Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 16:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
Honestly how many follow up threads are there?
I remembered someone bringing up this story... I also remember the youtube "news" channel discussing it... Which is perhaps why I didnt put much credence in it (aside from the no prosecution thing.) The rest seemed full of "white guilt", and "not telling the whole story."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/justice-department-opens-inquiry-in-killing-of-trayvon-martin.html?_r=1
So there ya go actual details of "who done it", and why. Looks like Zimmerman followed the kid...First in an SUV, and then with his gun out, rather than waiting for the cops. He then claims the kid attacked him after the police arrived. (They told him to meet them somewhere/stay put)
If I was being followed at night by a guy in an SUV who then gets out with a handgun brandished, who doesn't identify themselves or their intentions... Well depending on my options I might try to fight as well.
I wouldn't call this 1st degree murder, (Was no planning or intent to kill initially) but 2nd could be argued if a fight did ensue (the victim would be justified to fight given the circumstances) but this seems more akin to negligent homicide.
Either way sad all around, and pretty disgusting that it wasn't even investigated or the shooter taken into custody in the first place. |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1127
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 17:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Neighborhood watch goon thought he was a cop. Even if he did believe he was acting in self defense, I don't think this guy should ever be allowed to touch a firearm again. He created that situation through his own actions. It was irresponsible and someone lost a son for his stupidity.
Quote:The shooting has also raised new questions about FloridaGÇÖs GÇ£Stand Your GroundGÇ¥ law, which was approved in 2005. The law does not require a person who is threatened to retreat in order to claim self-defense, and Mr. Zimmerman has claimed he fired his weapon while defending himself.
I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
138
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 17:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
I certainly hope they nail this guy to the wall. Following and chasing after a person while ignoring dispatcher commands is not self defense at all, it's looking for trouble. Everything that the article states he said and did point to somebody wanting to be the big shot hero of his neighborhood, but not an actual protector. |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 17:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
. |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 17:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Neighborhood watch goon thought he was a cop. Even if he did believe he was acting in self defense, I don't think this guy should ever be allowed to touch a firearm again. He created that situation through his own actions. It was irresponsible and someone lost a son for his stupidity. Quote:The shooting has also raised new questions about FloridaGÇÖs GÇ£Stand Your GroundGÇ¥ law, which was approved in 2005. The law does not require a person who is threatened to retreat in order to claim self-defense, and Mr. Zimmerman has claimed he fired his weapon while defending himself. I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd.
Self defense or use of deadly force is different in all the states. I believe in Massachusetts you have to have expended all options to flee your own home before authorization to use deadly force. Where as other places like Florida you dont need to first attempt to flee/get to safety. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
53
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 17:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd.
The point of those laws is that you can't just use lethal force as your first response if you have a legitimate way to escape the situation safely. For example, the morons in the other thread who claimed they would open the door and beat the guy threatening them would be facing criminal charges, since they had the alternative option of simply keeping the door closed and waiting for the police to arrive.
|
VKhaun Vex
Viziam Amarr Empire
314
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 18:18:00 -
[7] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd. The point of those laws is that you can't just use lethal force as your first response if you have a legitimate way to escape the situation safely. For example, the morons in the other thread who claimed they would open the door and beat the guy threatening them would be facing criminal charges, since they had the alternative option of simply keeping the door closed and waiting for the police to arrive.
Agree with this.
It's a murky case that can be argued in a lot of directions, but at the end of the day the best case scenario for Zimmerman is that he still could have sat in his SUV taking notes/pictures, or followed at a great distance if the guy got too far from the road. Even if the guy had been a robber, killer, rapist, kidnapper, whatever, he was alone in the open. There was no reason to rush and intervene with cops on the way.
I would call it Murder 100% now that I've had time to think about it.
Why? In my mind I can't figure a way for the boy to have started the fight. This guy is chasing him while he's on foot, riding in an SUV, and the boy is walking around with candy...
If the guy started the fight, then shot him when losing, then called it 'self defense' that's bullshit. It would be like inviting someone into your home to kill them and saying they broke in. I don't care if he didn't 'intend' to kill the boy, he chased him down and created a situation where he had to defend himself, then killed him! That's murder. Even if not premeditated, they have classifications for it. Murder 2, Murder 3, Murder 9, whatever.
