony substantially supported (or at the very worst, didn't refute) Zimmerman's story, then yeah, I made up my mind.

People like you are the creationists of self-defense cases.  You don't see the actual evidence because you have internalized it as a matter of faith that George Zimmerman committed murder, and that he couldn't possibly have had the right to defend himself against Martin.

And no, I don't reflexively defend the shooters in every "somebody shot something" thread.  I've called people idiots when it was plain they were doing something unsafe (like those target practicing idiots in Pennsylvania, shooting guns without an adequate backstop), and I've called actual murderers what they are, murderers (like the guy who killed several people at a town hall meeting over a land dispute(.
 
2013-09-10 10:02:12 AM

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


"Chased"? Y'all crack me up.
 
2013-09-10 10:02:19 AM
Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Which one has a history of getting in trouble for lying?
 
2013-09-10 10:03:01 AM
Is she at least sure she saw George?  DNRTFA
 
2013-09-10 10:03:11 AM

Diogenes: Well, she lied to help him.  And now she lied to hurt him.

I think...maybe...she might be a liar.


I guess his lie didn't count?

"I was looking for an address" *camera turns to show house with clearly visible address*

Opps, there's another lie. That leaves the score at 2 - 2.

"He reached for the gun, I mean, he saw the gun, I mean, he covered my mouth and nose and beat me in the head and choked me and said some movie line about how I was going to die..."

Yeah, i think we might be dealing with two liars.

/Both sides are bad, so vote Shellie
 
2013-09-10 10:04:05 AM

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


Martin was being followed by a cracker ass rapist and had to give him an ass whoopin'.
 
2013-09-10 10:04:19 AM

Rapmaster2000: I took Logic in the Army. I'm not dumb.


logic.  army.

is that like "military intelligence"? you know, a direct contradiction?
 
2013-09-10 10:05:16 AM

redmid17: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.

Have they released the police report yet? I've read 3-4 stories on CNN and local affiliates but hadn't seen that yet.


It was a local report I read last night.
 
2013-09-10 10:06:44 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.
 
2013-09-10 10:07:18 AM

KellyX: Magorn: Give what a rest? Verdicts don;t change facts.  Fact is a teenage boy is dead and Zimmerman killed him.  Further fact is that the incident could have been entirely avoided if Zimmerman had done what he was told by competent law enforcement authorities.  Final fact is that the Zimmerman was not criminally convicted for his action because it was impossible to prove what happened that night beyond a reasonable doubt because the only other eyewitness to the entire altercation was dead by Zimmerman's hand.

from these facts it is entirely reasonable to conclude that Zimmerman is, like most of his supporters the exact sort of angry emotional  man-infant that makes me support gun control generally because it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so.

Killing someone is legalized in certain situations, war or armed conflicts typically its legal; self defense is another time it's legal.

They determined he didn't kill Martin illegally, that he did it in self defense.

Get over it already.


actually the did no such thing.  They determined that the evidence that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense when firing the bullet was not sufficent to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty and there are light years between those things.   I once served on a jury where we acquitted a man of the attempted murder of a cop even though we were almost certain he had done it.  There was no doubt he was in the car that had been in a high spped chase with the officer, his finger prints (and others) were also on the shotgun that fired the pellets that hit the officer in the chest and were stopped by his vest.  However, there were two other people in that car as well, and the only testimony making this guy the triggerman was the testimony of the officer.  Unfortunately the officer's testimony was generally unreliable as he testified he also returned fire with only a single shot, when in fact he emptied all 13 rounds from his weapon during the firefight  (including a shot a few minutes later that servered the spin of the fleeing defendant and paralyzed him for life)

Based on that, while we had no doubt he was involved in the shoot out with the officer,  and we knew he most LIKELY did it, we could not conclude "beyond a reasonable doubt" that HE fired the shotgun, and therefore had to acquit
 
2013-09-10 10:07:40 AM

King Something: Carth: max_pooper: One does not have to be in current possession of a firearm to commit a crime of threatening a person with use of a firearm.

"biatch, if you don't shut your mouth I'm ganna shoot you  like I shot that kid"

It is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony in most states.

Florida is not one of those states. The threat itself is enough, especially if the person who makes the threat to fatally shoot someone actually has fatally shot someone in the past and references that past shooting when making the threat.


Do you have a link to the statue? Googling isn't turning anything up.

It is surprising FL doesn't distinguish between saying "i'm going to kill you" and saying it with a gun in your hand. But... it is Florida so it is plausible.
 
2013-09-10 10:07:54 AM

steamingpile: p the boiler: I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute

Any woman named Shellie or a variation thereof are all crazy so steer clear.

Source: dated a woman named Shelly and worked with a coont of the same name.


Her name was Shelly and she named her vajajay Shelly? Was it something like "little Shelly" at least?

/ Shelly
 
2013-09-10 10:08:06 AM

someonelse: philotech: someonelse: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

[wkow.images.worldnow.com image 632x472]
Agrees.

Apparently the fact that the POLICE found NO GUN at the scene bears no weight at all.

It doesn't make either of these nutjobs any saner or less trashy, or their relationship any less twisted and pathetic, if that's what you're asking. Ooooh, their domestic dispute didn't involve a gun! Let's elect the fat stupid man mayor of Gun Safetyville!


My point was that it's not abused wife behavior to recant in the face of evidence...
 
2013-09-10 10:08:14 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Diogenes: Well, she lied to help him.  And now she lied to hurt him.

I think...maybe...she might be a liar.

I guess his lie didn't count?

"I was looking for an address" *camera turns to show house with clearly visible address*

Opps, there's another lie. That leaves the score at 2 - 2.

"He reached for the gun, I mean, he saw the gun, I mean, he covered my mouth and nose and beat me in the head and choked me and said some movie line about how I was going to die..."

Yeah, i think we might be dealing with two liars.

/Both sides are bad, so vote Shellie

it was dark as doom out there.

i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.
 
2013-09-10 10:08:22 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.


I posted it three times already. Pay attention before you make false assumptions.
 
2013-09-10 10:09:15 AM

badhatharry: Martin was being followed by a cracker ass rapist and had to give him an ass whoopin'.


i see someone else paid attention to the things that rachel actually admitted.
 
2013-09-10 10:09:26 AM
The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater
 
2013-09-10 10:10:16 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater


Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.
 
2013-09-10 10:10:33 AM

steamingpile: Sybarite:

Well the better question is why wasn't she charged with making false statements to police?????

Because 911 operators aren't police.


You can still be charged with making a false report and I wouldn't be surprised if that happens here.
 
2013-09-10 10:10:46 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm


Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.
 
2013-09-10 10:11:24 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

I posted it three times already. Pay attention before you make false assumptions.


And I just responded to it.
 
2013-09-10 10:11:49 AM

Magorn: They determined that the evidence that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense when firing the bullet was not sufficent to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty and there are light years between those things.


what the fark are you talking about?  this sentence.  no sense does it make.
 
2013-09-10 10:11:50 AM

steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.


What report?  Certainly not in TFA.

If true, then they did an extraordinarily shiatty job of searching since even his attorney says he had his gun with him.
 
2013-09-10 10:11:58 AM

Elegy: I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.


George would be proud of your loyalty. He's totally gonna sleep with you.
 
2013-09-10 10:12:05 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.


Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.
 
2013-09-10 10:12:08 AM
But for lying, she wins a free hoodie!
 
2013-09-10 10:13:02 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.


Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

Learn to read.
 
2013-09-10 10:13:32 AM

Magorn: dittybopper: Because People in power are Stupid:
So maybe he should start following her around until she defends herself... that way he can blow her away.  (It's fun to kill people.)

Give it a rest.  It's neither an intelligent argument, nor is it funny anymore due to constant repetition.  All it does is make the rest of us think that you are one of the people in power.

Give what a rest? Verdicts don;t change facts.  Fact is a teenage boy is dead and Zimmerman killed him.  Further fact is that the incident could have been entirely avoided if Zimmerman had done what he was told by competent law enforcement authorities.  Final fact is that the Zimmerman was not criminally convicted for his action because it was impossible to prove what happened that night beyond a reasonable doubt because the only other eyewitness to the entire altercation was dead by Zimmerman's hand.

from these facts it is entirely reasonable to conclude that Zimmerman is, like most of his supporters the exact sort of angry emotional  man-infant that makes me support gun control generally because it has been my experience that most of the people who WANT to carry guns are precisely the same people I do not trust to do so.


Ah, yes, another Self-Defense Creationist, who won't look at the actual evidence that Zimmerman acted in self-defense under the law as it applies everywhere in the United States because you just *KNOW*, in your deepest heart of hearts, that Zimmerman a vile racist who killed a defenseless 12 year old cherub who only wanted to get home.

Look, the entire resources of the State of Florida, backed up by the US Justice Department, went looking for evidence that Zimmerman was guilty of murder, or at least manslaughter, not to mention hate crimes (which is what the feds were looking at), and they came up with *NOTHING*.

Go watch the closing arguments of the trial again.  The defense put on an evidence-laden final argument.  The prosecution put on an emotion-laden final argument, largely devoid of any actual evidence.  It was pure character assassination, and the jury didn't buy it.

Neither should you.

Let it farkin' go.   It makes you look like an intellectually stunted person to keep hammering on this.  Admit you were wrong (to just yourself, if that's what it takes to preserve your pride), and move on.

Remember that the only reason this became a national story is because the Martin family hired a publicist who shopped the story, with blatant distortions of the facts, to the national media.  And you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
 
2013-09-10 10:14:42 AM

tricycleracer: biatches be trippin', amirite?


Word
 
2013-09-10 10:14:53 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.


Get a load of this guy thinking that self-admitted stats mean anything at all.
 
2013-09-10 10:15:04 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.


Men's rights groups have been f*cking that chicken for years.
 
2013-09-10 10:16:12 AM

Magorn: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...


Seriously?  Physical injuries on Zimmerman.  Front and back of head.  End of story.

Magorn, I respect your opinions as a rule, but you're really walking way out on thin ice on this one.
 
2013-09-10 10:16:31 AM
frepnog:
i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy? You're that starved for words to express yourself that the only thing yo ucan think to day is, "duh, you dumb" every time someone disagrees with you? Get a dictionary and read it. Make yourself a better person. As for the comment itself, I'm not taking up for an African-American. I'm being entertained/disgusted by the ridiculous notion that Trayvon Martin's past actions made him a violent thug, but Zimmerman's numerous interactions with police are all dismissible. I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists. So, I'm just here pointing it out.
 .
 
2013-09-10 10:16:36 AM

Mistymtnhop: Elegy: I'm sure all the people that stopped in yesterday to say that this incident was a part of a greater pattern of Zimmerman picking up a penis substitute and threatening people with it will stop back in today to apologize and tell us how wrong they were, and how their emotions led them to leap to a false conclusion.

Then again, probably not, so I'll just have to be twice as smug as I would otherwise be about saying "I told you so."

I told you so.

George would be proud of your loyalty. He's totally gonna sleep with you.


Shelly and Trayvon are proud of yours. You're totally going to get that BBW/necro threesome you've always wanted!
 
2013-09-10 10:17:37 AM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Diogenes: Well, she lied to help him.  And now she lied to hurt him.

I think...maybe...she might be a liar.

I guess his lie didn't count?

"I was looking for an address" *camera turns to show house with clearly visible address*

Opps, there's another lie. That leaves the score at 2 - 2.

"He reached for the gun, I mean, he saw the gun, I mean, he covered my mouth and nose and beat me in the head and choked me and said some movie line about how I was going to die..."

Yeah, i think we might be dealing with two liars.

/Both sides are bad, so vote Shellie
it was dark as doom out there.

i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Based on their states of mind (Zimmerman not wanting the punk to get away and Martin wanting to escape the creepy cracker), my money is on Zimmerman grabbing Martin and getting beaten for it.
 
2013-09-10 10:17:48 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.

I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.

It's pretty well known dude. Look it up.


You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.
 
2013-09-10 10:18:06 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.

Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

Learn to read.


Except the stabbing, shooting, burning and choking sort?

Learn to read, indeed :)
 
2013-09-10 10:18:19 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.


But women are liars, according to this very thread.
 
2013-09-10 10:18:36 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.


Oh, anecdotal evidence. Well by all means, please continue.
 
2013-09-10 10:19:27 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.


Not actually true you know.  I am a bit of an expert in this area as I used to help to run the Family Law Court in a Suburban DC county, and the statistics actually show that while women are batteredmore often than me, men are more likey to be severly injured or killed in a domestic violence situation, as women are much more likely than men to use a weapon.  It's not biology but sociology that accoonts for most of the disparate statistics.  mena are far less likely to recognize when they are being battered, and even if they do, they are exceedingly unlikely to seek outside help for it, owing to basic societal stigmas ("you let a GIRL beat you up? What kind of man are you?")
 
2013-09-10 10:19:56 AM

someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

But women are liars, according to this very thread.


Nah, just this one. It's kind of a thing with her, maybe?
 
2013-09-10 10:20:52 AM

MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.


I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.
 
2013-09-10 10:20:59 AM

Magorn: as women are much more likely than men to use a weapon.


That part kind of is related to basic biology.
 
2013-09-10 10:22:10 AM
And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.
 
2013-09-10 10:23:07 AM

Nabb1: someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

But women are liars, according to this very thread.

Nah, just this one. It's kind of a thing with her, maybe?


Except this thread is full of people saying that women lie in divorce cases. Then someone cites a study involving people SELF REPORTING domestic violence, and suddenly the possibility of lying is inconceivable.
 
2013-09-10 10:23:15 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Oh, anecdotal evidence. Well by all means, please continue.


I'm not racist but I look at it as a "what if it were me?" type of situation. If someone were to attack me, would I want to be able to defend myself?
 
2013-09-10 10:23:19 AM

Rapmaster2000: I knew it. It's been pretty obvious that there is a massive, long-running conspiracy to persecute this man.


The Buddhist concept of karma is that people's lives tend to go in the same direction as the things they do. Good deeds make one's life tend more towards good, and evil deeds cause one's life to tend more towards evil. It has long since been established that Zimmerman is a big fat poopyhead. The thing about big fat poopyheads is that they attract trouble. They do it on enough of a scale that lends some credence to the idea of karma.

But there's a common misconception about karma: that it's about some kind of cosmic justice or at least fairness. Neither is the case: a large part of the reason it's said we should take karma into account is that it isn't fair. Big fat poopyheads attract far more trouble than they cause. This does not invalidate the fact that they're big fat poopyheads, but it does mean that if we are of a mind to be fair, we must not presume them guilty. Every case must still be decided on its own merits. Even when big fat poopyheads are involved.
 
2013-09-10 10:23:37 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Men are blamed for 90+%.

Women openly admit to lying to police about who struck first because they know they will get away with it.

This situation is no different.

If the woman is found to be lying as in a vast majority of cases, SHE should be thrown in jail.

I love how well cited and not at all ridiculous this is.


I was gonna say... But I was rendered speechless, you nailed it.
 
2013-09-10 10:24:11 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.


Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".
 
2013-09-10 10:24:12 AM
My ex pulled something like this on the day we separated. Luckily for me the cops, her own son and the 911 tape all contradicted her story badly enough that the cops never even bothered to interview me about her claims. After that first incident my police department told me to record every interaction with her for my own protection.

The second time my ex tried claiming I beat the living crap out of her (and showed up at the sheriff's department covered in bruises and a "witness" for proof). Being able to play a recording of what actually happened surprised the hell out of the deputy, needless to say my recording saved me from going to jail or even being arrested.

She tried pulling the same thing again a third time a month ago, and again the cops quickly came to the conclusion that I never hurt anyone. Needless to say the judge determined that it was fabricated within seconds. She then has the audacity to complain in court about me recording every interaction with her!

Claiming a domestic abuse thing is a common divorce tactic that is favored because it instantly gives one person the kids, the house, child support and everything else. Unfortunately there are no legal repercussions for making false claims, until this changes false claims will continue to be a favored tactic for gaining custody.

How many kids grow up hating one of their parents thinking they did a horrible thing when in reality nothing ever happened and it was nothing more than a divorce tactic? Victims of false accusations need a way to force police departments to arrest the false accusers and force real consequences in family court.
 
2013-09-10 10:26:41 AM

PunGent: Magorn: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...

Seriously?  Physical injuries on Zimmerman.  Front and back of head.  End of story.

Magorn, I respect your opinions as a rule, but you're really walking way out on thin ice on this one.


Nope. Go with me a minute.  The Injuries show that an altercation took place, just as Martin's dead body did,  but, suppose Zimmerman had died fnot Martin, could you have convicted Martin?  You are Martin's defense lawyer, and you have a tap of this guy calling 911, ignoring police requests that he stay in the car, saying "he's not gonna get away this time" AND he's armed with a gun.   Could you, as a hypthetical juror at Martin's trial conclude that the evidence proved HE initiated the encounter and was not acting in self-defense?  The same standards of reasonable doubt that rightly have Zimmerman walking around as a free man today have to apply to those who accept the counter-narraive that somehow Taryvon started the fight that ended Zimmerman;s life.
 
2013-09-10 10:27:16 AM

MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.


Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.
 
2013-09-10 10:27:19 AM

onyxruby: My ex pulled something like this on the day we separated. Luckily for me the cops, her own son and the 911 tape all contradicted her story badly enough that the cops never even bothered to interview me about her claims. After that first incident my police department told me to record every interaction with her for my own protection.

