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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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...
frepnog: casing houses
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.ANDThat 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.
The more you eat the more you fart: That 28% of women vs 11% of men admitted to initiating domestic violence of ANY sort.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 29 2017 17:30:19
Runtime: 0.473 sec (473 ms)