It's not manslaughter because shooting him was intentional use of potentially lethal force, it's not negligent homicide because he had left behind his duties when he ignored police telling him to stay put, IMHO it is murder. *Charges Twilight fans with Ka-bar* -Surfin's PlunderBunny LIIIIIIIIIIINNEEEEE PIIIEEEECCCCEEE!!!!!!! -Taedrin Using relativity to irrational numbers is smart -rodyas I no longer believe we landed on the moon. -Atticus Fynch
|
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 18:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
Murder always == intent to kill, or murder 2 were you had to have known your actions would/could result in a death. Which is what it sounds akin to. Reason for the difference is because frame of mind are startlingly different...Mostly due to premeditation v. being ********, and what did you think was going to happen?
The reason for the differentiation goes down to punishment if convicted the results may be the same, but should societies revenge a.k.a prison time be the same even though one meant to and one did not? From that is the person remorseful or not? True murder sentences also carry the weight of the death penalty as well.
Negligent homicide and manslaughter are the same thing... |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
1135
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 19:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kattshiro wrote:Self defense or use of deadly force is different in all the states. I believe in Massachusetts you have to have expended all options to flee your own home before authorization to use deadly force. Where as other places like Florida you dont need to first attempt to flee/get to safety.
Because leaving my house is...safe.
Dude kicks my door in and I'm prepared for it, I'm not going to run out the back door and risk bumping into his accomplice.
Merin Ryskin wrote:The point of those laws is that you can't just use lethal force as your first response if you have a legitimate way to escape the situation safely. For example, the morons in the other thread who claimed they would open the door and beat the guy threatening them would be facing criminal charges, since they had the alternative option of simply keeping the door closed and waiting for the police to arrive.
There's a big difference between opening the door and delivering a beating, and delivering a beating after the door was opened by the attacker. It's time to put an end to CCP's war on piracy. Fight your own battles and stop asking CCP to do it for you. |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 19:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
^
Dont ask me I didn't make the law. Personally if anyone breaks in they didn't have your safety in mind...or theirs in the first place. They have have committed a crime knowingly. Now having said that should you shoot someone attempting to flee or say some dumb kid looking for a few bucks if you get the jump on them? Perhaps a little "unsporting" All situation dependent IMO.
|
|
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
138
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 19:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote: Because leaving my house is...safe.
Dude kicks my door in and I'm prepared for it, I'm not going to run out the back door and risk bumping into his accomplice.
Not every home is an armory. Not every home is a tube with 2 open ends. Not every tenant is a seasoned combatant. And not every break in is done by duo criminal masterminds.
Imagine a situation where the victim is a 16 yo girl, your typical loves pink and is afraid of bugs kind, is home alone for the weekend. Around midnight she hears the front door being kicked in while she is up in her bedroom on the second floor. Her neighbors lights are on hopefully signalling that somebody is awake.
Would you prefer she grab her teddy bear and lead the charge or climb out the window, jump down, and run for the neighbors?
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1334
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 21:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
I knew there was going to be a big push behind this.
Ok the "Stand your ground" law passed in Florida a few years ago came from an incident in 2004 when an old geezer, unable to escape from an intruder as was previously required (called "duty to retreat") ended up having to shoot. Do you expect an old man to do a cartwheel out of his bedroom window?
When the new law was passed, the usual moneyed disarmament interests made huge ads in newspapers stating that it's going to become a free fire zone.
They were wrong because the law clearly states the conditions involved. Basically it means there is no "duty to retreat" if you are threatened, but it was not meant to construe that you can just shoot people. In other words, there was protection for self-defense cases against overzealous prosecutors following the "all guns are bad and anybody who has them should not have them" mentality.
But it was clear from the start, if you escalate a situation, you would still be in trouble.
So, why the heck is this Zimmerman character not charged?
Because the politicized police do not like the law either. And by not charging Zimmerman, who clearly escalated the matter and put himself into a position where he ended up shooting somebody, it is making people angry.
And as we learned from what Kony 2012 attempted to do, angry people do not think.
So, what about all those innocent-looking black kids out there who get gunned down by real cops? Where are the marches? Where are the protests? Where are the calls to change the laws regarding police engagement tactics? Where are the questions around how the police are trained?
Nope. Nothing.
So now I get to watch the usual people suffering from vaginosis, as usual, go knee-jerk, being played like fiddles.
And we will be back to what? What a certain kind of people want, those politicking police chiefs, the victim-disarmament crowd, and the usual suspects who seek to replace social power with state power at every step (because to them, they are the state). So when someone pinned in their bedroom by some creep ends up having to shoot, some former community activist in the 60s type turned District Attorney can still charge the would-be victim and the latte-slurpers in the gated and guarded communities can feel good about themselves.