The second time my ex tried claiming I beat the living crap out of her (and showed up at the sheriff's department covered in bruises and a "witness" for proof). Being able to play a recording of what actually happened surprised the hell out of the deputy, needless to say my recording saved me from going to jail or even being arrested.

She tried pulling the same thing again a third time a month ago, and again the cops quickly came to the conclusion that I never hurt anyone. Needless to say the judge determined that it was fabricated within seconds. She then has the audacity to complain in court about me recording every interaction with her!

Claiming a domestic abuse thing is a common divorce tactic that is favored because it instantly gives one person the kids, the house, child support and everything else. Unfortunately there are no legal repercussions for making false claims, until this changes false claims will continue to be a favored tactic for gaining custody.

How many kids grow up hating one of their parents thinking they did a horrible thing when in reality nothing ever happened and it was nothing more than a divorce tactic? Victims of false accusations need a way to force police departments to arrest the false accusers and force real consequences in family court.


Better question: why isnt she in jail for that shiat?
 
2013-09-10 10:27:58 AM
I love this thread.
 
2013-09-10 10:30:31 AM

cookiefleck: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Oh, anecdotal evidence. Well by all means, please continue.

I'm not racist but I look at it as a "what if it were me?" type of situation. If someone were to attack me, would I want to be able to defend myself?


I don't understand your response. There is nothing said in this interaction about race. We're talking about domestic violence.
 
2013-09-10 10:31:08 AM

Magorn: frepnog: Magorn: That in no way clears him. Zimmerman to Wife " I'm going to shoot you dead", that's a threat, and one she should call 911 for, she doesn;t need to see the gun because it isn;t like she doesn;t know, as all America does, that he has one. The fact that he's bluffing could be a fact known only to him. This is why we have the separate crimes of assault and battery. Battery is when you actually DO hurt someone. Assault is when you make a credible threat to do the same

she lied, dude.  accept it.

based on...?  I mean other than your need to believe that a man with prior domestic violence charges, Charges of attacking a cop, and charges of murdering a teenager, is some sort of upstanding citizen and modern-day saint with absolutely no anger control issues....


>ctrl-f "convictions"
>no results
 
2013-09-10 10:31:16 AM
Said this last few Zimmerman threads.

As their divorce heats up, how long till she either starts telling EVERY stupid thing he's ever done or said to the media.  Even her just telling the truth, much less making things up, will keep the media entertained for months.

"He left the toilet seat up once."
"He let a toddler play cops and robbers with an unloaded gun."
"He used racial slurs all the time."
"His favorite episode of South Park was the "N***** Guy" episode."
"The night after he killed that kid he told me he wanted to have sex because he was still hard from the thrill of killing a n*****."
"After the shooting he got a tattoo of Martin's face on his ass with red "X" overlayed on it."
 
2013-09-10 10:31:28 AM

Magorn: PunGent: Magorn: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...

Seriously?  Physical injuries on Zimmerman.  Front and back of head.  End of story.

Magorn, I respect your opinions as a rule, but you're really walking way out on thin ice on this one.

Nope. Go with me a minute.  The Injuries show that an altercation took place, just as Martin's dead body did,  but, suppose Zimmerman had died fnot Martin, could you have convicted Martin?  You are Martin's defense lawyer, and you have a tap of this guy calling 911, ignoring police requests that he stay in the car, saying "he's not gonna get away this time" AND he's armed with a gun.   Could you, as a hypthetical juror at Martin's trial conclude that the evidence proved HE initiated the encounter and was not acting in self-defense?  The same standards of reasonable doubt that rightly have Zimmerman walking around as a free man today have to apply to those who accept the counter-narraive that somehow Taryvon started the fight that ended Zimmerman;s life.


I see what you're saying.  Imho, if M is alive, and, say, has a gunshot wound, but managed to kill Z, he probably walks.  Unless there's a witness, again, showing that, say, M started the fight.

It's unfortunate, perhaps, but the living have an advantage over the dead.  Just the way it is.
 
2013-09-10 10:31:36 AM
Gee, what a shock.

A bitter woman makes up a story about the husband that she is divorcing. Something that happens every day. She can't keep her BS story straight so cops have nothing to arrest anyone for. Because, nothing happened.

The low information Obama voters totally fall for it, of course. Because those idiots will fall for anything.
 
2013-09-10 10:32:55 AM

someonelse: Nabb1: someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

But women are liars, according to this very thread.

Nah, just this one. It's kind of a thing with her, maybe?

Except this thread is full of people saying that women lie in divorce cases. Then someone cites a study involving people SELF REPORTING domestic violence, and suddenly the possibility of lying is inconceivable.


Well...it depends on what is being self reported ya think?

Ask a bunch of men to self report how big their dick is and you'll get 99% of them saying 29 inches.

Asking a bunch of women how many times they initiate beating the shiat out of their male counterparts in a domestic violence situation is CLEARLY the same..lol
 
2013-09-10 10:33:10 AM

barneyfifesbullet: Obama voters


Fool-Flag raised to full mast.
 
2013-09-10 10:33:39 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.

Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

Learn to read.


MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.
 
2013-09-10 10:34:10 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Asking a bunch of women how many times they initiate beating the shiat out of their male counterparts in a domestic violence situation is CLEARLY the same..lol


I bet that's exactly how it was phrased

And I bet this is the first time ever that self-reported data is super accurate

Yep just this once, it's definitely true
 
2013-09-10 10:34:13 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.

Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".


Is that from the SAME study, or are you at least going to give me a link or something?

Because, you know, if the former...don't even bother.
 
2013-09-10 10:35:40 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.


That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.
 
2013-09-10 10:35:52 AM

Gimmick: Based on their states of mind (Zimmerman not wanting the punk to get away and Martin wanting to escape the creepy cracker), my money is on Zimmerman grabbing Martin and getting beaten for it.


For what reason did you not contact the office of the District Attorney of the state of Florida, so that you could present your baseless speculation, upon which Mr. Zimmerman would certainly have been convicted, at trial?
 
2013-09-10 10:36:04 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.

Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".

Is that from the SAME study, or are you at least going to give me a link or something?

Because, you know, if the former...don't even bother.


Its the actual cdc report. Look it up yourself.
 
2013-09-10 10:36:19 AM

LasersHurt: Fool-Flag raised to full mast.


Everyone can already see you.
 
2013-09-10 10:36:25 AM

Magorn: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

Not actually true you know.  I am a bit of an expert in this area as I used to help to run the Family Law Court in a Suburban DC county, and the statistics actually show that while women are battered more often than men, men are more likey to be severly injured or killed in a domestic violence situation, as women are much more likely than men to use a weapon.  It's not biology but sociology that accoonts for most of the disparate statistics.  mena are far less likely to recognize when they are being battered, and even if they do, they are exceedingly unlikely to seek outside help for it, owing to basic societal stigmas ("you let a GIRL beat you up? What kind of man are you?")



Women REPORT being battered more often than men.

Why is that?

One contributing reason (as usual) is the almighty State and its asinine legislation causing more problems than it solves.  In this particular instance, the government's asinine screw-up is the federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994.  It gives federal money to the many thousands of police agencies around the U.S. when they promulgate mandatory arrest policies, whereby a woman only needs to make an accusation, however unfounded, however motivated she may be to lie.  As a result, despite several centuries of Probable Cause jurisprudence, the rule in modern America is now that when accused by a woman, The Man Goes to Jail.

The federal government uses taxpayer money to bribe local law enforcement to make a larger number of Domestic Violence arrests of men, based on unilateral accusations that would otherwise not be legally sufficient.

It's not a big surprise that this type of corruption would encourage women to make false accusations, or to feel that they can attack men with impunity.

If the law provided that one race, based on nothing but a unilateral, unverified accusation, could get any member of another race arrested, at any time, automatically, with no fear of repercussion for making a false accusation, what do you think the result would be?
 
2013-09-10 10:36:42 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.

Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

Learn to read.

MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.


That's about what I'd expect.  That's not to say there aren't OTHER huge inequities, like women lying about child abuse in divorce cases, etc.
 
2013-09-10 10:37:05 AM

PunGent: MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.

Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.


I didn't say anything about waving the gun. He did have the tactical flashlight with knurled grip and striking bezel as well.
 
2013-09-10 10:37:13 AM

slayer199: I'm going to play a bit of Devil's Advocate here which I'm sure will inflame the fark masses.  Having been a police officer for a couple years, I've seen these stories go both ways.

Weren't they having marital troubles?  Isn't it possible that she embellished her story to get him out of the house?  I'm not saying one way or another what happened...that's why there's usually an investigation into these things.

If it was Joe Blow and not George Zimmerman we wouldn't be hearing about this.  I really don't know what happened in the house other than they had a heated argument...and odds are you don't know either.


I'm sure i would try and get my message out if it had been me
 
2013-09-10 10:38:39 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog:
i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy? You're that starved for words to express yourself that the only thing yo ucan think to day is, "duh, you dumb" every time someone disagrees with you? Get a dictionary and read it. Make yourself a better person. As for the comment itself, I'm not taking up for an African-American. I'm being entertained/disgusted by the ridiculous notion that Trayvon Martin's past actions made him a violent thug, but Zimmerman's numerous interactions with police are all dismissible. I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists. So, I'm just here pointing it out.
 .


well, my friend, continuing to assert that Zimmerman MUST have committed a crime in direct oposition to all available evidence is certainly not painting you in the best light.  Also, the fact that you continue this assertion while also being African-American points to your own racism.  Also, calling others racist for NOT defending Trayvon, once again, paints YOU as the racist.  Dude, you seem like a very intelligent human.  I have read hundreds of your posts.  I do not in fact believe you to be a fool OR ignorant.  I simply see you post things that read as ignorant and in defiance of fact.  That means that you are either a gigantic troll, or you are simply seriously racist despite your intelligence and will defend any African-American regardless of fact.  Which is it?
 
2013-09-10 10:40:35 AM

Magorn: ignoring police requests that he stay in the car


Please present evidence of such an occurrence. For what reason did the prosecutor admit that no evidence of such an occurrence was available, if you are aware of such an event?
 
2013-09-10 10:40:40 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: cookiefleck: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Oh, anecdotal evidence. Well by all means, please continue.

I'm not racist but I look at it as a "what if it were me?" type of situation. If someone were to attack me, would I want to be able to defend myself?

I don't understand your response. There is nothing said in this interaction about race. We're talking about domestic violence.


you said so up thread... you are taking Zimmerman' s past and giving his ex wife the benefit of the doubt because of his history. You also said upthread that trayvon's previous record shouldn't matter.
 
2013-09-10 10:40:57 AM

Phinn: Magorn: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

Not actually true you know.  I am a bit of an expert in this area as I used to help to run the Family Law Court in a Suburban DC county, and the statistics actually show that while women are battered more often than men, men are more likey to be severly injured or killed in a domestic violence situation, as women are much more likely than men to use a weapon.  It's not biology but sociology that accoonts for most of the disparate statistics.  mena are far less likely to recognize when they are being battered, and even if they do, they are exceedingly unlikely to seek outside help for it, owing to basic societal stigmas ("you let a GIRL beat you up? What kind of man are you?")

Women REPORT being battered more often than men.

Why is that?

One contributing reason (as usual) is the almighty State and its asinine legislation causing more problems than it solves.  In this particular instance, the government's asinine screw-up is the federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994.  It gives federal money to the many thousands of police agencies around the U.S. when they promulgate mandatory arrest policies, whereby a woman only needs to make an accusation, however unfounded, however motivated she may be to lie.  As a result, despite several centuries of Probable Cause jurisprudence, the rule in modern America is now that when accused by a woman, The Man Goes to Jail.

The federal government uses taxpayer money to bribe local law enforcement to make a larger number of Domestic Violence arrests of men, based on unilateral accusations that would otherwise not be legally sufficient.

It's not a big surprise that this type of corruption would encourage women to make false accusati ...


Problem is, the old "standard" was two armed cops would show up at house when the neighbors heard screaming and breaking glass, the husband would answer the door and say "everything's fine", and then the cops would leave.

So, no surprise the old pendulum has swung the other way a bit.
 
2013-09-10 10:41:30 AM

spiderpaz: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.


Thats uh..pretty much exactly what every recent survey/study states.

Women are more often the perpetrator/instigator, but they are more likely to sustain injury in non-one-sided conflicts because the men are more capable of inflicting more serious injury.

However, women are more likely to use a weapon to even the size/strength gap...which in effect leads to more severe injuries to them in cases where the man feels it necessary to defend himself.

It is irrefutable that more than 70% of one-sided domestic violence is perpetrated by the woman however.
 
2013-09-10 10:42:12 AM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog:
i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy? You're that starved for words to express yourself that the only thing yo ucan think to day is, "duh, you dumb" every time someone disagrees with you? Get a dictionary and read it. Make yourself a better person. As for the comment itself, I'm not taking up for an African-American. I'm being entertained/disgusted by the ridiculous notion that Trayvon Martin's past actions made him a violent thug, but Zimmerman's numerous interactions with police are all dismissible. I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists. So, I'm just here pointing it out.
 .

well, my friend, continuing to assert that Zimmerman MUST have committed a crime in direct oposition to all available evidence is certainly not painting you in the best light.  Also, the fact that you continue this assertion while also being African-American points to your own racism.  Also, calling others racist for NOT defending Trayvon, once again, paints YOU as the racist.  Dude, you seem like a very intelligent human.  I have read hundreds of your posts.  I do not in fact believe you to be a fool OR ignorant.  I simply see you post things that read as ignorant and in defiance of fact.  That means that you are either a gigantic troll, or you are simply seriously racist despite your intelligence and will defend any African-American regardless of fact.  Which is it?


I take racist for 500 Alex

/or maybe just a Tammy Wynettw fan
 
2013-09-10 10:42:16 AM

frepnog: dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american


Well aren't you just a peach.

*ignored*
 
2013-09-10 10:42:27 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: It is irrefutable that more than 70% of one-sided domestic violence is perpetrated by the woman however.


Unless you have OTHER studies, it's absolutely refutable.
 
2013-09-10 10:42:55 AM
The Examiner passes as a reputable source? Wow, your standards have fallen.

I think I'll wait to watch the story as it unfolds. The likelihood of news stories getting this right are slim. The likelihood of the Examiner getting this right are doubly so.
 
2013-09-10 10:42:59 AM
If he was smart (doubt it) he would only be around her with his lawyer and/or the cops and save any texts or emails and record calls. It seems like it would be the only way to protect himself from her. That or make her wear a hoodie and have a bag of skittles and say she was coming right for him.
 
2013-09-10 10:43:04 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.


Honest question: how the heck does the math work out on this? If men and women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships at about the same rate, then how does the proportion of victims come out as anything but roughly equal?
 
2013-09-10 10:43:54 AM
ignoring police requests that he stay in the car

You forgot to post the little smiling boy picture of Martin with that.

i240.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-10 10:44:00 AM

MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.

Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.

I didn't say anything about waving the gun. He did have the tactical flashlight with knurled grip and striking bezel as well.


If Martin had been defending himself, your example would be accurate.  There was no proof that's what he was doing.

Yes, it sucks M is dead, but courtrooms require evidence for convictions.
 
2013-09-10 10:44:20 AM

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.

What report?  Certainly not in TFA.

If true, then they did an extraordinarily shiatty job of searching since even his attorney says he had his gun with him.


The attorney wasn't there, but the cops were.
 
2013-09-10 10:45:34 AM

Millennium: Uranus Is Huge!: MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.

Honest question: how the heck does the math work out on this? If men and women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships at about the same rate, then how does the proportion of victims come out as anything but roughly equal?


Sociology isn't a hard science.
 
2013-09-10 10:46:08 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: [img401.imageshack.us image 608x380]

Q&D before work. Could've trimmed off the the uncanny parts but it's extra horrifying that way.


... she's from New Jersey?

\difficulty: no duck face
 
2013-09-10 10:47:43 AM

PunGent: Uranus Is Huge!: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: You were saying dumbfark?

I asked you to cite your claims, but if you need to call me names about it that's fine.

Here you are for starters:

http://www.newscastmedia.com/harvard_study.htm

Oh, not THAT crap again.

"The survey did not consider the use of knives, guns, choking, or burning".

Talk about cherry-picking your stats.

Clearly states that the women admitted that in one-sided domestic violence situations, they were the lone perpetrator 70% of the time.

AND

That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.

Learn to read.

MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.

That's about what I'd expect.  That's not to say there aren't OTHER huge inequities, like women lying about child abuse in divorce cases, etc.


Except the DOJ only reports on the cases reported to the police....which is the basis of this thread...women regularly lie about their role in domestic violence.

The cdc report takes into account all cases...reported to police or not.

The REAL fact is that overall, 48.2% of men and 48.7% of women have experienced opposite sex domestic violence.
 
2013-09-10 10:48:02 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: spiderpaz: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.

Thats uh..pretty much exactly what every recent survey/study states.

Women are more often the perpetrator/instigator, but they are more likely to sustain injury in non-one-sided conflicts because the men are more capable of inflicting more serious injury.

However, women are more likely to use a weapon to even the size/strength gap...which in effect leads to more severe injuries to them in cases where the man feels it necessary to defend himself.


Then why don't you cite a study that includes, you know, WEAPONS?