Florida is unique in that finances - being able to afford an expensive house far away from the cheap houses - is not common. Town are build in such a manner that you leave your expensive mansion and go a mile and at the stoplight the guy on the left is probably an ex-con, the guy on the right probably has warrants out on him. It's not like, say, Long Island New York where you have to pay half a million for a small house with $8K a year in property taxes just to "get away from those people". (the biggest racists are in those places where they pretend not to be racists). On those places, it would be a cop who stops the black kid and escalates the sitaution to the point of shooting him - because on "those places" (aka "Whitelandia" as Ron Kooby used to call it ) there are no black kids.
Yet those monied disarmament interests don't care so much about it, being socialists, and cops being tools of the state.
If they get their way, it will be back to the "Three S's": Shoot. Shovel. Shut up. It's possible still to totally kill somebody you have no connection to and bury them in the swamps (or feed them to the gators) and if you don't say a damned word about it to anybody you will still get away with it. So if having to defend yourself means you go to jail anyway, then it's 3S time because people will still do whatever they want and need to do. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1334
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 21:30:00 -
[13] - Quote
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:Neighborhood watch goon thought he was a cop. Even if he did believe he was acting in self defense, I don't think this guy should ever be allowed to touch a firearm again. He created that situation through his own actions. It was irresponsible and someone lost a son for his stupidity. Quote:The shooting has also raised new questions about FloridaGÇÖs GÇ£Stand Your GroundGÇ¥ law, which was approved in 2005. The law does not require a person who is threatened to retreat in order to claim self-defense, and Mr. Zimmerman has claimed he fired his weapon while defending himself. I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd.
Before "Stand your ground", there was a duty to retreat meaning that if you could run away, you had to. So if someone who could outrun you was shot, because you chose to shoot, then a zealous DA or county prosecutor with an agenda can still charge you with murder or manslaughter.
And the typical jury, watching crime shows on TV based out of New York and other such places, are thinking in the same lines that only criminals have guns. So for defending yourself, you can get more screwed then if you let the thug beat you to death.
One of the reasons why I took up blade tech stuff and teach basic Sayoc Kali to anybody who has the time is because an Emerson Kerambit at point blank range is nastier than a pistol. And silent too. You can be shot in the gut with a 9mm or have your midsection completely opened up by a J-cut and your guts spill out. What would you choose?
But over the years, I have trained hundreds of people in defensive pistol (more dramatically called "tactical defense" or whatever other crap macho label you can call it) and it's quite commonly known that the average engagement range, at the maximum, where there is violence intended, is 7 yards. I did tests myself with rubber knives and inert guns: a person with a knife or club can close that 7 yard distance faster than it takes to draw from a hip holster (the police train around this fact, by the way). It's roughly 1.5 seconds. Now imagine a concealed carry holster - around half a second longer AT BEST. So when the guy with the knife or tire iron tells you he's going to get you from across the street, you have to choose between gun or run.
So yes, in most parts of America, you are told how you can defend yourself, by people who have their own bodyguards, voted in by people who think "it can never happen to me", or can afford to live in safe gated and guarded communities. Somebody who was not there will charge you later and 12 more people who were not there AND too stupid to get out of jury duty will decide if you go to prison or not.
3S. Shoot. Shovel. Shut up. And let the family of the thugs spend the rest of their lives wondering. Sorry it has to be that way but bad laws cause more problems.
It's best to leave people alone and judge every case individually. but in my country at least I have not seen that possible in my lifetime.
And these are my two bunkerposts of the day...
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1339
|
Posted - 2012.03.21 19:01:00 -
[14] - Quote
As I said:
As outrage over the incident coalesces, a grand jury has been called to investigate the shooting and the FBI has announced that it will GÇ£monitorGÇ¥ the inquiry. MartinGÇÖs family has suggested that racial bigotry underlies both ZimmermanGÇÖs actions and the refusal by police to charge him. ABC News reports that GÇ£The Sanford Police Department says it stands by its investigation, and that it was not race or incompetence that prevented it from arresting Zimmerman but the law.GÇ¥ The civilian disarmament lobby loudly opposes GÇ£stand your groundGÇ¥ and GÇ£castle doctrineGÇ¥ laws recognizing the individual right to armed self-defense. In recent months, police unions have lobbied against GÇ£castle doctrineGÇ¥ laws in Minnesota and Indiana that explicitly recognize the natural right of citizens to use lethal force against police officers who unlawfully invade their property or threaten their lives.
Again:
In recent months, police unions have lobbied against GÇ£castle doctrineGÇ¥ laws in Minnesota and Indiana that explicitly recognize the natural right of citizens to use lethal force against police officers who unlawfully invade their property or threaten their lives.
So OF COURSE the police are not going to charge the moron.
Make the law look bad, people will vote against it - it's "weaponized democracy" and the new weapon of 5th Generation Warfare.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
54
|
Posted - 2012.03.21 19:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ok, so we have two possible explanations:
1) The police deliberately refuse to charge him to encourage public outrage about the "castle doctrine" laws, even though it's pretty clear that Zimmerman aggressively pursued his victim and provoked the confrontation, therefore forfeiting any protection from those laws. Because they are psychic, they were also able to know that the public outrage would be about the precise technicality on which they refused to arrest him, not about the fact that an innocent man was shot by a paranoid vigilante and the police did nothing. Because of this psychic ability, they were not at all afraid that the result would be a massive backlash against police in general, and their department specifically.
or
2) A black guy is shot by a "respected member of the community" who then claims it was self defense. Whether out of open racism or simply blind acceptance of a story that fits into common stereotypes, the police give the shooter the benefit of the doubt and decline to arrest him over a "clear case of self defense". After finding an acceptable explanation, they consider the case closed and don't care enough (whether out of apathy or racism) to investigate any deeper into the incident. When the story, unlike most cases of innocent people being shot for no good reason, gains national attention, the police department is even more motivated to refuse to consider alternatives, since now they have to think of the embarrassment of being so completely wrong in their initial actions.
One of these is a reasonable explanation that fits both the facts and known trends in human behavior, the other is paranoid tinfoil hat bull****. I'll leave you to figure out which is which. |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2012.03.21 20:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
What's option C? |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
143
|
Posted - 2012.03.21 21:09:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kattshiro wrote:What's option C?
The neighborhood vigilante meets another vigilante and pvp ensues. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
54
|
Posted - 2012.03.21 21:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
Micheal Dietrich wrote:Kattshiro wrote:What's option C? The neighborhood vigilante meets another vigilante and pvp ensues.
I was going to go with "Zimmerman was a mind-controlled agent of the Illuminati, and he was framed for the crime to prevent him from going public with the secret {WWII-era German political party} moon base and preventing Obama (a socialist Muslim and high-level agent of Xenu) from winning re-election over Ron Paul, the one true champion of the people (and the gold standard)."
But I suppose yours is a decent explanation too. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1341
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 00:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Micheal Dietrich wrote:Kattshiro wrote:What's option C? The neighborhood vigilante meets another vigilante and pvp ensues. I was going to go with "Zimmerman was a mind-controlled agent of the Illuminati, and he was framed for the crime to prevent him from going public with the secret {WWII-era German political party} moon base and preventing Obama (a socialist Muslim and high-level agent of Xenu) from winning re-election over Ron Paul, the one true champion of the people (and the gold standard)." But I suppose yours is a decent explanation too.
Wow that's exactly what I was thinking. |
NeoShocker
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
116
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 08:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
Heh, did read several articles on it, still pretty iffy on this and awaiting results from the investigation. Makes me wonder if the situation would've been different if Zimmerman didn't call 911 first.
But I must stress, even if I had a gun, it shouldn't be that difficult to shoot on the arms or legs to disable any individual. It is quite terrible it happen. :( |
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1343
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 15:14:00 -
[21] - Quote
NeoShocker wrote:Heh, did read several articles on it, still pretty iffy on this and awaiting results from the investigation. Makes me wonder if the situation would've been different if Zimmerman didn't call 911 first.
But I must stress, even if I had a gun, it shouldn't be that difficult to shoot on the arms or legs to disable any individual. It is quite terrible it happen. :(
Just about every gun accident I hear about, being an instructor and all that. There was a retired cop once, Florida I think, who accidentally shot himself in the inner thigh - right through the femoral. He bled out in less than 2 minutes.
Here is an very interesting Yahoo article - interesting in that in a world where the police can pretty much do what they want, suddenly they can't arrest somebody. This is a load of BS. This is a psyop to kill the Castle Doctrine, hated by both the police and the media.