It is irrefutable that more than 70% of one-sided domestic violence is perpetrated by the woman however.

That word, it does not mean what you think it means...
 
2013-09-10 10:48:35 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Diogenes: Well, she lied to help him.  And now she lied to hurt him.

I think...maybe...she might be a liar.

I guess his lie didn't count?

"I was looking for an address" *camera turns to show house with clearly visible address*

Opps, there's another lie. That leaves the score at 2 - 2.

"He reached for the gun, I mean, he saw the gun, I mean, he covered my mouth and nose and beat me in the head and choked me and said some movie line about how I was going to die..."

Yeah, i think we might be dealing with two liars.

/Both sides are bad, so vote Shellie


This is one thing no one ever talks about and has bothered me throughout this whole thing. This action movie dialog that Zimmerman claimed was said to him.
Trayvon- "You got a problem? Well you do now" and "You're gonna die tonight"
Who talks like that? I mean seriously? And the fact that Zimmerman Fanboys everywhere don't even acknowledge this as being odd, is even more disturbing.
The second thing that is bothersome is how no one had mentioned that when Trayvon asked George "Why are you following me" as Zimmerman said he did, Why didnt Zimmerman identify himself? I was hoping someone would ask this of him, but no one ever did.
 
2013-09-10 10:49:39 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: women regularly lie about their role in domestic violence.


"Women are more violent, it says so in this self-reported survey"

"Women lie about their role in domestic violence"

*explodingbrain.gif*
 
2013-09-10 10:49:51 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.

Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".

Is that from the SAME study, or are you at least going to give me a link or something?

Because, you know, if the former...don't even bother.

Its the actual cdc report. Look it up yourself.


In other words, your first link sucks, and you got nothing.  I'll go with the link above:  85% male, 15% female, until you can do better.
 
2013-09-10 10:50:21 AM

Millennium: Uranus Is Huge!: MYTH #3: THE REAL PROBLEM IS COUPLES WHO ASSAULT EACH OTHER. WOMEN ARE JUST AS VIOLENT AS MEN.

FACT: A well-publicized study conducted by Dr. Murray Strauss at the University of New Hampshire found that women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships as often as men. However, the study also concluded that when the context and consequences of an assault are measured, the majority of victims are women. The U.S. Department of Justice has found that 85% of the victims of spouse abuse are female. Men can be victims, but it is rare.

Honest question: how the heck does the math work out on this? If men and women use violent means to resolve conflict in relationships at about the same rate, then how does the proportion of victims come out as anything but roughly equal?


Lots of lesbians?
 
2013-09-10 10:50:37 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Ask a bunch of men to self report how big their dick is and you'll get 99% of them saying 29 inches.


What will we get if we ask them to self report instances of initiating domestic violence?
 
2013-09-10 10:50:53 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: It is irrefutable that more than 70% of one-sided domestic violence is perpetrated by the woman however.

Unless you have OTHER studies, it's absolutely refutable.


Read the cdc report. Im not doing it for you.

The doj only takes into accoint cases reported to police, which is almost always reported BY the woman...who also admit to lying about the fact they are more often the initiator.

The cdc report takes into account reported and non-reported incidents, and is therefore less biased based on that fact.
 
2013-09-10 10:51:30 AM

dittybopper: Ah, yes, another Self-Defense Creationist, who won't look at the actual evidence that Zimmerman acted in self-defense under the law as it applies everywhere in the United States because you just *KNOW*, in your deepest heart of hearts, that Zimmerman a vile racist who killed a defenseless 12 year old cherub who only wanted to get home.

Look, the entire resources of the State of Florida, backed up by the US Justice Department, went looking for evidence that Zimmerman was guilty of murder, or at least manslaughter, not to mention hate crimes (which is what the feds were looking at), and they came up with *NOTHING*.

Go watch the closing arguments of the trial again. The defense put on an evidence-laden final argument. The prosecution put on an emotion-laden final argument, largely devoid of any actual evidence. It was pure character assassination, and the jury didn't buy it.

Neither should you.

Let it farkin' go. It makes you look like an intellectually stunted person to keep hammering on this. Admit you were wrong (to just yourself, if that's what it takes to preserve your pride), and move on.

Remember that the only reason this became a national story is because the Martin family hired a publicist who shopped the story, with blatant distortions of the facts, to the national media. And you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.


While it is highly likely that Zimms acted in self defense, there is zero doubt that he set into motion the events that resulted in a minor who was doing nothing wrong being shot dead.  Zimms poor judgement created the situation in which the conflict occurred, his decision to patrol armed created the situation where the conflict escalated to lethal levels.

I do not think that Zimms murdered Martin in cold blood.  I do not think that Zimms profiled him because he was black (body language, attire, and age probably had more to do with it than color).  But if you think that Zimms poor judgement did not result in a foreseeable and avoidable death of a minor child committing no crime, you are insane.

Of course, your assertion that someone could be charged with manslaughter due to a Rube Goldbergian chain of events stemming from a false accusation kind of already proved that point.
 
2013-09-10 10:52:45 AM

PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.

Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".

Is that from the SAME study, or are you at least going to give me a link or something?

Because, you know, if the former...don't even bother.

Its the actual cdc report. Look it up yourself.

In other words, your first link sucks, and you got nothing.  I'll go with the link above:  85% male, 15% female, until you can do better.


You are a special kind of stupid arent you
 
2013-09-10 10:53:21 AM

someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: Ask a bunch of men to self report how big their dick is and you'll get 99% of them saying 29 inches.

What will we get if we ask them to self report instances of initiating domestic violence?


The same as women?
 
2013-09-10 10:56:12 AM
Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/
 
2013-09-10 10:56:59 AM

MycroftHolmes: dittybopper: Ah, yes, another Self-Defense Creationist, who won't look at the actual evidence that Zimmerman acted in self-defense under the law as it applies everywhere in the United States because you just *KNOW*, in your deepest heart of hearts, that Zimmerman a vile racist who killed a defenseless 12 year old cherub who only wanted to get home.

Look, the entire resources of the State of Florida, backed up by the US Justice Department, went looking for evidence that Zimmerman was guilty of murder, or at least manslaughter, not to mention hate crimes (which is what the feds were looking at), and they came up with *NOTHING*.

Go watch the closing arguments of the trial again. The defense put on an evidence-laden final argument. The prosecution put on an emotion-laden final argument, largely devoid of any actual evidence. It was pure character assassination, and the jury didn't buy it.

Neither should you.

Let it farkin' go. It makes you look like an intellectually stunted person to keep hammering on this. Admit you were wrong (to just yourself, if that's what it takes to preserve your pride), and move on.

Remember that the only reason this became a national story is because the Martin family hired a publicist who shopped the story, with blatant distortions of the facts, to the national media. And you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

While it is highly likely that Zimms acted in self defense, there is zero doubt that he set into motion the events that resulted in a minor who was doing nothing wrong being shot dead.  Zimms poor judgement created the situation in which the conflict occurred, his decision to patrol armed created the situation where the conflict escalated to lethal levels.

I do not think that Zimms murdered Martin in cold blood.  I do not think that Zimms profiled him because he was black (body language, attire, and age probably had more to do with it than color).  But if you think that Zimms poor judgement did not result in a foreseeable and a ...


Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.
 
2013-09-10 10:57:22 AM

barneyfifesbullet: ignoring police requests that he stay in the car

You forgot to post the little smiling boy picture of Martin with that.

[i240.photobucket.com image 745x581]


So, according to your clever graphic, the media portrayed George Zimmerman as a fat man. And he portrayed himself to the public ... as a fat, smiling man. That's some fine insight, their, Lou.
 
2013-09-10 10:57:27 AM

Phinn: Magorn: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

Not actually true you know.  I am a bit of an expert in this area as I used to help to run the Family Law Court in a Suburban DC county, and the statistics actually show that while women are battered more often than men, men are more likey to be severly injured or killed in a domestic violence situation, as women are much more likely than men to use a weapon.  It's not biology but sociology that accoonts for most of the disparate statistics.  mena are far less likely to recognize when they are being battered, and even if they do, they are exceedingly unlikely to seek outside help for it, owing to basic societal stigmas ("you let a GIRL beat you up? What kind of man are you?")

Women REPORT being battered more often than men.

Why is that?

One contributing reason (as usual) is the almighty State and its asinine legislation causing more problems than it solves.  In this particular instance, the government's asinine screw-up is the federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994.  It gives federal money to the many thousands of police agencies around the U.S. when they promulgate mandatory arrest policies, whereby a woman only needs to make an accusation, however unfounded, however motivated she may be to lie.  As a result, despite several centuries of Probable Cause jurisprudence, the rule in modern America is now that when accused by a woman, The Man Goes to Jail.

The federal government uses taxpayer money to bribe local law enforcement to make a larger number of Domestic Violence arrests of men, based on unilateral accusations that would otherwise not be legally sufficient.

It's not a big surprise that this type of corruption would encourage women to make false accusati ...


Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them.  They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations.  One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence.  A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible  result.  SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.

And contrary to popular myth cops HATE responding to DV calls because they result in injuries to officers more often than nearly any other (and more than once the spouse they are "rescuing" turns on them if a fight breaks out with the other partner).  This is why when I ran the DV desk at my court I urged women to go through with the process of getting the full restrining order.  they were often very skeptical ("how is a piece of paer going to stop him if he wants to hurt me"?)  But as I always told them it gave them all sorts of power if they had to call the cops, if told the dispatcher that they had a restraining order.

First it meant the responding officers didn;t have to play a game of "he said, she said".  There is a court order that he stay away, he's violating that order? Boom he's the one going to jail. No fuss, No muss.   Second it told the cops you were serious about wanting to end the abusive realtionship, and you weren;t going to tearily recant or turn on them when they showed up.  And finally it almost gauranteed a faster police response because no police dept wanted to deal with a headline in the Newspaper like DOmestic Violence victim with a protective order killed whyile waiting for police to arrive"

Saw hundreds of these cases in my time, and the only one I ever lost, decided not to stay that day for the hearing cause she be back in court on Monday anyway.   That Monday I was talking to homicide detectives instead; though, as small consolation I was able to give the detectives the clue they needed to arrest the boyfirend and prove his guilt.  (She told me she wanted the DV order because he'd been sending her the police code for Murder in Progress on her pager.  When they found the body it had no pager on it.  Guess who still had the damn thing on him when he was picked up?)
 
2013-09-10 11:00:25 AM

onyxruby: Victims of false accusations need a way to force police departments to arrest the false accusers and force real consequences in family court.


Are slander laws no longer a thing?
 
2013-09-10 11:00:30 AM

PunGent: MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.

Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.

I didn't say anything about waving the gun. He did have the tactical flashlight with knurled grip and striking bezel as well.

If Martin had been defending himself, your example would be accurate.  There was no proof that's what he was doing.

Yes, it sucks M is dead, but courtrooms require evidence for convictions.


And here we have cognitave dissonance at it's finest. After being chased for 2 blocks by car and 30 yards on foot, there is no way the young man was defending himself.
 
2013-09-10 11:00:37 AM

Diogenes: frepnog: dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american

Well aren't you just a peach.

*ignored*


well i simply don't know how I will be able to sleep tonight.
 
2013-09-10 11:01:00 AM
George should start dating black women just to make everyone's head explode.
 
2013-09-10 11:01:12 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/


I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.
 
2013-09-10 11:01:17 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: DROxINxTHExWIND: The more you eat the more you fart:
More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.


You sound like a wife beater

Or someone who works in healthcare and sees the cdc reports.

Then cite some of those, instead of the other crap, if you would.

Its a pdf so i cant..but you can easily look it up yourself but here is part of it:

Intimate partner violence:
1 in 3 women vs. 92.1% of men experienced intimate partner violence.

Stalking, rape, and unwanted sexual contact on male victims were more often perpetrated by other men. Physical violence of a domestic nature against men most often perpetrated by a woman.

Differential: 72.8% of domestic violence self-reported as being initiated by the female partner in heterosexual relationships vs 23.4% by the male partner. Remaining classified as "mutual".


They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time.
 
2013-09-10 11:01:38 AM

PunGent: Women REPORT being battered more often than men.

Why is that?

One contributing reason (as usual) is the almighty State and its asinine legislation causing more problems than it solves. In this particular instance, the government's asinine screw-up is the federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994. It gives federal money to the many thousands of police agencies around the U.S. when they promulgate mandatory arrest policies, whereby a woman only needs to make an accusation, however unfounded, however motivated she may be to lie. As a result, despite several centuries of Probable Cause jurisprudence, the rule in modern America is now that when accused by a woman, The Man Goes to Jail.

The federal government uses taxpayer money to bribe local law enforcement to make a larger number of Domestic Violence arrests of men, based on unilateral accusations that would otherwise not be legally sufficient.

It's not a big surprise that this type of corruption would encourage women to make false accusati ...

Problem is, the old "standard" was two armed cops would show up at house when the neighbors heard screaming and breaking glass, the husband would answer the door and say "everything's fine", and then the cops would leave.

So, no surprise the old pendulum has swung the other way a bit.



If there's one thing that my year-long discussion of the Zimmerman case has taught me, it is the extent to which some people are able to spend their entire lives inside a self-referential Unreality Bubble.  They insist on it.  They resent any attempt to burst it, actually.

The Unreality Bubble is amazingly powerful.  It is impervious to objective facts, reason and evidence.  It is, however, entirely convinced it is correct.  The main feature of the Unreality Bubble is that everything that occurs inside it is based on story.  Unreality is story-world.

Stories are everything to a person living inside the Unreality Bubble.  Narrative becomes elevated to the status of physics -- it controls how everything happens and can happen.  Fantasy is the only reality.

The image of the cops knocking on the door, and the wife-beater sending them away so he can resume his belt-strap lecture, is fantasy.  It's imaginary.  Of course I'm sure it has happened, somewhere, but women also really do attack men with weapons, often improvised.

The metaphor of the "pendulum" of politics is also a hallmark of Unreality.  It's nonsense.  Nothing ever "swings back."  The only constant is the lock-step march toward greater and greater centralized control.  The purpose of the "pendulum" metaphor is to get you to tolerate, excuse and even sometimes promote government actions that are patently indefensible, since it deceives you into assuming that such a measure is temporary, or offset by some other indefensible rule somewhere else.

There are people in this world whose job it is to weave a tapestry of Unreality for you to wrap around yourself.  It seems that you are part of their target market.
 
2013-09-10 11:02:19 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/


Here's a summary from the actual CDC that says you're at worst a liar, at best not so bright.

PDF

Here the source page.
 
2013-09-10 11:02:33 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Women are more often the perpetrator/instigator, but they are more likely to sustain injury in non-one-sided conflicts because the men are more capable of inflicting more serious injury.


It's sort of like being Germany. You keep starting, and losing, wars.
 
2013-09-10 11:02:35 AM

K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.


it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.
 
2013-09-10 11:06:49 AM

Magorn: Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them. They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations. One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence. A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible result. SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.


Poor you, begin required to do your job and arrest the person who left evidence of battery. Your burden is Sissyphian.
 
2013-09-10 11:06:57 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.


Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.
 
2013-09-10 11:08:05 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

Here's a summary from the actual CDC that says you're at worst a liar, at best not so bright.

PDF

Here the source page.


Read the link i just posted.
 
2013-09-10 11:09:12 AM

This text is now purple: onyxruby: Victims of false accusations need a way to force police departments to arrest the false accusers and force real consequences in family court.

Are slander laws no longer a thing?


They're a thing, but slander is a tort, not a crime. I believe that what onyxruby is suggesting is to make it an actual crime.
 
2013-09-10 11:09:23 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.


I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.
 
2013-09-10 11:09:36 AM

This text is now purple: The more you eat the more you fart: Women are more often the perpetrator/instigator, but they are more likely to sustain injury in non-one-sided conflicts because the men are more capable of inflicting more serious injury.

It's sort of like being Germany. You keep starting, and losing, wars.


Except when im not fighting a war and am simply cut and pasting.
 
2013-09-10 11:09:38 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/


Or you could go to the actual CDC NISVS report, and read what they actually determined, which is quite a bit different than what is portrayed in the men's rights links that have been posted here.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html
 
2013-09-10 11:11:29 AM

LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.


You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.
 
2013-09-10 11:12:11 AM
had the same shiat happen to me.  guess who still has all of his guns after proving that the poor little snowflake is a constant liar.  that and putting lying cops on the stand made it all good for me.  judges like people who tell the truth and can do it without looking like they're lying their asses off....
 
2013-09-10 11:12:39 AM

give me doughnuts: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.

What report?  Certainly not in TFA.

If true, then they did an extraordinarily shiatty job of searching since even his attorney says he had his gun with him.

The attorney wasn't there, but the cops were.


And the official police report says...  ??!?
 
2013-09-10 11:13:21 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.


Yeeessss, but then I read the SOURCE MATERIAL. Which is important, you know? Try it out.
 
2013-09-10 11:15:15 AM
 
2013-09-10 11:16:57 AM

Millennium: This text is now purple: onyxruby: Victims of false accusations need a way to force police departments to arrest the false accusers and force real consequences in family court.

Are slander laws no longer a thing?

They're a thing, but slander is a tort, not a crime. I believe that what onyxruby is suggesting is to make it an actual crime.


Defamation per se is a crime in something like 17 states, but even a civil suit might slow her down.
 
2013-09-10 11:17:42 AM
What some people actually think happened
i141.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-10 11:17:53 AM

Uranus Is Huge!: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

Here's a summary from the actual CDC that says you're at worst a liar, at best not so bright.

PDF

Here the source page.


If I'm reading the study right, it looks like when the measurements are taken anonymously, men and women report being the perpetrators and victims of domestic violence in roughly equal numbers. But when measurements can be traced back to the people who did the reporting, far more women report being the victims of domestic violence than men do. I'm citing the first column on Page 25 (by the PDF's own count; I note that Firefox's PDF viewer calls it Page 37).

Fascinating.
 
2013-09-10 11:17:57 AM
she should have stood her ground and shot him.
 
2013-09-10 11:20:53 AM

frepnog: K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.

it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.


In this case, it was provably unfounded. Martin wasn't casing houses, he was walking back from the store.

An it is unfounded fear that would cause a man to drive around his own neighborhood armed.
 
2013-09-10 11:21:27 AM

pacified: she should have stood her ground and shot him.


what she should do is act like a farking grown up and not tell lies.
 
2013-09-10 11:22:33 AM

The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.

You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.


Yeah, but in post-Clinton America, men deserve it. They can be attacked with impunity and then jailed (or at best detained) for making a woman hit him. For exame, if he fails to meet her needs, such as making enough money for her use, or not finding her sufficiently attractive to remain sexually loyal to her. For that, men get what they deserve, until they learn their place.

And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.

As an added bonus, all female accusations against men are now presumed true until conclusively disproven.
 
2013-09-10 11:23:58 AM
It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles.
 
2013-09-10 11:24:00 AM
On the 911 call, she sounds more upset about the blonde in the car than the claim that he had a gun.
 
2013-09-10 11:25:36 AM

MycroftHolmes: frepnog: K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.

it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.

In this case, it was provably unfounded. Martin wasn't casing houses, he was walking back from the store.

An it is unfounded fear that would cause a man to drive around his own neighborhood armed.


I love how we are supposed to be outraged at the possibility that Zimmerman has been unfairly accused of domestic violence. But we are supposed to accept without question the accusation that Martin was "casing houses."
 
2013-09-10 11:26:28 AM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog:
i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy? You're that starved for words to express yourself that the only thing yo ucan think to day is, "duh, you dumb" every time someone disagrees with you? Get a dictionary and read it. Make yourself a better person. As for the comment itself, I'm not taking up for an African-American. I'm being entertained/disgusted by the ridiculous notion that Trayvon Martin's past actions made him a violent thug, but Zimmerman's numerous interactions with police are all dismissible. I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists. So, I'm just here pointing it out.
 .

well, my friend, continuing to assert that Zimmerman MUST have committed a crime in direct oposition to all available evidence is certainly not painting you in the best light.  Also, the fact that you continue this assertion while also being African-American points to your own racism.  Also, calling others racist for NOT defending Trayvon, once again, paints YOU as the racist.  Dude, you seem like a very intelligent human.  I have read hundreds of your posts.  I do not in fact believe you to be a fool OR ignorant.  I simply see you post things that read as ignorant and in defiance of fact.  That means that you are either a gigantic troll, or you are simply seriously racist despite your intelligence and will defend any African-American regardless of fact.  Which is it?



I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Are you a pineapple or a candle? FYI, just because you give someone two dumbass choices, it does not mean one of them has to be valid. Your in-depth research of my posts aside, you have no idea of my positon on this and I can tell because you're using the standard arguments. You expect me to believe certain things and feel a certain way and you project that into your unsupported, uncited posts. I'm not going to argue from the perspective of the boogeyman you've created. Find somebody else for that. If you want to address something I've actually said, or ask what I think and counter it, I'd be happy to engage you.
 
2013-09-10 11:27:23 AM

MycroftHolmes: frepnog: K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.

it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.

In this case, it was provably unfounded. Martin wasn't casing houses, he was walking back from the store.

An it is unfounded fear that would cause a man to drive around his own neighborhood armed.


it is not an unfounded fear when Zimmerman lived in an area already hit with multiple burglaries.  it is not an unfounded fear when you spot someone casing houses, call the police, and the person you spotted approaches you and acts in an intimidating manner.  It is not an unfounded fear when, while waiting for the police to arrive, you are attacked by the person you are reporting to the police.

dude, give it the fark up.  yeah, Trayvon had skittles and watermelon drink.  but, his own telephone and liver toxicology prove exactly what trayvon was going to do with those items, among the other interesting items that trayvon's own telephone proved - that he liked to fight, liked to do drugs, was looking for a gun, ect.

Travyon actually proved that Zimmerman's "fears" were very much accurate.
 
2013-09-10 11:27:59 AM

Phinn: And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.


Oh, he's a keeper, ladies.
 
2013-09-10 11:29:39 AM

AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles.


i can fully support this statement.  he proved himself inarguably a dumbass by touring the kel-tek factory and being all smiles in photos that should have never been seen by the public.
 
2013-09-10 11:30:55 AM

frepnog: casing houses


Just so we're clear, how exactly are you defining "casing houses"? Because it kinda sounds like you are defining it as "looking at houses while black."
 
2013-09-10 11:32:15 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog:
i like you, you are at least constantly ignorant.  dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american, but at some point even you must admit the truth about a person - trayvon attacked zimmerman.  you know it, i know it, dogs know it, and at some point you either must admit the truth or continue to look a fool.


Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy? You're that starved for words to express yourself that the only thing yo ucan think to day is, "duh, you dumb" every time someone disagrees with you? Get a dictionary and read it. Make yourself a better person. As for the comment itself, I'm not taking up for an African-American. I'm being entertained/disgusted by the ridiculous notion that Trayvon Martin's past actions made him a violent thug, but Zimmerman's numerous interactions with police are all dismissible. I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists. So, I'm just here pointing it out.
 .

well, my friend, continuing to assert that Zimmerman MUST have committed a crime in direct oposition to all available evidence is certainly not painting you in the best light.  Also, the fact that you continue this assertion while also being African-American points to your own racism.  Also, calling others racist for NOT defending Trayvon, once again, paints YOU as the racist.  Dude, you seem like a very intelligent human.  I have read hundreds of your posts.  I do not in fact believe you to be a fool OR ignorant.  I simply see you post things that read as ignorant and in defiance of fact.  That means that you are either a gigantic troll, or you are simply seriously racist despite your intelligence and will defend any African-American regardless of fact.  Which is it?


I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Are you a pineapple or a candle? FYI, just because you give someone two dumbass choices, it does ...


nice deflection, and about what I expected.
 
2013-09-10 11:33:11 AM
Did the court determine that Trayvon was casing houses? If not, those who are saying "get over it" because Zimmerman was found not guilty should really stop stating the "casing houses" thing as fact. Unless, of course, they are complete, unrepentant hypocrites.
 
2013-09-10 11:34:21 AM
How is it that, so far, no one has managed to turn the corner on some random non-sequitur and feel the need to post some hot babe pics .. the ones with the tiny panties and maybe some tan lines. And don't forget to include the beer.

That'd be great.
 
2013-09-10 11:34:45 AM

someonelse: Did the court determine that Trayvon was casing houses? If not, those who are saying "get over it" because Zimmerman was found not guilty should really stop stating the "casing houses" thing as fact. Unless, of course, they are complete, unrepentant hypocrites.


The court also did not determine that he bought a drink and candy so he could make super-drug-sauce out of it, yet they've been running with that too.
 
2013-09-10 11:35:53 AM

someonelse: MycroftHolmes: frepnog: K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.

it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.

In this case, it was provably unfounded. Martin wasn't casing houses, he was walking back from the store.

An it is unfounded fear that would cause a man to drive around his own neighborhood armed.

I love how we are supposed to be outraged at the possibility that Zimmerman has been unfairly accused of domestic violence. But we are supposed to accept without question the accusation that Martin was "casing houses."


well...  trayvon liked to steal, and nothing whatever has been produced to show that Zimmerman lied about anything that night - in fact, the police, who have no reason to cover for zimmerman, indicated that Zimmerman was being truthful.  when zimmerman reported that trayvon was "wandering around, looking in houses, he looks like he is on drugs" and everything we find out about Trayvon upholds that, well, what can you do?  thug is as thug does.
 
2013-09-10 11:37:31 AM

someonelse: Phinn: And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.

Oh, he's a keeper, ladies.



The phrase "reciprocal obligations" helps identify the people, like yourself, with reality problems.

Marriages entail obligations.  For example, courts vigorously enforce the (overwhelmingly male) obligation to pay money to the woman, inasmuch as "economic support" is one of the primary obligations of marriage. Failure to pay such court-ordered payments leads a lot of men directly to a kind of modern Debtor's Prison that hasn't been around since the early 1800s.

What are some of the corresponding, reciprocal obligations of marriage, in your view?
 
2013-09-10 11:39:00 AM

QueenMamaBee: And as a police officer, I'm also sure you've seen many women who've had the crap beat out of them turn around and refuse to press charges against the douche. That's also a good possibility.


Very true...and very unfortunate.  However, the laws have changed so you don't need witnesses or the victim's account...just probable cause to make an arrest.

Did he threaten her?  Very likely.  Did he threaten her with a gun?  Maybe.  The point I was making is that none of us would be talking about it if he wasn't George Zimmerman.  The only reason this is news is because of the distaste many have for the trial verdict and so people can say, "See, I told you so!"

steamingpile: Except nobody had a mark on them and Zimmerman was outside the whole time yet no neighbors saw anything and the father didn't either. You're acting like this is just he said/she said when there were numerous witnesses this time.


Imma going to let the courts figure it out...

heili skrimsli: She also wants him to take out a permanent life insurance policy on himself listing her as the sole beneficiary as a part of the divorce settlement. That seems pretty close to her hoping he gets killed so she can cash in.


Wow.  I didn't know that part about the life insurance.  That's pretty cold.
 
2013-09-10 11:39:12 AM
What casing houses may look like:
www.cupidinsider.com

www.thecultureconcept.com

www.zillowblog.com
 
2013-09-10 11:39:30 AM
When are we gonna leave this poor guy alone?
 
2013-09-10 11:40:27 AM

someonelse: What casing houses may look like:
[www.cupidinsider.com image 700x466]

[www.thecultureconcept.com image 720x436]

[www.zillowblog.com image 716x535]


That woman in the middle looks like she likes to steal. Thug.
 
2013-09-10 11:40:36 AM

frepnog: Diogenes: frepnog: dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american

Well aren't you just a peach.

*ignored*

well i simply don't know how I will be able to sleep tonight.


I'm sure you can find plenty of sheets.
 
2013-09-10 11:40:53 AM

frepnog: MycroftHolmes: frepnog: K-jack: Well said. In fact the only thing crystal clear in the whole incident is that it was initiated by Zimmerman's actions and unfounded fears.

it is not an unfounded fear to see someone casing houses and report them to the police.

In this case, it was provably unfounded. Martin wasn't casing houses, he was walking back from the store.

An it is unfounded fear that would cause a man to drive around his own neighborhood armed.

it is not an unfounded fear when Zimmerman lived in an area already hit with multiple burglaries.  it is not an unfounded fear when you spot someone casing houses, call the police, and the person you spotted approaches you and acts in an intimidating manner.  It is not an unfounded fear when, while waiting for the police to arrive, you are attacked by the person you are reporting to the police.

dude, give it the fark up.  yeah, Trayvon had skittles and watermelon drink.  but, his own telephone and liver toxicology prove exactly what trayvon was going to do with those items, among the other interesting items that trayvon's own telephone proved - that he liked to fight, liked to do drugs, was looking for a gun, ect.

Travyon actually proved that Zimmerman's "fears" were very much accurate.


By definition, Zimms fears were unfounded.  Martin was not any of the things that he feared.  Is this really a difficult concept for you.

Yes, in all likelihood, Martin started the immediate physical altercation.  This, of course, after a man with a gun was stalking him, then getting out of his car to follow him.

That a 17 year old liked to fight, or talk smack about guns, or smoke a joint, all have zero to do with the fact that Martin was walking home from the store, doing nothing and engaging no one, when Zimms started the sequence of events.  Is this really hard to understand?
 
2013-09-10 11:40:55 AM

LasersHurt: someonelse: Did the court determine that Trayvon was casing houses? If not, those who are saying "get over it" because Zimmerman was found not guilty should really stop stating the "casing houses" thing as fact. Unless, of course, they are complete, unrepentant hypocrites.

The court also did not determine that he bought a drink and candy so he could make super-drug-sauce out of it, yet they've been running with that too.


trayvon was not on trial.  however, many things about trayvon are known.  he liked to steal.  he liked to fight.  he liked to vandalize,  and he very much liked a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

seriously.  reality being reality, what can you do?  trayvon is very much the wrong poster child to use for gun violence.  trayvon is in fact the reason that guns are available to people so that they can defend themselves.

don't go around attacking people.  you might get farking shot.
 
2013-09-10 11:42:38 AM

slayer199: heili skrimsli: She also wants him to take out a permanent life insurance policy on himself listing her as the sole beneficiary as a part of the divorce settlement. That seems pretty close to her hoping he gets killed so she can cash in.

Wow. I didn't know that part about the life insurance. That's pretty cold.



It's a natural expression of the view in modern American law of what men are for.  Farmers take out insurance on their livestock all the time.
 
2013-09-10 11:42:42 AM

frepnog: well... trayvon liked to steal, and nothing whatever has been produced to show that Zimmerman lied about anything that night


Nothing has been produced to show that Martin lied about anything that night, either. And by your own logic, Zimmerman liked to follow people and assume they were criminals.
 
2013-09-10 11:43:21 AM

This text is now purple: Magorn: Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them. They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations. One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence. A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible result. SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.

Poor you, begin required to do your job and arrest the person who left evidence of battery. Your burden is Sissyphian.


Did you get the impression I'm a cop?   Reading IS Fundamental,  I've bolded the significant part of my post above.  But the fact reamins that if a man initiates a violent encounter by, say grabbing his wife and throwing her on a bed (as , say a prelude to rape) and she fights him off with clawed hands, she is going to show no visible signs of his attack but his face will be badly scratched and bleeding.  In this scenario, the attacker will be labelled the victim and the victim arrested and charged, which, I think we can all agree, is an injustice neh?
 
2013-09-10 11:43:30 AM

Mistymtnhop: frepnog: Diogenes: frepnog: dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american

Well aren't you just a peach.

*ignored*

well i simply don't know how I will be able to sleep tonight.

I'm sure you can find plenty of sheets.


i'm sorry, is that a "you are a racist" remark?  nope.  sorry.  I am very much no racist.  i don't like violent people that attack others, race be damned.

find an example of anything racist I have said.  unless you are projecting your own racism onto me, nothing will you find.
 
2013-09-10 11:43:36 AM

RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.


maybe he put the gun back in the truck's glove box?  George himself says he never goes anywhere without it.
 
2013-09-10 11:45:12 AM

Phinn: What are some of the corresponding, reciprocal obligations of marriage, in your view?


What a sweet talker you are. I'll bet the ladies are lined up around the block.
 
2013-09-10 11:45:54 AM
+5 internets to whoever said ' Post Clinton America'.
 
2013-09-10 11:47:25 AM

MycroftHolmes: That a 17 year old liked to fight, or talk smack about guns, or smoke a joint, all have zero to do with the fact that Martin was walking home from the store, doing nothing and engaging no one, when Zimms started the sequence of events. Is this really hard to understand?


is it also hard to understand that Zimmerman spotted Martin, called the cops, Martin realized he had been seen, tried to intimidate Zimmerman, ran home, and then came back to "whoop cracka ass"?

because that is what happened.  Did Zimmerman "start" the sequence?   Only if you admit that he "started it" by having the audacity to call the police to report a suspicious person in a neighborhood stricken with crime and burglaries.
 
2013-09-10 11:47:31 AM

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.


I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.
 
2013-09-10 11:47:49 AM

frepnog: AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles.

i can fully support this statement.  he proved himself inarguably a dumbass by touring the kel-tek factory and being all smiles in photos that should have never been seen by the public.



This, ladies and gentleman, is what I like to call the "balancing statement". Its what a guy does when he's trying to create the appearence of impartiality by choosing some small position to take a stand on that appears to be in contrast to the position of other group thinkers who believe Trayvon Martin is probably a thug because he's black.

"George Zimmerman definately should have killed that kid. i support that decision. But, he NEVER should have smiled about it during a tour of the gun factory. THAT is where I draw the line!"


/Pffft. GTFO of here
//*jerk off motion*
 
2013-09-10 11:49:23 AM

someonelse: Nothing has been produced to show that Martin lied about anything that night, either. And by your own logic, Zimmerman liked to follow people and assume they were criminals.


Martin is dead because he attacked Zimmerman.  I'd say Zimmerman's fears, if he had any that night, were in fact realized by Martin's actions.
 
2013-09-10 11:50:54 AM

MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.


His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.
 
2013-09-10 11:50:56 AM

Magorn: Nope. Go with me a minute. The Injuries show that an altercation took place, just as Martin's dead body did, but, suppose Zimmerman had died fnot Martin, could you have convicted Martin? You are Martin's defense lawyer, and you have a tap of this guy calling 911, ignoring police requests that he stay in the car, saying "he's not gonna get away this time" AND he's armed with a gun. Could you, as a hypthetical juror at Martin's trial conclude that the evidence proved HE initiated the encounter and was not acting in self-defense? The same standards of reasonable doubt that rightly have Zimmerman walking around as a free man today have to apply to those who accept the counter-narraive that somehow Taryvon started the fight that ended Zimmerman;s life.


Yes, Trayvon would have gone to prison for the rest of his life if Zimmerman died.

Stop being a moron just because you desperately need to believe a series of events that never happened.
 
2013-09-10 11:52:03 AM

Phinn: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.

You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.

Yeah, but in post-Clinton America, men deserve it. They can be attacked with impunity and then jailed (or at best detained) for making a woman hit him. For exame, if he fails to meet her needs, such as making enough money for her use, or not finding her sufficiently attractive to remain sexually loyal to her. For that, men get what they deserve, until they learn their place.

And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.

As an added bonus, all female accusations against men are now presumed tru ...


Wow. You are seriously about two steps away from being found dancing around wearing the flayed skin of the random women who are your victims.  Get help, and do it now.
 
2013-09-10 11:52:39 AM

frepnog: trayvon was not on trial. however, many things about trayvon are known. he liked to steal. he liked to fight. he liked to vandalize, and he very much liked a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.


He "liked to steal"? Because of all the theft convictions on his record? How many were there again? And again, specifically, what evidence do you have that he was "casing houses"? And why, exactly, does his history mean he "liked to fight," but Zimmerman's history does not?
 
2013-09-10 11:52:40 AM

frepnog: nice deflection, and about what I expected.



So sorry, I didn't respond to your serious question, "are you a troll or a racist" in a manner that satisfied you.
 
2013-09-10 11:55:24 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog: AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles.

i can fully support this statement.  he proved himself inarguably a dumbass by touring the kel-tek factory and being all smiles in photos that should have never been seen by the public.


This, ladies and gentleman, is what I like to call the "balancing statement". Its what a guy does when he's trying to create the appearence of impartiality by choosing some small position to take a stand on that appears to be in contrast to the position of other group thinkers who believe Trayvon Martin is probably a thug because he's black.

"George Zimmerman definately should have killed that kid. i support that decision. But, he NEVER should have smiled about it during a tour of the gun factory. THAT is where I draw the line!"


/Pffft. GTFO of here
//*jerk off motion*


so.  it was NOT in poor taste?  jeez, dude.  i don't think zimmerman is a hero.  i think he should have sat his ass in his truck.  regardless, he did nothing illegal or wrong that night, and yep, even with an acquittal touring the gun factory of the manufacturer of the weapon he defended himself with and taking photo ops and being all smiles is, well, kinda farked up and stupid.

I will just say it right out - Drox, you are very likely a racist, and that is sad in this day and age.  you may not be, but you are definitely wearing a racist's uniform.
 
2013-09-10 11:55:37 AM

MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.

Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.

I didn't say anything about waving the gun. He did have the tactical flashlight with knurled grip and striking bezel as well.

If Martin had been defending himself, your example would be accurate.  There was no proof that's what he was doing.

Yes, it sucks M is dead, but courtrooms require evidence for convictions.

And here we have cognitave dissonance at it's finest. After being chased for 2 blocks by car and 30 yards on foot, there is no way the young man was defending himself.


Correct. There was absolutely, irrefutably, no way he was defending himself at the point he was shot. And that's all that matters.

No, being followed is not justification for assault. Not now, not ever. It will NEVER be justification to assault someone.

The correct course of action is to escape and call police if you suspect someone suspicious following you. If you do not adhere to the law here, you have ONLY yourself to blame when you are justifiably killed.
 
2013-09-10 11:56:30 AM
To be fair, it's probably wise to just assume this guy is always armed and more than willing to use his gun.
 
2013-09-10 11:58:22 AM

MycroftHolmes: Yes, in all likelihood, Martin started the immediate physical altercation. This, of course, after a man with a gun was stalking him, then getting out of his car to follow him.


First part is assault. Second part is not stalking.

That's all that matters. Now come to the correct conclusion.
 
2013-09-10 11:59:02 AM

frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.


Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.
 
2013-09-10 12:00:27 PM

Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.


No worse than a judge and jury in Florida.
 
2013-09-10 12:00:34 PM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts, especially when a story is written to our expectations.  Shellie Zimmerman claimed there was a gun involved, that her father had been punched in the face and that George had broken an iPad and stabbed it with a knife the called 911 in tears to tell them her story.  When the police arrived they found no broken iPads, no injuries on anyone and no guns.  After consulting with their lawyer (who was there that night) both Shellie and her father recanted the story and didn't press charges.  That's the way the story is now being reported by  USAToday and ABC News.

Shellie filed for divorce last week.  This isn't abused spouse behavior and this isn't an attempt to save George, this is an attempt by an ex- to get revenge.  Ask any man who's tried to get custody of his children only to be accused of being a sex offender and handed a restraining order, it happens all the time.
 
2013-09-10 12:01:17 PM

Magorn: Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them. They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations. One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence. A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible result. SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.


Had a buddy who experienced the joys of this maybe 7ish years ago.  He was a railroad engineer, came home from out of state to find police waiting for him.  Soon as he called saying he'd be home that evening she called the police claiming he had beaten the crap out of her.

When he got out of jail the next morning the house was empty.  Even the ice trays and the shelves in the fridge.  He was most upset over his fishing poles and the dog.
 
2013-09-10 12:01:37 PM

frepnog: someonelse: Nothing has been produced to show that Martin lied about anything that night, either. And by your own logic, Zimmerman liked to follow people and assume they were criminals.

Martin is dead because he attacked Zimmerman.  I'd say Zimmerman's fears, if he had any that night, were in fact realized by Martin's actions.


Do you notice how when you are asked specific questions or challenged in any way, you revert to circular logic? "Martin is dead because of what I believe he did. What I believe he did must be true because Martin is dead."
 
2013-09-10 12:02:34 PM

frepnog: MycroftHolmes: That a 17 year old liked to fight, or talk smack about guns, or smoke a joint, all have zero to do with the fact that Martin was walking home from the store, doing nothing and engaging no one, when Zimms started the sequence of events. Is this really hard to understand?

is it also hard to understand that Zimmerman spotted Martin, called the cops, Martin realized he had been seen, tried to intimidate Zimmerman, ran home, and then came back to "whoop cracka ass"?

because that is what happened.  Did Zimmerman "start" the sequence?   Only if you admit that he "started it" by having the audacity to call the police to report a suspicious person in a neighborhood stricken with crime and burglaries.


I thi....I mean you...ho.....

Wow, just wow.  You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.

Why was Zimmerman armed?  Why was he out of his car?  Why did Martin, who had a very valid reason to be in the neighborhood, choose to confront Zimmerman?

Zimmerman did not just call the police.  He also followed him around, then got out his car, while armed, after the sequence of events had started.
 
2013-09-10 12:03:50 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog: nice deflection, and about what I expected.


So sorry, I didn't respond to your serious question, "are you a troll or a racist" in a manner that satisfied you.


actually you "answered" it like a seasoned politician, that is, in a long winded way that in no way addressed the issue.

as I said, it was about what I expected from ya.  don't get me wrong, you are at least consistent and I usually enjoy your bullshiat.  it is why I don't just ignore you.  honestly, i wouldn't mind hanging out with ya and drinking a cold one and just discussing the world.  i image you have some fascinating viewpoints.
 
2013-09-10 12:04:30 PM

justtray: MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: PunGent: MFAWG: And now we get to the heart of the issue. In Florida, you can chase someone while carrying multiple weapons, and if the person you're chasing defends themself and ends updead, no crime had occurred.

Well, unless, for example, a SINGLE witness had reliably said "Z chased M, threatening him and waving his gun, and M jumped him in self-defense."   Z probably would've been convicted in that case...and rightfully so.

I didn't say anything about waving the gun. He did have the tactical flashlight with knurled grip and striking bezel as well.

If Martin had been defending himself, your example would be accurate.  There was no proof that's what he was doing.

Yes, it sucks M is dead, but courtrooms require evidence for convictions.

And here we have cognitave dissonance at it's finest. After being chased for 2 blocks by car and 30 yards on foot, there is no way the young man was defending himself.

Correct. There was absolutely, irrefutably, no way he was defending himself at the point he was shot. And that's all that matters.

No, being followed is not justification for assault. Not now, not ever. It will NEVER be justification to assault someone.

The correct course of action is to escape and call police if you suspect someone suspicious following you. If you do not adhere to the law here, you have ONLY yourself to blame when you are justifiably killed.


And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.
 
2013-09-10 12:06:44 PM

someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.


google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.
 
2013-09-10 12:07:50 PM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: frepnog: AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles.

i can fully support this statement.  he proved himself inarguably a dumbass by touring the kel-tek factory and being all smiles in photos that should have never been seen by the public.


This, ladies and gentleman, is what I like to call the "balancing statement". Its what a guy does when he's trying to create the appearence of impartiality by choosing some small position to take a stand on that appears to be in contrast to the position of other group thinkers who believe Trayvon Martin is probably a thug because he's black.

"George Zimmerman definately should have killed that kid. i support that decision. But, he NEVER should have smiled about it during a tour of the gun factory. THAT is where I draw the line!"


/Pffft. GTFO of here
//*jerk off motion*

so.  it was NOT in poor taste?  jeez, dude.  i don't think zimmerman is a hero.  i think he should have sat his ass in his truck.  regardless, he did nothing illegal or wrong that night, and yep, even with an acquittal touring the gun factory of the manufacturer of the weapon he defended himself with and taking photo ops and being all smiles is, well, kinda farked up and stupid.

I will just say it right out - Drox, you are very likely a racist, and that is sad in this day and age.  you may not be, but you are definitely wearing a racist's uniform.


Its funny how getting into a fight and shooting someone is only "gangsta" when its done "in the hood". None of you bigots ever asks who started the fight in a thread about a black man killing another black person. It just turns into a discussion about per capita crime statistics and about blacks having a predisposition to crime. THAT is the racism that I address in these threads. The old Fark double standard.

"Trayvon Martin ATTACKED Zimmerman and that is why he was shot"

When confronted with the fact that on one knows who threw the first punch:

"It doesn't matter who started it! Zimmerman thought a 17 year old was going to kill him by...suffocation, MMA-style pounding, using the sidewalk as a weapon, AND reaching for a gun, I mean, touching a gun, no, I mean reaching for a gun that was in a holser, in the dark, concealed behind the person he was straddling."

The contradictions are astounding. And the true measure of who is blindly defending someone can be determined when we look at who has to jump through the most mental hurdles to make their position logical. I know that's not me.
 
2013-09-10 12:07:57 PM

MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.


but he did in fact "retreat" to his current home and then return to beat Zimmerman up.

reality is what it is, dude.
 
2013-09-10 12:08:06 PM

frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.


So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."
 
2013-09-10 12:09:31 PM

MycroftHolmes: ow, just wow. You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.


heh.  I made up absolutely zero things.  it is all in witness statements and evidence.  I am not the one that needs to spin fantasy to suit my beliefs.  I just go by the actual events.
 
2013-09-10 12:11:30 PM

frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.


Again. Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

Show proof that he was "casing houses."

Show proof that he "liked to steal" and "liked to fight."

All things that you have claimed as fact.
 
2013-09-10 12:13:40 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: "Trayvon Martin ATTACKED Zimmerman and that is why he was shot"

When confronted with the fact that on one knows who threw the first punch:

"It doesn't matter who started it! Zimmerman thought a 17 year old was going to kill him by...suffocation, MMA-style pounding, using the sidewalk as a weapon, AND reaching for a gun, I mean, touching a gun, no, I mean reaching for a gun that was in a holser, in the dark, concealed behind the person he was straddling."

The contradictions are astounding. And the true measure of who is blindly defending someone can be determined when we look at who has to jump through the most mental hurdles to make their position logical. I know that's not me.


you ignore the reality that it absolutely DOES NOT MATTER who threw the first punch (altho all evidence shows that Trayvon attacked).  Once trayvon knocked Zim down and mounted him and continued his assault, self defense was absolutely within Zim's rights, and is why he was acquitted.  I don't care if Tray went for the gun, whether he held his hands over Zim's mouth or other crap.  He knocked him down, mounted him and was beating him, and that is inarguable by anyone other than those that discount reality.
 
2013-09-10 12:14:34 PM
Just run now, George!  In the opposite direction this time.
 
2013-09-10 12:14:42 PM

someonelse: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

Again. Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

Show proof that he was "casing houses."

Show proof that he "liked to steal" and "liked to fight."

All things that you have claimed as fact.


do your own research.  My screen name is not google.
 
2013-09-10 12:16:02 PM

frepnog: MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

but he did in fact "retreat" to his current home and then return to beat Zimmerman up.

reality is what it is, dude.


Do you have a credible source that says he went home?
 
2013-09-10 12:16:09 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."


as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.
 
2013-09-10 12:16:21 PM

diddletwat: Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.

No worse than a judge and jury in Florida.


I'm sorry you feel that way, but they got it right. The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant. Or they are using other people's ignorance to push something that doesn't really factor into this case. I'm not trying to be to harsh, but the facts have been out there long enough that anyone who still clings to the Trayvon Martin fan-fiction version of events or keeps parroting misstatements of the law has to be willfully ignorant at this point.
 
2013-09-10 12:17:49 PM

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."

as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.


What if I told you we DID pay attention, which is precisely why we know he was never convicted of stealing anything (let alone "liked" it), and there is no evidence that his liver issues were caused by drugs? And no evidence that he was "casing properties"?

As you said earlier, he was not on trial. How is it that you're so sure of these things?
 
2013-09-10 12:18:44 PM

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."

as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.



Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.


/Cue dramatic music
 
2013-09-10 12:19:06 PM

Nabb1: The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant.


You missed self loathing whites that think "White Mexican" comes complete with so called white privilege.
 
2013-09-10 12:19:11 PM

MyRandomName: All we have learned in regards to zimmerman is that when MSNBC reports on him, the truth is opposite of what they say. They are determined to make George a Bmillionaire in his lawsuit.


Fixed that for you

The case has already surpassed "millionaire status" I would say he shouldn't settle for anything less than a 100 million dollars, his attorney should be seeking 1 billion dollars.

Before the shooting of Trayvon Martin, no body knew who George Zimmerman was. MSNBC (and others) turned this into racial crime, which it was not. They even called Zimmerman "white" and showed pictures of a 12 year old "victim". MSNBC went as far as edit the 911 tape to make it look like Zimmerman was using racial slurs that are not fit for television. That is messed up, Zimmerman and his lawyers should teach MSNBC and the media a lesson, a billion dollars would be about what a case like this should be worth. The guy will never be able to live life without the fear of someone hunting him down and for what? Defending himself against a thug who was going to kill him. He can thank MSNBC for that and they should pay dearly.
 
2013-09-10 12:20:32 PM

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

but he did in fact "retreat" to his current home and then return to beat Zimmerman up.

reality is what it is, dude.

Do you have a credible source that says he went home?


a witness stated it on the stand.  what more do you want? it happened. also, the time frame of the incident absolutely support that Martin disappeared for around 4 minutes - plenty of time to cover the ground.  believe what you want, I suppose, he stays dead and the man that killed him was acquitted.
 
2013-09-10 12:25:57 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.


yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....
 
2013-09-10 12:27:24 PM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....


Don't forget about bypassing a grand jury and willfully withholding evidence from the defense. Who needs professional ethics when we've got a lynch mob to placate?
 
2013-09-10 12:27:37 PM

someonelse: Phinn: What are some of the corresponding, reciprocal obligations of marriage, in your view?

What a sweet talker you are. I'll bet the ladies are lined up around the block.


they're called golddiggers....they're everywhere......
 
2013-09-10 12:29:13 PM

Nabb1: frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....

Don't forget about bypassing a grand jury and willfully withholding evidence from the defense. Who needs professional ethics when we've got a lynch mob to placate?


Then had the feds re-open the case flagrantly trying to find a way around the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.
 
2013-09-10 12:29:22 PM

Magorn: Phinn: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.

You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.

Yeah, but in post-Clinton America, men deserve it. They can be attacked with impunity and then jailed (or at best detained) for making a woman hit him. For exame, if he fails to meet her needs, such as making enough money for her use, or not finding her sufficiently attractive to remain sexually loyal to her. For that, men get what they deserve, until they learn their place.

And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.

As an added bonus, all female accusations against men are now presumed tru ...

Wow. You are seriously about two steps away from being found dancing around wearing the flayed skin of the random women who are your victims.  Get help, and do it now.


As someone who enjoys a colorful retort, I appreciate the vivid imagery, I really do.

But to the extent that you're serious shows just how perverse contemporary American culture has become on the subject of gender and the law -- anyone who has a negative opinion about the relatively recent changes in family and criminal law is one step away from being a serial killer.

That's the famous Progressive sense of rationality and open-mindedness on display.
 
2013-09-10 12:30:19 PM

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....


Goalposts moved successfully.

We asked you to prove your statements about Martin, not discuss the verdict. Two different things.
 
2013-09-10 12:33:40 PM

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.


No it didn't, his cite said exactly what he said it did.  It's right there, I just read it.  What are you trying to turn his simple statement into?  What is it you're trying to imply he said that's somehow refuted?


someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

Indeed. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html


Okay, I've read your source, and it's counting something other than the one he's citing.  The source he cites counts ALL acts of violence and the source you cite specifically counts SERIOUS acts of violence.

Both things can be true, and I've not once seen him assert anything saying differently.
 
2013-09-10 12:34:08 PM
MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

Up until this point, Zimmerman had done nothing that would justify Martin striking first.

However, let's assume that he did, for the sake of argument. This would have given Martin a valid self-defense claim. But self-defense still has its limits: even under SYG, you have to stop when the threat is neutralized, and Martin failed to do that. He completely dominated the fight, to the point that Zimmerman was crying for help, but he pressed his attack. If he ever had a self-defense claim, it ended at that moment.
 
2013-09-10 12:34:51 PM

MycroftHolmes: I thi....I mean you...ho.....

Wow, just wow. You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.

Why was Zimmerman armed? Why was he out of his car? Why did Martin, who had a very valid reason to be in the neighborhood, choose to confront Zimmerman?

Zimmerman did not just call the police. He also followed him around, then got out his car, while armed, after the sequence of events had started.


That's nothing, wait to you hear my theory of what went down that night:
As we now know, Zimmerman's wife left him that night after they had a big fight.  He didn't know if she'd ever be back.  He was angry and highly sexually frustrated.

So he went driving around.  Angry, raging erection, and he had a gun.   He saw a young, nubile black man walking alone.  So he followed him.   He knew what wanted to do, how long it would take him (he typically couldn't maintain an erection longer then 20 seconds after intercourse started).  He called the police to setup an alibi.

After trying to trick Martin into his car failed, due to Martin already having candy, he took after the young man on foot.  He managed to catch him but the attempted rape turned into a fight, as the kid was able to put up a fight.  Fearing for his life, Zimmerman then shot his planned rape victim.

The facts don't fully disprove my theory, so that must mean it's true.
 
2013-09-10 12:37:45 PM
frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Much as I hate to step in the middle of your and someonelses' love fest, this statement is demonstrably false.  The autopsy report clearly states that the liver microscopy had no diagnostic abnormalities.  Grossly, it states that there is some fatty change (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days, but whatever...it gets the meaning across if you know what you are looking at), but this is a non-specific finding.

Link to primary source:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autops y. pdf?hpt=hp_t2

\liver?
\\Chianti and fava beans
 
2013-09-10 12:39:34 PM

Satanic_Hamster: MycroftHolmes: I thi....I mean you...ho.....

Wow, just wow. You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.

Why was Zimmerman armed? Why was he out of his car? Why did Martin, who had a very valid reason to be in the neighborhood, choose to confront Zimmerman?

Zimmerman did not just call the police. He also followed him around, then got out his car, while armed, after the sequence of events had started.

That's nothing, wait to you hear my theory of what went down that night:
As we now know, Zimmerman's wife left him that night after they had a big fight.  He didn't know if she'd ever be back.  He was angry and highly sexually frustrated.

So he went driving around.  Angry, raging erection, and he had a gun.   He saw a young, nubile black man walking alone.  So he followed him.   He knew what wanted to do, how long it would take him (he typically couldn't maintain an erection longer then 20 seconds after intercourse started).  He called the police to setup an alibi.

After trying to trick Martin into his car failed, due to Martin already having candy, he took after the young man on foot.  He managed to catch him but the attempted rape turned into a fight, as the kid was able to put up a fight.  Fearing for his life, Zimmerman then shot his planned rape victim.

The facts don't fully disprove my theory, so that must mean it's true.


If he couldn't maintain an erection for longer than 20 seconds AND Martin was still moving after the gun shot, he clearly missed his opportunity.
 
2013-09-10 12:39:58 PM

neomunk: No it didn't, his cite said exactly what he said it did.  It's right there, I just read it.


Read the CDC report in this thread. It directly contradicts most of his points. It's the source material his claims are based on, yet it disagrees with him. Do not rely on third-party "analysis."
 
2013-09-10 12:40:38 PM

frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

Again. Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

Show proof that he was "casing houses."

Show proof that he "liked to steal" and "liked to fight."

All things that you have claimed as fact.

do your own research.  My screen name is not google.


So. You are claiming that proof exists that Martin a) was casing houses, b) had liver damage due to drug abuse, c) liked to fight, and d) liked to steal. But you refuse to share any of it. Sounds legit.
 
2013-09-10 12:40:51 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....

Goalposts moved successfully.

We asked you to prove your statements about Martin, not discuss the verdict. Two different things.


Point is that you can call me a liar but reality is what it is and the facts are out there. But you and a select group don' t care about the facts. You just want zim's head on a pike regardless of fact. So do your own research because anything i post won't be good enough- if you can't face reality by now nothing i say will matter.
 
2013-09-10 12:43:39 PM

frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.


The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.
 
2013-09-10 12:44:46 PM

brokenslide: (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days,


The correct term is "person of size metamorphosis."

fatvanish.com
 
2013-09-10 12:46:21 PM

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.


You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.
 
2013-09-10 12:46:54 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.


Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.
 
2013-09-10 12:46:55 PM

someonelse: frepnog: trayvon was not on trial. however, many things about trayvon are known. he liked to steal. he liked to fight. he liked to vandalize, and he very much liked a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

He "liked to steal"? Because of all the theft convictions on his record? How many were there again? And again, specifically, what evidence do you have that he was "casing houses"? And why, exactly, does his history mean he "liked to fight," but Zimmerman's history does not?


That's what I mean when I talk about the double standard of proof/conviction vs perception as it relates to bias.  Trayvon's IMAGE and lifestyle are all the evidence needed for some, but GZ must be convicted of specific crimes to be subject to the same scrutiny, even with multiple and similar incidents to consider.
 
2013-09-10 12:56:41 PM

MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.

You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.


Seriously? All this shows is that you didn't read the CDC report. From the "summary":

"Women experience more intimate partner
violence than do men: 22.1 percent of surveyed women, compared with 7.4 percent
of surveyed men, reported they were physically assaulted by a current or former
spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or
girlfriend, or date in their lifetime; 1.3 percent of surveyed women and 0.9 percent of
surveyed men reported experiencing such
violence in the previous 12 months. "


http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

I'm not a liar, I just took the time to read the source instead of some person's "analysis" of it.

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.


There you go again, intentionally conflating Zim's charges/acquittal with your claims about Martin. But you're right, you ARE wrong, and have no evidence to support your claims.
 
2013-09-10 12:57:46 PM

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.

What report?  Certainly not in TFA.

If true, then they did an extraordinarily shiatty job of searching since even his attorney says he had his gun with him.


No he doesn't, he says he thinks it may have been holstered in the car but the police didn't find one while searching, she also backed off her claim her father was punched. In the end its all horseshiat by her to get what money and attention.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/
 
2013-09-10 01:04:03 PM
What the fark is it about Trayvon Martin/George Zimmermann that makes people completely unable to see logic.The evidence backed Zimmermanns story. This doesn't mean the Zimmermann isn't a piece of crap. It just means that he was innocent of that crime.
 
2013-09-10 01:04:17 PM

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.

You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.

Seriously? All this shows is that you didn't read the CDC report. From the "summary":

"Women experience more intimate partner
violence than do men: 22.1 percent of surveyed women, compared with 7.4 percent
of surveyed men, reported they were physically assaulted by a current or former
spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or
girlfriend, or date in their lifetime; 1.3 percent of surveyed women and 0.9 percent of
surveyed men reported experiencing such
violence in the previous 12 months. "

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

I'm not a liar, I just took the time to read the source instead of some person's "analysis" of it.

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.

There you go again, intentionally conflating Zim's charges/acquittal with your claims about Martin. But you're right, you ARE wrong, and have no evidence to support your claims.


Ok. You have shown me the light. Tray was an innocent gunned down by a cop wannabe. Happy?
 
2013-09-10 01:24:31 PM

p the boiler: I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2013-09-10 01:37:46 PM

someonelse: brokenslide: (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days,

The correct term is "person of size metamorphosis."

[fatvanish.com image 560x400]


He looked happier when he was fat.
 
2013-09-10 01:41:42 PM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...
 
2013-09-10 01:44:00 PM

dittybopper: RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.

Especially when you consider that if he gets put under a restraining order, he's not allowed to possess a firearm under federal law.  And that puts him in much more danger than the typical person, because there is a significant (though small) fraction of the population that wants him dead, because "Justice for Trayvon".

If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


You mean, god forbid, someone might profile Zimmerman due to his proclivity to get himself in dangerous situations and thereby provoke someone to defend themselves out of a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death?

Also, Zimmerman has already been "put under a restraining order" by his previous girlfriend and it doesn't seem to have kept him from legally carrying a gun. That's because the typical restraining order granted in a divorce proceeding is completely different than the one proscribed by federal law upon conviction of an act of domestic violence. Anyone can file a request for a protection order by alleging certain facts, mostly that they are afraid of someone, and an emergency ex parte order enjoining the respondent from all contact with the victim will be rubber-stamped by a judge. This doesn't overcome a constitutional right.

As for Shellie being charged with manslaughter...this has to be the stupidest shiat I've ever read on Fark, but it sure does show what a bunch of pussies the Zimmerman fanbois are.
 
2013-09-10 01:47:10 PM

Magorn: This text is now purple: Magorn: Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them. They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations. One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence. A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible result. SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.

Poor you, begin required to do your job and arrest the person who left evidence of battery. Your burden is Sissyphian.

Did you get the impression I'm a cop?   Reading IS Fundamental,  I've bolded the significant part of my post above.  But the fact reamins that if a man initiates a violent encounter by, say grabbing his wife and throwing her on a bed (as , say a prelude to rape) and she fights him off with clawed hands, she is going to show no visible signs of his attack but his face will be badly scratched and bleeding.  In this scenario, the attacker will be labelled the victim and the victim arrested and charged, which, I think we can all agree, is an injustice neh?


I would need to know what your alternative is before deciding. What do you propose is the correct course of action? But without a priori knowledge of the objective course of events -- based only on what a responding officer would know.
 
2013-09-10 01:48:08 PM

Nabb1: diddletwat: Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.

No worse than a judge and jury in Florida.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but they got it right. The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant. Or they are using other people's ignorance to push something that doesn't really factor into this case. I'm not trying to be to harsh, but the facts have been out there long enough that anyone who still clings to the Trayvon Martin fan-fiction version of events or keeps parroting misstatements of the law has to be willfully ignorant at this point.


Statements such as this only proves that ignorance is pervasive in our society and especially in the state of Florida.
 
2013-09-10 01:49:21 PM

steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/


"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.
 
2013-09-10 01:49:49 PM

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...


You're also neglecting to mention the part where her father was there as well and didn't want to press charges after allegedly having his nose broken and having been "threatened with a gun." I'm having trouble that the battered spouse behavior would have taken hold of him too. The police had the opportunity to look at the security camera footage as well, and nothing came of that.

I haven't gone through a divorce but I know people who have. Without commenting on her post encounter behavior, it doesn't seem unusual that an encounter between people who can't stand to be around each other, especially when one shows up unannounced (her), that an emotionally charged event like an argument might take place.
 
2013-09-10 01:50:55 PM
img0012.popscreencdn.com
 
2013-09-10 01:53:52 PM

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...


Oh look. It's She-Bevets.
 
2013-09-10 01:54:38 PM

AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles


Pretty much that. Used to have a friend like that, it was a wonder he made it to his mid 20s without getting himself or anyone killed. It is the main reason people stopped hanging out with him. Does Zimmerman even have a job right now, because if I was his employer I would probably be looking for a way to get him out the door. I soehow imagine him being a rent-a-cop somewhere.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:07 PM

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.


I suppose I can only speak for myself, but this makes the second time I've presumed the man guilty only for the facts to prove me wrong when the truth came out. In this case, for example, I said that she should have pressed charges over the gun threat and the broken nose, only to find out later that there was no gun and there was no broken nose. What conclusion am I supposed to be drawing now?

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

I don't know about you, but I've been noticing that the old heuristic of "trust the most likely victim" has had a really bad track record as of late. Perhaps we shouldn't be taking such shortcuts after all, and evaluating the case on its merits, rather than on the people.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:47 PM

redmid17: PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

You're also neglecting to mention the part where her father was there as well and didn't want to press charges after allegedly having his nose broken and having been "threatened with a gun." I'm having trouble that the battered spouse behavior would have taken hold of him too. The police had the opportunity to look at the security camera footage as well, and nothing came of that.

I haven't gone through a divorce but I know people who have. Without commenting on her post encounter behavior, it doesn't seem unusual that an encounter between people who can't stand to be around each other, especially when one shows up unannounced (her), that an emotionally charged event like an argument might take place.


...TFA isn't loading well for me, so if that's true, yes, that would change the story.

This text is now purple: Oh look. It's She-Bevets.


Oh look. A waste of a comment.
 
2013-09-10 01:59:01 PM

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.


So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?
 
2013-09-10 02:10:45 PM

Millennium: PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I suppose I can only speak for myself, but this makes the second time I've presumed the man guilty only for the facts to prove me wrong when the truth came out. In this case, for example, I said that she should have pressed charges over the gun threat and the broken nose, only to find out later that there was no gun and there was no broken nose. What conclusion am I supposed to be drawing now?

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

I don't know about you, but I've been noticing that the old heuristic of "trust the most likely victim" has had a really bad track record as of late. Perhaps we shouldn't be taking such shortcuts after all, and evaluating the case on its merits, rather than on the people.


I did not see that there was no broken nose (though the lack of a gun's presence, as has been pointed out, does not negate the crime of threatening with a gun). That does change the situation somewhat, but it  still does not justify saying one party or the other is automatically a liar. I'm not saying  trust the woman. I'm saying don't decide what happened now, before the facts are in. Notice how I'm not saying Zimmerman actually did anything, either? I find it  likely that he did, but I  don't know. Important distinctions here.
 
2013-09-10 02:19:03 PM

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


being followed is not justification for assaulting someone.    Hopping on top of someone and beating them is justicfation for them shooting you though.    If Trayvon watched more Rocky movies, he would have known to "stick and move... stick....and move"
 
2013-09-10 02:20:39 PM

redmid17: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.

So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?


Some people are this stupid, if she reported a gun being brandished against her, hell its on the 911 call, then they will search for it. The police chief already doesn't like him and wouldn't need much of a reason to help him move on, if there was a gun they would have found it.
 
2013-09-10 02:27:15 PM
Why is Zimmerman even in FL still? He should be in Montana or some shiat
 
2013-09-10 02:28:15 PM

redmid17: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.

So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?


Funny, I've been on this planet long enough to realize that there is often a difference between a) what I imagine should have happened in a given situation and b) what actually happened.  This is why people like police, and scientists, and newspaper reporters go to so much trouble to dig up these things called "facts" which more objectively describe actual events then the imaginings in your head.

Good lord...
 
2013-09-10 02:32:25 PM

whatsupchuck: redmid17: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.

So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?

Funny, I've been on this planet long enough to realize that there is often a difference between a) what I imagine should have happened in a given situation and b) what actually happened.  This is why people like police, and scientists, and newspaper reporters go to so much trouble to dig up these things called "facts" which more objectively describe actual events then the imaginings in your head.

Good lord...


Jesus dude. If you're going to be hitting the bong this early, just let the rest of us know.
 
2013-09-10 02:41:35 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Why is Zimmerman even in FL still? He should be in Montana or some shiat


There are times I wonder about that myself, but moving takes time and money. So does purchasing an entirely new wardrobe, which you pretty much have to do if you're moving between those two states of all places. Perhaps he just hasn't gotten around to that yet.
 
2013-09-10 02:44:38 PM

redmid17: Jesus dude. If you're going to be hitting the bong this early, just let the rest of us know.


Is that what you're imagining again?  Well, bless your heart...
 
2013-09-10 02:50:43 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.


You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.
 
2013-09-10 02:51:44 PM

neomunk: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.


Sorry, I responded to the wrong post, but to the right poster.  Pretend I clicked on your response to me like I meant to.
 
2013-09-10 02:54:26 PM
I can see how all this is going to end. The estranged wife will get a restraining order against Zimmerman. He will ignore it and stalk her anyway. She will stand her ground and shoot him. Zimmerman's fanbois will be forced to remove their lips from his cock, and the rest of us will finally have some peace.
 
2013-09-10 02:57:20 PM

whatsupchuck: redmid17: Jesus dude. If you're going to be hitting the bong this early, just let the rest of us know.

Is that what you're imagining again?  Well, bless your heart...


Let's get this straight, no search at all during a domestic violence call featuring an armed, angry person who was on trial for murder less than two months ago?

According to police, George was not in his car when they arrived but was standing in the yard.  They say he was also very cooperative and allowed police to search his person.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_tampa/lake-mary-police- ar e-now-calling-into-question-several-statements-shellie-zimmerman-made- to-911

I don't have to imagine anything. I can read and understand why police might take the time to look for potential evidence in a crime involving someone of his public image.

To put this less elegantly, I'm pretty sure you're a moron or a troll, though it's not out of the question to replace the or with an and.
 
2013-09-10 02:59:49 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists.


Why does this not surprise me at all?

/From reading your posts, it would seem that  everyone is a racist (or at least a closet racist) in your eyes, Dro.
 
Bf+
2013-09-10 03:00:32 PM
 
2013-09-10 03:11:03 PM

neomunk: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.


You explained nothing of the sort, not to me. All you said is that his claims were fine. And they were not. The CDC, who he kept referring to for support, disagrees with him.
 
2013-09-10 03:12:20 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Why can't allegedly intelligent people ever make a comment about their position without a bunch of name calling and idiocy?


Why indeed.
 
2013-09-10 03:19:51 PM

redmid17: Let's get this straight, no search at all during a domestic violence call featuring an armed, angry person who was on trial for murder less than two months ago?

According to police, George was not in his car when they arrived but was standing in the yard.  They say he was also very cooperative and allowed police to search his person.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_tampa/lake-mary-police- ar e-now-calling-into-question-several-statements-shellie-zimmerman-made- to-911

I don't have to imagine anything. I can read and understand why police might take the time to look for potential evidence in a crime involving someone of his public image.


If they were actually searching for evidence of a gun, they would have looked in his car where, according to his lawyer, they might have found one.  They searched his person the way they always do when a gun is reported during a service call because police don't like suspects wandering around holding guns.  At least, that's what I imagine.

Thank you and congratulations for posting the first evidence in this thread that there was any search done whatsoever.  Still waiting to hear about the more thorough search of his car and bodyguard mentioned by another farker.
 
Bf+
2013-09-10 03:22:24 PM

Millennium: allegedly

 
2013-09-10 03:30:44 PM

whatsupchuck: redmid17: Let's get this straight, no search at all during a domestic violence call featuring an armed, angry person who was on trial for murder less than two months ago?

According to police, George was not in his car when they arrived but was standing in the yard.  They say he was also very cooperative and allowed police to search his person.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_tampa/lake-mary-police- ar e-now-calling-into-question-several-statements-shellie-zimmerman-made- to-911

I don't have to imagine anything. I can read and understand why police might take the time to look for potential evidence in a crime involving someone of his public image.

If they were actually searching for evidence of a gun, they would have looked in his car where, according to his lawyer, they might have found one.  They searched his person the way they always do when a gun is reported during a service call because police don't like suspects wandering around holding guns.  At least, that's what I imagine.

Thank you and congratulations for posting the first evidence in this thread that there was any search done whatsoever.  Still waiting to hear about the more thorough search of his car and bodyguard mentioned by another farker.


They didn't search the car per the police chief. They did a thorough enough search, though, to enable EMTs to come on scene and ensure that the scene was secure. I doubt they are going to let his bodyguard walk around with a gun either. Per this picture in the Orlando Sentinel, it looks like he was searched:

i.imgur.com

#4
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-z im merman-domestic-violence-pictures,0,6691722.photogallery
 
2013-09-10 03:33:10 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Why is Zimmerman even in FL still? He should be in Montana or some shiat


Exactly what I said, I would be out of the damn country where nobody knows who the fark zimmerman is or what it means.

whatsupchuck: Funny, I've been on this planet long enough to realize that there is often a difference between a) what I imagine should have happened in a given situation and b) what actually happened. This is why people like police, and scientists, and newspaper reporters go to so much trouble to dig up these things called "facts" which more objectively describe actual events then the imaginings in your head.


Fact: She reported domestic violence with a physical altercation along with brandishing a gun by showing it to her and telling her to come closer.

Those are facts, there is no disputing that since it is on the 911 call.

Now, even farking barney fife would do three things when arriving onsite, 1) separate the two people to get their stories, 2) pat down the one who is being reported as armed and brandishing a gun, 3) search the car once hes been detained.

If you know any law enforcement at all then the first thing they do is search for their safety to make sure nothing is hidden to hurt themselves, too many cops have been killed or hurt by not following protocol.
 
2013-09-10 03:37:32 PM

whatsupchuck: Thank you and congratulations for posting the first evidence in this thread that there was any search done whatsoever. Still waiting to hear about the more thorough search of his car and bodyguard mentioned by another farker.


You dont understand that the chief saying no gun was found means they searched him, in any article it states he was searched when cops arrived on scene, you can hear her mention it in the 911 call that his hands are up while they are patting him down. It was a farking argument blown out of proportion by her shiatty acting.
 
2013-09-10 03:45:47 PM

GanjSmokr: DROxINxTHExWIND: I believe that many of you have taken that position because you are racists.

Why does this not surprise me at all?

/From reading your posts, it would seem that  everyone is a racist (or at least a closet racist) in your eyes, Dro.


Drox is an African American gentleman that defends Trayvon simply because he was also an African American despite all evidence showing that Trayvon was responsible for his own death by attacking Zimmerman and continuing that attack as his victim cried out for help from the ground.

Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

To Drox, this means that everyone ELSE is actually the racist.

/experienced that myself with people I know that I never suspected of being racist.
 
2013-09-10 03:52:32 PM

frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.


What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is
 
2013-09-10 03:58:46 PM

steamingpile: whatsupchuck: Thank you and congratulations for posting the first evidence in this thread that there was any search done whatsoever. Still waiting to hear about the more thorough search of his car and bodyguard mentioned by another farker.

You dont understand that the chief saying no gun was found means they searched him, in any article it states he was searched when cops arrived on scene, you can hear her mention it in the 911 call that his hands are up while they are patting him down. It was a farking argument blown out of proportion by her shiatty acting.


You just moved the goalposts over two consecutive posts, didn't you?  Even by Fark standards that's mighty impressive!

At this point I'd bet a paycheck that he had gun in the glovebox of his car.  I couldn't swear to it, though.  BTW, my opinion of her isn't any higher than my opinion of him, and I'd go so far as to say they probably deserve each other.
 
2013-09-10 04:01:15 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is


that is not what I have done, and if you paid any attention at all you would know that.  If Drox had a leg to stand on it would be worth discussing but he ignores evidence and fact based on the color of Trayvon's skin.
 
2013-09-10 04:04:14 PM

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is

that is not what I have done, and if you paid any attention at all you would know that.  If Drox had a leg to stand on it would be worth discussing but he ignores evidence and fact based on the color of Trayvon's skin.


And if YOU had a leg to stand on, you would have been able to back up the comments you made about Trayvon Martin's thefts, his liver, or his casing houses. But you can't - you have no evidence to support them, yet you assume them to be absolutely true. I wonder why you accept the negative things you heard about him without question while calling him a "thug." Hmmm.
 
2013-09-10 04:06:30 PM

LasersHurt: frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is


No, it isnt incredibly racist, simply because you conveniently ignored the 'despite all evidence' part of the post.

But keep on keeping on.  Disagree with Obama?  Racist.!
 
2013-09-10 04:10:29 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Disagree with Obama?  Racist.!


Are you having some kind of persecution-seizure?
 
2013-09-10 04:11:08 PM

King Something: unlikely: "threatened with a gun" is not the same as "saw a gun"

"I might have to just TRAYVON your ass" is threatening with a gun. Coming from him, it'd be doubly so, and doubly menacing.

Thing is, though, threatening with a gun (like by saying "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," for instance) is a felony under Florida law. It's called Aggravated Assault and carries a maximum 5-year prison sentence (as opposed to Simple Assault, which is when you threaten someone but don't threaten to use deadly force, such as by saying something like "I'mma slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo")

I have to double-check the details on the law (and am currently too lazy to do it right this decade), but I'm fairly certain that the victim has to reasonably believe that the threat is in earnest and that the aggressor is willing and able to carry out the threat -- if someone tells you they're gonna slap you upside the head with a giant purple dildo, it doesn't count as assault if the verbal exchange is over PSN while playing Grand Theft Auto online but does count as assault if the conversation is face-to-face and that person is carrying (or could reasonably be believed to be carrying) a giant purple dildo twice the size of a hoagie. Likewise, if someone tells you "I might have to just TRAYVON your ass," it's not aggravated assault if it's via the headset while playing GTA but is if the conversation is in person -- and, as you sad, doubly so if the person threatening you is George Zimmerman.

Of course, there's no way he'd be convicted in criminal court on just hearsay. She would have had to have recorded him actually saying those words (or words to that effect) in order to meet the "reasonable doubt" standard, otherwise it's just he-said-she-said in a divorce trial.


NPR reporting that there is a video of this altercation on Shellie's Ipad but someone smashed the Ipad so it is going to take awhile to recover the video.
 
2013-09-10 04:12:11 PM

spongeboob: NPR reporting that there is a video of this altercation on Shellie's Ipad but someone smashed the Ipad so it is going to take awhile to recover the video.


What, they don't know who tried to destroy evidence?
 
2013-09-10 04:14:08 PM
Why does one need to back up "casing houses"   It was on the police call.   Are we to assume he was playing hopscotch?   It is just as valid as any other witness testimony to the cops.   Why not assert that Martin was actually on the ground and the rest is just racist lies?
 
2013-09-10 04:15:07 PM
SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- George Zimmerman's wife is asking that he pay for a permanent life insurance policy
with her named as the beneficiary,according to a divorce petition made public Friday.Shellie Zimmerman said
in the petition that her husband should pay the premiums on the policy since he"has the financial ability to
obtain such life insurance at reasonable rates."
 
2013-09-10 04:22:17 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Why does one need to back up "casing houses"   It was on the police call.   Are we to assume he was playing hopscotch?   It is just as valid as any other witness testimony to the cops.   Why not assert that Martin was actually on the ground and the rest is just racist lies?


Because that which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. If you cannot prove he was "casing houses," he wasn't. Much how George did not commit murder, because it was not proven, right?
 
2013-09-10 04:23:33 PM

LasersHurt: spongeboob: NPR reporting that there is a video of this altercation on Shellie's Ipad but someone smashed the Ipad so it is going to take awhile to recover the video.

What, they don't know who tried to destroy evidence?


They are hoping to find that out when they examine the Ipad again per the NPR report.
 
2013-09-10 04:29:02 PM
 
2013-09-10 04:40:20 PM

spongeboob: Either the Lake Mary police are very bad cops or O'Mara is a  very bad lawyer and liar

George Zimmerman's attorney, former Local 6 legal analyst Mark O'Mara, also said George Zimmerman had a gun holstered to his body.

Police later said they did not find a gun on Zimmerman's person.


Ummm... I officially retract my wager that he had it in his glovebox.
 
2013-09-10 04:43:30 PM
I'm so glad that emotional assholes like Magorn and MFAWG have zero sway in our justice system.

"WELL ACCORDING TO MY FEELINGS HE IS GUILTY THEREFORE HE IS GUILTY"

So stupid.
 
2013-09-10 04:43:41 PM
Best thing about the whole Zimmerman thing is how incredibly stupid it made Obama look. Guy is a racist pig, can't believe all you stupid white people fell for his crap. "If I had a son...." He is such a loser!!! What kind of President makes a statement like that about a minor criminal case?? A dumb loser who is now getting his ass handed to him by Putin, that's who.
 
2013-09-10 04:47:16 PM
Phinn: "That's the famous Progressive sense of rationality and open-mindedness on display."

Oh.

You're one of THOSE.

Show us on the doll where Woodrow Wilson touched you :)
 
2013-09-10 04:49:37 PM
Phinn: "The image of the cops knocking on the door, and the wife-beater sending them away so he can resume his belt-strap lecture, is fantasy.  It's imaginary.  Of course I'm sure it has happened, somewhere, but women also really do attack men with weapons, often improvised"

Oh, goody, another one on the "men beat women just as much" bandwagon.

CITATION NEEDED, numbnuts.
 
2013-09-10 04:52:12 PM

spiderpaz: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.


No, they don't.  Look at something besides the study that moron posted.  Anything.  Seriously.  Prisons have always had more men in them than women, and that statistic WAY predates any modern "PC bullshiat" the misogynists here would have you blame.
 
2013-09-10 04:53:18 PM

Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."


As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".
 
2013-09-10 05:01:11 PM

Magorn: PunGent: Magorn: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

Assume trayvon survived the incident.  Explain to me what evidence could have been used to convict him of attacking George Zimmerman, or initiating the altercation.  I mena clearly he deserves the same benefit of the doubt Zimmerman does,  in reaching that conclusion right?  Go on I'll wait-any evidence at all...

Seriously?  Physical injuries on Zimmerman.  Front and back of head.  End of story.

Magorn, I respect your opinions as a rule, but you're really walking way out on thin ice on this one.

Nope. Go with me a minute.  The Injuries show that an altercation took place, just as Martin's dead body did,  but, suppose Zimmerman had died fnot Martin, could you have convicted Martin?  You are Martin's defense lawyer, and you have a tap of this guy calling 911, ignoring police requests that he stay in the car, saying "he's not gonna get away this time" AND he's armed with a gun.   Could you, as a hypthetical juror at Martin's trial conclude that the evidence proved HE initiated the encounter and was not acting in self-defense?  The same standards of reasonable doubt that rightly have Zimmerman walking around as a free man today have to apply to those who accept the counter-narraive that somehow Taryvon started the fight that ended Zimmerman;s life.


I was thinking some more about your hypothetical.   Seems to me the "problem" is that the presumption of innocence almost always attaches to whoever survived the fight...we don't waste a lot of time charging dead people with crimes, after all.  So there's going to be an inherent bias toward the survivor, since he can shape the narrative after the fact.

So, without outside testimony, it's going to come down to physical evidence.   If Z DIDN'T have injuries (however minor) on his face and the back of his head, he'd have a FAR weaker case, and would've been much more likely to get convicted on at least negligent homicide, or the like.
 
2013-09-10 05:02:08 PM
Evidently police are saying Zimmerman may still be charged with battery once they go through the statements.
They are also going to put together the iPad she was using to record the incident that George grabbed from her and smashed.
So do go on.....
 
2013-09-10 05:41:29 PM

Phinn: The image of the cops knocking on the door, and the wife-beater sending them away so he can resume his belt-strap lecture, is fantasy.  It's imaginary.  Of course I'm sure it has happened, somewhere


A study published in 1976 by the Police Foundation found that the police had intervened at least once in the previous two years in 85% of spouse homicides.
 
2013-09-10 06:07:29 PM

PunGent: spiderpaz: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.

No, they don't.  Look at something besides the study that moron posted.  Anything.  Seriously.  Prisons have always had more men in them than women, and that statistic WAY predates any modern "PC bullshiat" the misogynists here would have you blame.


Oh my God you're right ... there would have to be like - a double standard or something when it came to charging women and men with domestic violence for both things to be true.
 
2013-09-10 06:46:23 PM
OMG.  Just saw the damage Zimmerman did to the father-in-law's nose.  It reminded me of Zimmerman's Trayvon wounds...like he just went ten rounds with a mountain lion.

That surveillance tape of Zimmerman breaking the iPad is suspicious, too.  Why can't the criminal justice stop this guy from involving himself in dangerous situations.

Thug.
 
2013-09-10 07:07:56 PM

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: Thank you and congratulations for posting the first evidence in this thread that there was any search done whatsoever. Still waiting to hear about the more thorough search of his car and bodyguard mentioned by another farker.

You dont understand that the chief saying no gun was found means they searched him, in any article it states he was searched when cops arrived on scene, you can hear her mention it in the 911 call that his hands are up while they are patting him down. It was a farking argument blown out of proportion by her shiatty acting.

You just moved the goalposts over two consecutive posts, didn't you?  Even by Fark standards that's mighty impressive!

At this point I'd bet a paycheck that he had gun in the glovebox of his car.  I couldn't swear to it, though.  BTW, my opinion of her isn't any higher than my opinion of him, and I'd go so far as to say they probably deserve each other.


Nope goalposts same place, if you think a cop will respond to a call about a person brandishing a firearm and not search him or his car then you are just ignorant of law enforcement.

I do agree they are both scumbags and she's trying to get all the notoriety she can to play the abused woman on Oprah.
 
2013-09-10 07:10:32 PM

The more you eat the more you fart: Better question: why isnt she in jail for that shiat?


Because the only time the cops ever charge someone for filing a false police report is if the news media is watching. I've learned that I have to record every interaction with her for my own protection and to always have a witness.

This text is now purple: Are slander laws no longer a thing?


Actually they are, and taking her to court for slander and the considerable amount of money she has cost me is something that I've got to seriously consider. This isn't someone saying they don't like me, this is someone trying to get me arrested, take away my kid and have me thrown in prison. She has cost me untold thousands from her slander of myself.

Millennium: They're a thing, but slander is a tort, not a crime. I believe that what onyxruby is suggesting is to make it an actual crime.


I have no idea if it is a crime where I live or not, I think the cops around here look at it as a civil matter. At this point I am looking at suing with a jury trial so that I can show the next legal person the decree showing her history and recoup damages.

This text is now purple: Defamation per se is a crime in something like 17 states, but even a civil suit might slow her down.


That's what I need to do, she refuses to stop and even though nobody believes her it's still a lot of stress and money to routinely deal with. That and I don't like having to record every interaction with her for my own protection.
 
2013-09-10 07:22:56 PM

dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".


I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.
 
2013-09-10 07:25:07 PM

steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.


The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.
 
2013-09-10 07:37:57 PM

gimmegimme: steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.

The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.


Ahhh I get it trolling, problem was this was his home
 
2013-09-10 07:42:40 PM

steamingpile: gimmegimme: steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.

The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.

Ahhh I get it trolling, problem was this was his home


Look, even if it's his place of residence, he doesn't necessarily belong there.  Would all of his neighbors know he's in the neighborhood?  Suburbs can be a dangerous place; you don't want strangers walking around.
 
2013-09-10 08:00:15 PM

gimmegimme: steamingpile: gimmegimme: steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.

The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.

Ahhh I get it trolling, problem was this was his home

Look, even if it's his place of residence, he doesn't necessarily belong there.  Would all of his neighbors know he's in the neighborhood?  Suburbs can be a dangerous place; you don't want strangers walking around.


Try harder, you can get serious responses with a little effort.
 
2013-09-10 08:09:19 PM

steamingpile: gimmegimme: steamingpile: gimmegimme: steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.

The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.

Ahhh I get it trolling, problem was this was his home

Look, even if it's his place of residence, he doesn't necessarily belong there.  Would all of his neighbors know he's in the neighborhood?  Suburbs can be a dangerous place; you don't want strangers walking around.

Try harder, you can get serious responses with a little effort.


I don't get it...these arguments were hailed as a justification for shooting an unarmed kid only a few months ago.  What changed?
 
2013-09-10 10:40:14 PM

dittybopper: Notice that I was influenced by media coverage a bit, thinking of Zimmerman as a "Mall Ninja" (think Paul Blart, Mall Cop with a gun).

But as all the alleged evidence on the Martin side was shown to be either completely false, or misleading, while all the actual confirmed evidence and eyewitness testimony substantially supported (or at the very worst, didn't refute) Zimmerman's story, then yeah, I made up my mind.


i guess what all us little people want to know. That is, people who don't stroke off to images of George Zimmerman or make references to d-list movies is: why do you love him so much? I'm serious. Is it that you have some sort of gay fascination with the thought of Georgy-boy "penetrating" a ferocious black man with his phallic gun? Or is it some sort of jealousy ie that that you stroke off every time you pick up a gun with the thought that you too -can declare yourself a neighborhood vigilante and kill some teenager?

Maybe you even follow teens around hoping that one of them will start something...

Well whatever it is, I'm sure you and your little sock-puppet minions spend plenty of time on website forums telling others your opinions and making good sure that nobody else dare impugn the good name of George Zimmerman.
 
2013-09-10 10:57:06 PM

LasersHurt: Nutsac_Jim: Why does one need to back up "casing houses"   It was on the police call.   Are we to assume he was playing hopscotch?   It is just as valid as any other witness testimony to the cops.   Why not assert that Martin was actually on the ground and the rest is just racist lies?

Because that which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. If you cannot prove he was "casing houses," he wasn't. Much how George did not commit murder, because it was not proven, right?


People will give extra weight to play by play statements on the phone to the cops.
This is not the same thing as killing your wife and then calling the cops and saying a one armed man did it.

According to you, it is not proven that Martin was on top of zimmerman because we simply have this play by play phone calls to the cops and not a photo.
 
2013-09-10 11:01:46 PM

gimmegimme: steamingpile: dbrunker: Bf+: "Lake Mary Police Department spokesman Zach Hudson said Tuesday that the iPad captured video of the dispute, but the mobile device was in pieces and needed to be examined in a lab."

As I said, "It's easy for us to jump to conclusions before we have all the facts...".

I can tell you whats on the video, she's starts taping him on the property because she's trying to provoke him into a reaction and it works since he slaps it out of her hands saying get that shiat out of my face. She's vindictive and sounds pissy after she discovers his new GF in the truck at the end of her phone call. I would bet she's known about her for a while and is trying to get him to fark himself over, he needs someone to just tell him to stay the fark away from her.

The whole altercation could have been avoided if he had just gone home.  Instead, he had to act all tough and circle back.  He was just defending himself against her aggressive attack.


Well.. he did get back to his property and say back the fark up or get some pain.   The same thing Trayvon should have done.
 
2013-09-10 11:04:56 PM

gimmegimme: Try harder, you can get serious responses with a little effort.

I don't get it...these arguments were hailed as a justification for shooting an unarmed kid only a few months ago.  What changed?


Nobody has made such an assertion, except for you.   Everyone else said that it ok to shoot somone when they suckerpunch you jump on top, and refuse to get off despite tapping out by crying for help.

Martin... he just didnt know when to quit.
 
2013-09-10 11:06:30 PM

spiderpaz: PunGent: spiderpaz: PunGent: The more you eat the more you fart: doglover: The fairer sex, as in there's always a fair chance they're lying.

More than 70% of domestic violence situations are initiated by the woman.

Citation needed.

There's a reason we don't need as many battered men's shelters:  basic biology.

That's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.

No, they don't.  Look at something besides the study that moron posted.  Anything.  Seriously.  Prisons have always had more men in them than women, and that statistic WAY predates any modern "PC bullshiat" the misogynists here would have you blame.

Oh my God you're right ... there would have to be like - a double standard or something when it came to charging women and men with domestic violence for both things to be true.


Nope.
 
2013-09-10 11:10:11 PM
Phinn:

Still no citations, eh?

Speaking of the Unreality Bubble :)
 
2013-09-10 11:12:38 PM

PunGent: hat's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.

No, they don't.  Look at something besides the study that moron posted.  Anything.  Seriously.  Prisons have always had more men in them than women, and that statistic WAY predates any modern "PC bullshiat" the misogynists here would have you blame.


Just like "blacks get prosecuted more than whites".. prisons will have more men, simply because more women will call the cops.   Unless someone does a Lorena Bobbitt on you, as a man, you pretty much have to suck it up.
 
2013-09-11 05:40:59 AM

LasersHurt: neomunk: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.

You explained nothing of the sort, not to me. All you said is that his claims were fine. And they were not. The CDC, who he kept referring to for support, disagrees with him.


No, you arrogant fark, it doesn't.  You're incorrect and your continuing failure to even consider that fact is making you look like a egotistical fool.

Just sayin.  You can keep saying he's wrong all you want, but you've yet to show it.  All you've shown is that once you believe something you'll drag yourself down to the level of disingenuous ass without once going back and seeing if what someone else is saying is true.  You've already been told that the two studies are comparing different levels of violence, but that doesn't support your point, so you've ignored it.  The only person that makes look bad is you.

Oh, and by the way, nice job pretending that a study specifically about different types of abuse of women is a full study detailing all domestic violence toward both sexes, yet somehow TRUMPS a study that IS about all types of domestic violence, that's TOTALLY not disingenuous, right?
 
2013-09-11 07:35:58 AM

neomunk: LasersHurt: neomunk: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.

You explained nothing of the sort, not to me. All you said is that his claims were fine. And they were not. The CDC, who he kept referring to for support, disagrees with him.

No, you arrogant fark, it doesn't.  You're incorrect and your continuing failure to even consider that fact is making you look like a egotistical fool.

Just sayin.  You can keep saying he's wrong all you want, but you've yet to show it.  All you've shown is that once you believe something you'll drag yourself down to the level of disingenuous ass without once going back and seeing if what someone else is saying is true.  You've already been told that the two studies are comparing different levels of violence, but that doesn't support your point, so you've ignored it.  The only person that makes look bad is you.

Oh, and by the way, nice job pretending that a study specifically about different types of abuse of women is a full study detailing all domestic violence toward both sexes, yet somehow TRUMPS a study that IS about all types of domestic violence, that's TOTALLY not disingenuous, right?


Let's try it this way - I posted the link earlier, as did others. I also posted quotes from the CDC piece. I DID provide evidence.

You, on the other hand, keep yelling that I am wrong and calling me names. YOU have not proven a damned thing. I DID show that he's wrong - you keep saying "nuh uh."

YOU put up or shut up.
 
2013-09-11 08:55:48 AM

Nutsac_Jim: PunGent: hat's pretty sketchy logic.  Maybe we don't need as many battered men's shelter because, although women initiate domestic violence more often, men (being biologically the bigger/stronger gender), are not as likely to sustain serious injuries because they are generally more capable of defending themselves.

No, they don't.  Look at something besides the study that moron posted.  Anything.  Seriously.  Prisons have always had more men in them than women, and that statistic WAY predates any modern "PC bullshiat" the misogynists here would have you blame.

Just like "blacks get prosecuted more than whites".. prisons will have more men, simply because more women will call the cops.   Unless someone does a Lorena Bobbitt on you, as a man, you pretty much have to suck it up.


Because the Duluth Model virtually guarantees that even if the man is the victim, he's the one going to jail. There are damn few resources for abused men, and if you've ever tried to help an abused man, it becomes very apparent that few people believe men can be abused and even fewer give a shiat about helping one.
 
2013-09-11 08:59:31 AM

PunGent: Phinn:

Still no citations, eh?

Speaking of the Unreality Bubble :)


I ignored you because explaining why you're wrong takes time.

You fail to comprehend the simple fact that my argument is a legal one and therefore doesn't depend on statistics. Your demand that I provide a "citation" is a straw man -- that I am required to prove that "women beat up men just as much," or some such nonsense, in order to show that the VAWA is unjust.

It doesn't matter if the statistics were to show that men initiate batteries of women 10 times more often than the reverse. (They don't.) The LAW is (and must be) that the statistical behavior of other people is not evidence of guilt.

Statistics may be grounds for suspicion, but before the government can legitimately take forceful action against someone (arrest, removal from the home, etc.), there must be particularized evidence amounting to probable cause.

What you probably don't see in your daily life is that the US government bribes local law enforcement to arrest men accused of domestic violence. Imagine if it gave grants to local law enforcement expressly for the purpose of arresting black people, and justified it on the grounds that black males under age 25 are statistically more likely commit crimes. (Which they are.)

That kind of system is expressly prejudiced against a politically disfavored target. Modern domestic violence law, as well as police practices and policies, have effectively declared that men are to be presumed guilty, on the basis of nothing more than a woman's accusation, which (as Shellie Zimmerman demonstrates) can be false.
 
2013-09-11 11:43:08 AM

LasersHurt: neomunk: LasersHurt: neomunk: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

You're not getting that you're comparing apples and oranges.  The reports are not counting the same types of activities.

I explained that, you ignored it.

You explained nothing of the sort, not to me. All you said is that his claims were fine. And they were not. The CDC, who he kept referring to for support, disagrees with him.

No, you arrogant fark, it doesn't.  You're incorrect and your continuing failure to even consider that fact is making you look like a egotistical fool.

Just sayin.  You can keep saying he's wrong all you want, but you've yet to show it.  All you've shown is that once you believe something you'll drag yourself down to the level of disingenuous ass without once going back and seeing if what someone else is saying is true.  You've already been told that the two studies are comparing different levels of violence, but that doesn't support your point, so you've ignored it.  The only person that makes look bad is you.

Oh, and by the way, nice job pretending that a study specifically about different types of abuse of women is a full study detailing all domestic violence toward both sexes, yet somehow TRUMPS a study that IS about all types of domestic violence, that's TOTALLY not disingenuous, right?

Let's try it this way - I posted the link earlier, as did others. I also posted quotes from the CDC piece. I DID provide evidence.

You, on the other hand, keep yelling that I am wrong and calling me names. YOU have not proven a damned thing. I DID show that he's wrong - you keep saying "nuh uh."

YOU put up or shut up.


The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about. It doesn't need to be reposted.   If you want to be right, you'll scroll up and finally actually read the thing.

Otherwise, continue with your "NO, U!" routine all you want, but when you post something stupid and obviously wrong, don't be suprised when I keep calling you out on it.

A very simple fact has been explained to you several times now, and you keep just shaking your head certain that you couldn't have made a mistake.  How very teabaggy of you.

Last time, and only because your heart is usually in the right place (unless your ego is hanging out, taking up all the good seats)  the report linked to WAY above counts ALL domestic violence, the report you linked to counts SOME TYPES of domestic violence (and even some things that aren't violence).  The study HE sited was about domestic violence in general, the study YOU cited was about violence against women specifically.  Do you not see that MAYBE, just farking MAYBE there could be some difference between them?

Now, take off the disingenuous egotrip hat and put on your thinking cap buck-o, you can do it!
 
2013-09-11 11:52:15 AM

neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.


Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.
 
2013-09-11 11:58:37 AM

LasersHurt: neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.

Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.


just get a room, you two.
 
2013-09-11 12:02:14 PM

frepnog: LasersHurt: neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.

Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.

just get a room, you two.


I'm only now realizing he might have me confused with someone else. He called me "teabaggy" ffs.
 
2013-09-11 12:36:53 PM

LasersHurt: neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.

Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.


Here's the link he posted that I've been talking about, note the URL text:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

Oh, and I called you teabaggy for repeatedly saying that he didn't link to a cdc report and for completely ignoring the meat of my text (where I point out your error clearly) instead choosing to focus on the one "mistake" you were pretty sure I was making.  You know, lying via willful ignorance due to your ego telling you you can't possibly have made a mistake...  that's what I call "teabaggy" now.

BTW, I reread his link 3 times in order to make sure that I wasn't making a mistake.  That's what people who don't believe in their own perfection do, check on themselves before asserting something over and over again in the face of credible denial.
 
2013-09-11 12:42:50 PM

neomunk: LasersHurt: neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.

Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.

Here's the link he posted that I've been talking about, note the URL text:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

Oh, and I called you teabaggy for repeatedly saying that he didn't link to a cdc report and for completely ignoring the meat of my text (where I point out your error clearly) instead choosing to focus on the one "mistake" you were pretty sure I was making.  You know, lying via willful ignorance due to your ego telling you you can't possibly have made a mistake...  that's what I call "teabaggy" now.

BTW, I reread his link 3 times in order to make sure that I wasn't making a mistake.  That's what people who don't believe in their own perfection do, check on themselves before asserting something over and over again in the face of credible denial.


That's exactly the report I am referring to as well.

Wait, what "he" do you think I am disagreeing with?
 
2013-09-11 01:32:23 PM

LasersHurt: neomunk: LasersHurt: neomunk: The link he posted in this thread way up there will suffice, as it's the CDC report that I'm talking about.

Now I think you're confused, he didn't post the CDC report, he posted some analysis from another website.

Here's the link he posted that I've been talking about, note the URL text:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

Oh, and I called you teabaggy for repeatedly saying that he didn't link to a cdc report and for completely ignoring the meat of my text (where I point out your error clearly) instead choosing to focus on the one "mistake" you were pretty sure I was making.  You know, lying via willful ignorance due to your ego telling you you can't possibly have made a mistake...  that's what I call "teabaggy" now.

BTW, I reread his link 3 times in order to make sure that I wasn't making a mistake.  That's what people who don't believe in their own perfection do, check on themselves before asserting something over and over again in the face of credible denial.

That's exactly the report I am referring to as well.

Wait, what "he" do you think I am disagreeing with?


You know what, I think I am mixed up.  I apologize.  In fact, not only am I mixed up here, I did the same thing on another thread elsewhere too, so sorry about that.  I could have kept myself more inline by posting more details and less invective, my mistake.

The only half assed excuse I'll offer up is that I've been on inordinate amount of pain medication the past few days.  I should follow drunk posting rules even though I don't exactly feel drunk.

Sorry.
(you CAN sound like an asshole (just like me!) sometimes though, just sayin)
 
2013-09-11 01:41:09 PM

Mistymtnhop: frepnog: Diogenes: frepnog: dude, it is absolutely ok to take up for a fellow african american

Well aren't you just a peach.

*ignored*

well i simply don't know how I will be able to sleep tonight.

I'm sure you can find plenty of sheets.


All white.
 
2013-09-11 01:44:21 PM

frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.


Those results are from Conservative web sites that are not known for being truthful.
 
2013-09-11 01:50:08 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Why is Zimmerman even in FL still? He should be in Montana or some shiat


If you feel so highly about him you can offer him room and board.
 
2013-09-11 01:52:29 PM

Latinwolf: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

Those results are from Conservative web sites that are not known for being truthful.


it's ok, tray tray was just an innocent babe preyed upon by a ruthless white hispanic.
 
2013-09-11 01:56:10 PM

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is

that is not what I have done, and if you paid any attention at all you would know that.  If Drox had a leg to stand on it would be worth discussing but he ignores evidence and fact based on the color of Trayvon's skin.


Of course you don't see the irony of you making that claim.
 
2013-09-11 02:05:22 PM

Latinwolf: frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: Defending someone vehemently of your own race based on nothing but race is INCREDIBLY racist.

What about dismissing someone's entire argument on the basis that he is black, so therefore he's obviously just defending another black guy?

Is THAT incredibly racist?

/yes it is, other Barry, yes it is

that is not what I have done, and if you paid any attention at all you would know that.  If Drox had a leg to stand on it would be worth discussing but he ignores evidence and fact based on the color of Trayvon's skin.

Of course you don't see the irony of you making that claim.


because there is no irony.  i don't defend anyone based on nothing but the color of their skin.  to do so is racist, and I am no racist, try as you might to paint me as one.  i think Zim was a dumbass that should have never left his truck.  that does not remove the fact that Trayvon was in fact, a thug and acted as such, and attacked an armed man that he was already racially slurring.

none of that has dick-all to do with race.  you don't need to be white hispanic to be a dumb ass and you certainly don't need to be african american to be a thug.

it is nice to pretend that trayvon was innocent, that he was just out minding his own business and ended up dead, but the truth is that he was out acting suspicious, was in fact a thug, did in fact attack an armed man, was in fact high at the time, did in fact go all the way home and return to beat Zim up, was in exile from school for thug like activity, did in fact steal, did in fact use the lean concoction and was in fact responsible for his own death.

don't go around attacking people.  you might end up dead.
 
Displayed 474 of 474 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report