The article also has a very interesting "designation" they give to Zimmerman. Can any of you catch it? Here's a hint: the media would have really LOVED this case if Zimmerman was white. It would have been perfect for their agenda. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
55
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 16:41:00 -
[22] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:This is a psyop to kill the Castle Doctrine, hated by both the police and the media.
I notice that you ignored the part where I pointed out how stupid this idea is. Let me repeat it for you:
No sane person would assume that the public outrage would be over the specific technicality on which they refused to arrest him, instead of massive outrage against the police in general for letting him get away with murder.
Anyone who doesn't look at the case in detail sees it as "police do nothing while a man gets away with murder" and hate the police.
People who read more carefully see something about "castle doctrine" and wonder if maybe that needs to be changed.
However, anyone who spends a few more minutes thinking about it realizes that the "castle doctrine" does not apply here and their outrage goes right back to the police.
So, for your bull**** "psyop" theory to work, the police would have to gladly accept outrage against police in general from 99% of the people who hear about the incident in exchange for getting 1% of the people who hear about it outraged about "castle doctrine" laws. How the **** does this make even the slightest bit of sense to anyone who isn't wearing a tinfoil hat? |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 17:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
The issue with most conspiracies that I see is that they take a significant amount of coordination, and intelligence to pull off. (Which look how things run by governments get handled...Can't balance a budget, but you can successfully pull off a fake moon landing with no one squealing?)
Also a fair amount of people caring in the first place, which i'd have to say more things happen due to apathy or laziness. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1343
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 18:16:00 -
[24] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:This is a psyop to kill the Castle Doctrine, hated by both the police and the media. I notice that you ignored the part where I pointed out how stupid this idea is. Let me repeat it for you: No sane person would assume that the public outrage would be over the specific technicality on which they refused to arrest him, instead of massive outrage against the police in general for letting him get away with murder.Anyone who doesn't look at the case in detail sees it as "police do nothing while a man gets away with murder" and hate the police. People who read more carefully see something about "castle doctrine" and wonder if maybe that needs to be changed. However, anyone who spends a few more minutes thinking about it realizes that the "castle doctrine" does not apply here and their outrage goes right back to the police. So, for your bull**** "psyop" theory to work, the police would have to gladly accept outrage against police in general from 99% of the people who hear about the incident in exchange for getting 1% of the people who hear about it outraged about "castle doctrine" laws. How the **** does this make even the slightest bit of sense to anyone who isn't wearing a tinfoil hat?
Obviously you have not dealt with people in government and the media.
I have.
I too used to think a lot of what gets assumed or said was "tinfoil hattery" (and that's what I called it).
But for the last 15 years, involved in lawsuits, FOIA requests, delegate selections in election years (and the lawsuits dealing with vote fraud), along with gun cases, property cases - one of which involved cops - and I almost had a standoff with a SWAT Team back in in '02. I have friends who were threatened and a a couple die from strange circumstances.
You can think everything is a conspiracy, like I did, until you try to actually stand up for your rights and the rights of others, train people in the use of weapons, own a farm or a business, and challenge the establishment. Then you will witness firsthand that a lot of what people like yourself call conspiracy is real. It's not invisible-spaceship full of reptoid real (that's just a straw man made for ridicule), but it's a very dry and administrative reality, a paragraph in a legal document on page 50 of 500, an admission from an agent or detective in the parking lot of the courthouse, blacked out spots on maps, etc.
I wish you were right. But you are not.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
55
|
Posted - 2012.03.22 18:40:00 -
[25] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Obviously you have not dealt with people in government and the media.
No, but I have dealt with people in general, and your theories keep running into one very, very simple problem:
The actions of the people in the supposed "conspiracy" are not the actions of a rational organization with the agenda that you claim it has.
If your proposed conspiracy, like in this case, requires that the people involved act in ways that are at best completely irrational, and at worst directly opposed to their supposed goals, it is tinfoil hat nonsense.
Quote:train people in the use of weapons
Ah yes, the favorite hobby of the paranoid and delusional.
PS: unless you're training people in the use of weapons like predator drones or artillery or stealth bombers your "training" is nothing more than LARPing. No matter how much you try to be serious about it, you're still just throwing foam balls and yelling "MAGIC MISSILE!!!!". |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics Bringers of Death.
642
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 01:42:00 -
[26] - Quote
You already see the usual suspects - bed wetting socialists, whimpering gun grabbers, community agitators, professional blacks - trying to use this to push for the repeal of the Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws. Thankfully it won't be successful, and those laws had nothing to do with Zimmerman's actions, but it does go to show you how shameless the opponents of laws that protect people in instances of actual self defense really are.
I'm also not going to jump to condemn Zimmerman. I believe nothing shake down scam artists and liars like Jesse Jackson, the agitator-in-chief say, and their complicit media cohorts say. Is it possible this kid was wrongly killed? Absolutely. Is it possible he dressed like a thug, acted like a thug, got up in this man's face and died like a thug? Absolutely. If you don't want people to think you're thugs, stop glorifying thug life.
I do know cops don't just let you walk away once you've shot someone unless they have awfully compelling evidence that you were engaged in an act of self defense.
Of course, we'll only hear what really happened a couple weeks from now after the media's moved on to something else and Jesse Jackson can't find any more cameras in Florida to get in front of. |
Jett0
Team Kitty Choke Slam
78
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 02:06:00 -
[27] - Quote
This story is really sad.
I try not to jump to conclusions, but Zimmerman's "they always get away" comment before the actual incident is pretty damning. Not to mention that a man with a firearm has plenty of options when faced with a 17-year-old armed with Skittles and iced tea.
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:The article also has a very interesting "designation" they give to Zimmerman. Can any of you catch it? Here's a hint: the media would have really LOVED this case if Zimmerman was white. It would have been perfect for their agenda.
I noticed that too. Nearly every article I've read throws in "hispanic" as though implying it's a significant variable. |
SpaceSquirrels
275
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 03:10:00 -
[28] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:You already see the usual suspects - bed wetting socialists, whimpering gun grabbers, community agitators, professional blacks - trying to use this to push for the repeal of the Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws. Thankfully it won't be successful, and those laws had nothing to do with Zimmerman's actions, but it does go to show you how shameless the opponents of laws that protect people in instances of actual self defense really are.
I'm also not going to jump to condemn Zimmerman. I believe nothing shake down scam artists and liars like Jesse Jackson, the agitator-in-chief say, and their complicit media cohorts say. Is it possible this kid was wrongly killed? Absolutely. Is it possible he dressed like a thug, acted like a thug, got up in this man's face and died like a thug? Absolutely. If you don't want people to think you're thugs, stop glorifying thug life.
I do know cops don't just let you walk away once you've shot someone unless they have awfully compelling evidence that you were engaged in an act of self defense.
Of course, we'll only hear what really happened a couple weeks from now after the media's moved on to something else and Jesse Jackson can't find any more cameras in Florida to get in front of.
Lol did you read the article? Also a link to a phone conversation he had moments before he got shot. He was talking to some girl... Literally Zimmerman was following him around..first in an SUV then he got out. As for the thug thing. Kid was in a sweat shirt with it up because it was raining. I dunno about you, but I own a black sweatshirt as well... And im pretty ******* far from thug as you can get. (Eve one actually)
I'm not sure how talking to a 16 year old girl walking home with candy in your pocket is thug... But if someone was following me in an SUV... Then gets out with a gun in their hand and doesn't state their purpose. I figure at that point you or me. In which case being in that kids shoes if he did attack he was justified in doing so. Lets ask the gun nuts what they would have done if a guy was following him with a loaded 9mm?
Seriously all Zimmerman had to do was ask the kid. "Excuse me can I help you? You look lost."
But yes when this story was first released without accreditation and race was allover it...and the name zimmerman people made it seem like a white v. black thing. Once they found out he was cuban it lost it's luster.
|
Selinate
688
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 03:13:00 -
[29] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:This story is really sad. I try not to jump to conclusions, but Zimmerman's "they always get away" comment before the actual incident is pretty damning. Not to mention that a man with a firearm has plenty of options when faced with a 17-year-old armed with Skittles and iced tea. Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:The article also has a very interesting "designation" they give to Zimmerman. Can any of you catch it? Here's a hint: the media would have really LOVED this case if Zimmerman was white. It would have been perfect for their agenda. I noticed that too. Nearly every article I've read throws in "hispanic" as though implying it's a significant variable.
Well yeah, in order for something to be considered racist, usually the two parties must first be of different races, unless one of the guys has a REALLY weird inferiority complex.... |
Jett0
Team Kitty Choke Slam
82
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 04:44:00 -
[30] - Quote
Haha Jewish *****...
The part I'm drawing attention to is the "hispanic" portion, as though his violence is somehow related to that.
EDIT: Wow, N azis is filtered? It's not a dirty word, CCP Forum Filter Dude. Occasionally plays sober. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |