Home | Community | Message Board


Kratom Eye
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | Next > | Last >
InvisibleTherian
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/04/09
Posts: 684
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: psychotropicwhale]
    #15979163 - 03/22/12 12:08 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

But I genuinely don't believe if Martin was a white adult we'd be having this conversation...


Conversely,I believe if Zimmerman were to have been black we would not be having this conversation. The main issue here seems to be that a somewhat white man shot a black kid.

diploid could not be more correct. I enjoy how the media has already called this a racist attack, when obviously all the facts are not in. I too love the pictures that are shown when he was 10 years old, or how they seem to love to speak of how he had just purchased skittles, as if that is germane to the case at all.

From what I have heard concerning the phone call was that Zimmerman was approaching Martin, asking what he was doing. Martins girlfriend said that he pulled his hoodie over his head as if to disguise himself and began to run. Obviously, to a neighborhood watch member this would indicate some sort of guilt, therefore he chased after him, after this confrontation, the devil is in the details.

I don't know why Martin didn't just stop and say I'm going to my dads house and he lives right there. His parents of course proclaim that the only reason he was pursued was due to the fact that Zimmerman was white, not that he was attempting to conceal himself and run. They also state that Zimmerman should have just stayed in his car and left Martin alone. Well screw that. That is what is always expected. Just stay in your car, let someone vandalize property, or break into someones car, or commit a b&e. It's about time someone confronts someone to see what their intentions are, to ensure the safety of your neighbors, to not allow others to free range to do harm. If more people were like this many neighborhoods wouldn't be over run with crime. People are tired of just sitting in their proverbial cars and allowing others to victimize them.

I'm not saying the kid was going to commit any crime, just that it isn't a crime to attempt to ensure safety in ones own neighborhood. Its being portrayed as if citizens of a community have no right to police their own neighborhoods to prevent crime, as if they only have the right to be victimized.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 3 months, 19 days
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Therian] * 1
    #15979576 - 03/22/12 02:34 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Therian said:
I don't know why Martin didn't just stop and say I'm going to my dads house and he lives right there.




Probably because no one owes anyone an explanation as to what they are doing when they are simply walking down the street. The shooter wasn't a police officer, and neighborhood watch isn't synonymous with "follow people around and harass them". I don't know nearly enough to judge the particulars of what happened and if it was justified, but the idea of some douche bag coming up to you on the street and harassing you isn't justifiable in the slightest.
For all we know, when some creepy looking Hispanic guy comes up to you and starts asking questions about what you're doing, the pertinent thing to do would be to disguise yourself from him and take off running. :lol:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: fireworks_god]
    #15980023 - 03/22/12 06:55 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Should Zimmerman have been following Martin? I wouldn't, but so what? It's not illegal to be where Zimmerman was. It's not illegal for Zimmerman to ask Martin what he was doing. Neither was Martin doing anything illegal. But that's the point. There was some poor judgement going on, but nothing illegal until either Martin attacked Zimmerman or Zimmerman shot Martin unprovoked. And which of those happened has not yet been determined.




I'm not extremely familiar with Florida state law. But self-defense is a defense. What we know for sure is that Zimmerman shot Martin. We also know that Zimmerman voluntarily went from a state of no immanent danger, safely in his vehicle, to what he is claiming was an assault on him. He had a weapon on him. Maybe Martin saw the weapon, maybe he didn't. But by ignoring the 911 operator's instruction not to pursue Martin, he went off the reservation. When you voluntarily enter a state of presumed danger, self-defense is off the table. We can argue as to whether or not danger should have been presumed, but 911 dispatch certainly advised against it, and when one person leaves their vehicle at night to pursue someone on foot, any reasonable person would think it is the person on foot that should feel threatened, not Zimmerman.

The ONLY reason he hasn't been charged is because Florida's state law means that it is highly likely that whether or not Zimmerman walks will depend almost entirely on what they choose to charge him with... it's by no means that they're lacking evidence. They've got multiple dispatch phone records, and an eye-witness on the phone with dispatch in which you could actually hear the shot the killed Martin... when moments before said eyewitness stated man with white shirt(Zimmerman) was on top of someone before the shot was fired. But in a stand your ground state, they'd hate to get greedy with charging him with over-charging him and getting burned with acquittal.

The idea that this is self-defense is laughable unless you're using an extremely loose definition of self-defense... which who knows, maybe Florida judges do.

I think we'll be disappointed if we're waiting on too many facts to emerge. In this case there actually was at least one witness, and phone records that in no way help Zimmerman's case. But if I'm in Florida in a dark alley away from eyewitnesses I can just wait for someone to come along, shoot them, and I've eliminated the sole source of evidence against me. In principle, I agree with this law. But if they dismiss this, I may change my standing... b/c what occurred was textbook murder, regardless of whether or not Martin swung on Zimmerman... if some creepy fuck with a gun and no badge gets out of his truck while I'm by myself at night and starts grilling me because I look like I'm "up to no good" ... then I'm threatened.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980043 - 03/22/12 07:05 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

saintphotios said:
Quote:

Should Zimmerman have been following Martin? I wouldn't, but so what? It's not illegal to be where Zimmerman was. It's not illegal for Zimmerman to ask Martin what he was doing. Neither was Martin doing anything illegal. But that's the point. There was some poor judgement going on, but nothing illegal until either Martin attacked Zimmerman or Zimmerman shot Martin unprovoked. And which of those happened has not yet been determined.




I'm not extremely familiar with Florida state law. But self-defense is a defense. What we know for sure is that Zimmerman shot Martin. We also know that Zimmerman voluntarily went from a state of no immanent danger, safely in his vehicle, to what he is claiming was an assault on him. He had a weapon on him. Maybe Martin saw the weapon, maybe he didn't. But by ignoring the 911 operator's instruction not to pursue Martin, he went off the reservation. When you voluntarily enter a state of presumed danger, self-defense is off the table. We can argue as to whether or not danger should have been presumed, but 911 dispatch certainly advised against it, and when one person leaves their vehicle at night to pursue someone on foot, any reasonable person would think it is the person on foot that should feel threatened, not Zimmerman.

The ONLY reason he hasn't been charged is because Florida's state law means that it is highly likely that whether or not Zimmerman walks will depend almost entirely on what they choose to charge him with... it's by no means that they're lacking evidence. They've got multiple dispatch phone records, and an eye-witness on the phone with dispatch in which you could actually hear the shot the killed Martin... when moments before said eyewitness stated man with white shirt(Zimmerman) was on top of someone before the shot was fired. But in a stand your ground state, they'd hate to get greedy with charging him with over-charging him and getting burned with acquittal.

The idea that this is self-defense is laughable unless you're using an extremely loose definition of self-defense... which who knows, maybe Florida judges do.

I think we'll be disappointed if we're waiting on too many facts to emerge. In this case there actually was at least one witness, and phone records that in no way help Zimmerman's case. But if I'm in Florida in a dark alley away from eyewitnesses I can just wait for someone to come along, shoot them, and I've eliminated the sole source of evidence against me. In principle, I agree with this law. But if they dismiss this, I may change my standing... b/c what occurred was textbook murder, regardless of whether or not Martin swung on Zimmerman... if some creepy fuck with a gun and no badge gets out of his truck while I'm by myself at night and starts grilling me because I look like I'm "up to no good" ... then I'm threatened.



As with most things, the devil is in the details...This is going to boil down to the sequence of events just before the shooting.  In order to use self-defense, Zimmerman will have to show that Martin either attacked first or escalated a non-deadly combat into a deadly combat...The latter is awfully hard to prove because Martin was unarmed...If the former can be proven, then Zimmerman is still going to have to show that he reasonably feared that he was in mortal danger...another hard sell with an unarmed victim...

But this is nothing new...Self-defense claims almost always fail.  There's every indication that Zimmerman will be charged...whether it's murder or manslaughter will largely depend on the sequence of events here.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980164 - 03/22/12 08:07 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

When you voluntarily enter a state of presumed danger, self-defense is off the table.

I don't buy it. 911 instructions are not binding on a citizen legally present in a public place where he has a right to be. If I go downtown where a riot is currently taking place but where I have a right to peaceably stand (presumably a dangerous place) and someone comes at me with a knife, I have a right to self-defense. It doesn't matter that I went into a riot area. I have a right to enter a riot area if a feel like it. And I have a right to defend myself there if attacked.

I'm not saying that Martin attacked Zimmerman, but maybe he did. Maybe he got pissed that some self-important asshole (which I agree Zimmerman is) was asking him questions and Martin jumped Zimmerman. Or maybe Zimmerman is a trigger-happy idiot with a gun and murdered Martin. WE DON'T KNOW. And we may never know. In the absence of something to refute Zimmerman's claim that Martin jumped him, the law as-written favors Zimmerman.

And point of fact, Zimmerman probably did not bloody his own head and nose. Something/someone smacked him to make him bleed. The only plausible thing to do that is Martin.

I'm not defending either side. I'm just saying that we don't know and may never know. If we never know, Zimmerman wins on the word of the law. Tough cookies if Martin was actually murdered and Zimmerman gets away with it. The law goes wrong all the time and we have to accept that on the trade-off that it goes right MOST of the time.

In this case there actually was at least one witness, and phone records that in no way help Zimmerman's case

I don't read it that way. The phone conversation shows that Zimmerman was following Martin and asking him questions. That is not illegal. Then SOMETHING happened. If what happened is that Martin got pissed and jumped Zimmerman, then self-defense stands. It doesn't matter that Zimmerman was following Martin. They were both in a public place and both had a right to be there. The issue hinges on who (if anyone) attacked whom first.

I think we'll be disappointed if we're waiting on too many facts to emerge.

I agree. And if the facts currently available are all we're going to get, then Zimmerman wins on the law as written. He claims Martin attacked, and no one has refuted that. That he was following Martin is irrelevant. That is not illegal.

For the record, I picture Zimmerman came up behind Martin and maybe put his hand on Martin's shoulder to turn him around, and at that point, Martin took a swipe at Zimmerman who pulled the trigger. If that's how it went down, then Zimmerman is a murderer in my book. But belief is not proof under the law, and we have to accept that even though black people are outraged and white people are on a guilt-driven witch hunt.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Diploid]
    #15980197 - 03/22/12 08:22 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

How fucked up is this? Sanford, FL commissioners are calling for the police chief to be fired even before the investigation is complete. A bunch of emotional morons. No wonder our society has illegal plants.

--

The Sanford City Commission voted 3-2 that it had no confidence in Police Chief Bill Lee Jr. over his handling of the Trayvon Martin shooting Wednesday. Velma Williams, the city’s only black commissioner, said she spent 15 years trying to bring together the black community and white community, and the Martin episode has taken an emotional toll. "And now this. It’s a national embarrassment," she said.

Commissioners Patty Mahany and Randy Jones supported the police chief, who came on the job last May. "I would not want to see someone tried in the court of public opinion without all the facts," Jones said. Mayor Jeff Triplett sounded a similar theme, though he voted against Lee. "We only have a very small piece of the puzzle right now," he said.

Commissioners cannot fire Lee, as he reports to City Manager Norton Bonaparte Jr. Williams implied that if Bonaparte doesn't fire Lee, she would review his contract the next time it comes up for renewal. She nearly fainted after the vote because she became so emotional, and had to be treated by a paramedic.

The rest of the story is at MSNBC.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Diploid] * 1
    #15980227 - 03/22/12 08:35 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

911 instructions are not binding on a citizen legally present in a public place where he has a right to be. If I go downtown where a riot is currently taking place but where I have a right to peaceably stand (presumably a dangerous place) and someone comes at me with a knife, I have a right to self-defense. It doesn't matter that I went into a riot area. I have a right to enter a riot area if a feel like it. And I have a right to defend myself there if attacked.




I agree that they're not binding, and again, I'm not an expert on Florida law. But even Sen Peaden, the guy that wrote Florida stand your ground law said that ignoring 911 dispatch's instructions removes Zimmerman's self-defense protection. It doesn't have to be binding to make his self-defense claim invalid. He wasn't merely going into a dangerous area. He was pursuing the exact person he later claimed he was defending himself from. Again, self-defense is a defense. It's like using insanity as a defense. Once you plea insanity, the burden of proof shifts to the defense and it's no longer just about reasonable doubt. The prosecution doesn't have to prove that the defendant wasn't insane. The defense has to verify that insanity was the reason the crime was committed. Because the plea will presumably be self-defense, the burden of proof here is on the defense to show compelling evidence that Martin did pose a mortal threat, or that Zimmerman reasonably believed so. Because of the plea, lack of evidence doesn't necessarily help Zimmerman's case. Again, because Florida law may be different, I can't say this is definitely the case, but it usually is. And the Senator that wrote it seems to agree. If not, you could shoot anyone for any reason, and as long as there was no evidence that they weren't threatening, the law would come out on your side. I just have a hard time believing the Florida law was that poorly written.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980252 - 03/22/12 08:43 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

saintphotios said:
Quote:

911 instructions are not binding on a citizen legally present in a public place where he has a right to be. If I go downtown where a riot is currently taking place but where I have a right to peaceably stand (presumably a dangerous place) and someone comes at me with a knife, I have a right to self-defense. It doesn't matter that I went into a riot area. I have a right to enter a riot area if a feel like it. And I have a right to defend myself there if attacked.




I agree that they're not binding, and again, I'm not an expert on Florida law. But even Sen Peaden, the guy that wrote Florida stand your ground law said that ignoring 911 dispatch's instructions removes Zimmerman's self-defense protection. It doesn't have to be binding to make his self-defense claim invalid. He wasn't merely going into a dangerous area. He was pursuing the exact person he later claimed he was defending himself from. Again, self-defense is a defense. It's like using insanity as a defense. Once you plea insanity, the burden of proof shifts to the defense and it's no longer just about reasonable doubt. The prosecution doesn't have to prove that the defendant wasn't insane. The defense has to verify that insanity was the reason the crime was committed. Because the plea will presumably be self-defense, the burden of proof here is on the defense to show compelling evidence that Martin did pose a mortal threat, or that Zimmerman reasonably believed so. Because of the plea, lack of evidence doesn't necessarily help Zimmerman's case. Again, because Florida law may be different, I can't say this is definitely the case, but it usually is. And the Senator that wrote it seems to agree. If not, you could shoot anyone for any reason, and as long as there was no evidence that they weren't threatening, the law would come out on your side. I just have a hard time believing the Florida law was that poorly written.



There's no question that the burden will be on the defendant to prove that he reasonably feared for his life and acted with reasonable force.  That is not in dispute...But he has really good evidence to present...namely, eyewitness testimony.  The prosecution won't really have anyone to testify as to exactly what happened.  They can only chip away at his testimony by cross examining his story against itself and the other evidence.

The senator is completely mistaken in his statement that ignoring the warning from 911 negates the defense...That's simply someone trying to get his name in the paper on the "right" side of an issue.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980256 - 03/22/12 08:44 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

the Senator that wrote it seems to agree

Of course he'll say that even if he doesn't agree. To say otherwise is political suicide. :shrug:

If not, you could shoot anyone for any reason, and as long as there was no evidence that they weren't threatening, the law would come out on your side.

Well, that's one of the best critiques against the Stand Your Ground law, IMO.

I just have a hard time believing the Florida law was that poorly written.

As with any law, most of the time it works as intended. Case in point:

--

Sept. 17--POMPANO BEACH -- When an angry motorist came rushing up to the window of his pickup truck Wednesday, Cleveland Murdock had a gun and Florida law to back him.

The Broward Sheriff's Office said Thursday their case is closed in the road rage incident that left Patrick Lavoie, 33, dead in the middle of a residential street. Murdock acted in self-defense by shooting in the heart the man who approached him, investigators determined.

Witnesses told investigators Lavoie jumped out of the Honda Civic his girlfriend was driving, upset that Murdock seemed to be tailgating the couple. Lavoie angrily charged toward Murdock's Toyota Tacoma and tried to open the door to grab him, witnesses told police.

Murdock, 38, fatally shot the glass worker, who was holding only a cigarette lighter in his hand.

Investigators detained Murdock for hours, while they compared his story about fearing for his life to eyewitness accounts. Then they told him he was free to go.

Sheriff's Office officials say they plan to forward the case to Broward prosecutors for review. If homicide prosecutors examine the case and feel they should present it to a grand jury, they will do so, said Ron Ishoy, spokesman for the Broward State Attorney's Office.

Reached on his cell phone Thursday, Murdock, who lives in West Palm Beach, would say only that he had just left his doctor's office and he wasn't feeling well.

Lavoie's relatives, who live in Coconut Creek, declined to comment, saying they were too distraught.

That Murdock was allowed to go home after the fatal shooting left many who knew Lavoie dumbfounded.

"I don't understand how you can kill a person and nothing happens," said Vicky Richardson, a close friend and former neighbor who hung flowers on Thursday yards from where Lavoie was killed. "Not even a single day in jail."

According to legal experts, it appears Murdock had Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law on his side.

Sought by the National Rifle Association, the law allows a person to shoot to kill if he or she feels in danger of death or great bodily harm, regardless of location. At home, in a vehicle, or out on the street -- it doesn't matter.

Before the law was passed in 2005, Florida residents had the right only in their homes. Outside their castles, Floridians were required to retreat from an attack, if possible, before fighting back.

Noted defense attorney Mike Dutko, who is not involved in the Pompano Beach case, said it appears Murdock was in the clear after Lavoie reached into the truck.

"That alone was a game-changer," said Dutko. He equated reaching into the truck to first-degree burglary.

Prosecutors everywhere have rallied against the "Stand Your Ground" law, saying it might be misinterpreted by citizens who think they have the right to use deadly force, and that it could be manipulated by those with itchy trigger fingers.

William Cervone, president of Florida's Prosecuting Attorneys Association, said the law often leaves people settling cases on the streets instead of in a courtroom. Also, he said, it provides a shooter the opportunity to make up a story without the victim's side of what happened.

"In general, it has the potential of leaving victims and their survivors without their day in court," said Cervone. "The last person standing has the ability to say the magic words 'I was in fear' and walk away without a jury being able to decide."

Florida Sun Sentinel News


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Diploid]
    #15980296 - 03/22/12 08:58 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

But he has really good evidence to present...namely, eyewitness testimony.



What are you referring to? The only eyewitness testimony I've heard was two different women, both saying that they saw Zimmerman on top of Martin. If anything, eyewitness testimony will be the nail in Zimmerman's coffin.

Quote:

To say otherwise is political suicide.



He's no longer in politics. He was just in Congress when the law was passed. He hasn't been in office since 2010. Maybe he is just saying that because it's popular opinion. But that would be true regardless of who we asked. If there's anyone out there that should know the law, it's him. And I'm not aware of any political ramifications for him at this point.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980312 - 03/22/12 09:01 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

saintphotios said:
Quote:

But he has really good evidence to present...namely, eyewitness testimony.



What are you referring to? The only eyewitness testimony I've heard was two different women, both saying that they saw Zimmerman on top of Martin. If anything, eyewitness testimony will be the nail in Zimmerman's coffin.

Quote:

To say otherwise is political suicide.



He's no longer in politics. He was just in Congress when the law was passed. He hasn't been in office since 2010. Maybe he is just saying that because it's popular opinion. But that would be true regardless of who we asked. If there's anyone out there that should know the law, it's him. And I'm not aware of any political ramifications for him at this point.



Zimmerman was an eyewitness, and he is the only one who can testify to the whole thing...Unless he's a blind, deaf mute and I didn't hear about that part.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980418 - 03/22/12 09:29 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

He's no longer in politics. He was just in Congress when the law was passed

Well, it's becoming more and more clear that, guilty or not, Zimmerman is gonna hang. This isn't about the law any more. It's about emotional people looking for a witch to burn. Even the police chief is in hot water before the investigation has concluded.

Funny I didn't see black people this pissed off when OJ killed two white people in cold blood. They were cheering in the streets, as I recall.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Diploid]
    #15980428 - 03/22/12 09:31 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
Funny I didn't see black people this pissed off when OJ killed two white people in cold blood. They were cheering in the streets, as I recall.



Stretching the truth a bit here...no one cheered when they were killed...They cheered when he was acquitted...A verdict that many, many people agree with...myself included...


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,244
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Diploid]
    #15980582 - 03/22/12 10:10 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
WE DON'T KNOW. And we may never know.





Around here it's all too rare to see those words.

Kudos on a sensible position.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinesaintphotios
Stranger
Male


Registered: 02/23/12
Posts: 448
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #15980682 - 03/22/12 10:43 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Zimmerman was an eyewitness, and he is the only one who can testify to the whole thing...Unless he's a blind, deaf mute and I didn't hear about that part.



Ahhh... well yeah, but his testimony is a foregone conclusion. I'm talking about the two other women that aren't about to get arrested for manslaughter(one white/one hispanic if that matters) that heard a "young boy" screaming, heard a gunshot, then looked out the window to see Zimmerman on top of Martin. I'd say the jury will find that a bit more compelling than Zimmerman saying "Yo he came at me first."

Quote:

Well, it's becoming more and more clear that, guilty or not, Zimmerman is gonna hang. This isn't about the law any more. It's about emotional people looking for a witch to burn.



I don't completely disagree. But I'd have way more sympathy for Zimmerman if all of this wasn't directly caused by him being utterly incapable of minding his own fucking business and letting the cops(who already said they were on the way) do their job... namely, harassing unarmed black kids:rolleyes: Does he deserve to face murder charges because he wanted to play Billy Badass sidewalk avenger and couldn't back off and let the cops handle it like they told him to... no. He deserves to face murder charges because he did all that -- plus he shot an unarmed fucking kid. I have seen very few 17 year olds that, without a weapon, would pose a mortal threat to a guy the size of Zimmerman.

Quote:

They cheered when he was acquitted...A verdict that many, many people agree with...myself included...



:okthatsfunny:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: saintphotios]
    #15980725 - 03/22/12 10:54 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

saintphotios said:
Ahhh... well yeah, but his testimony is a foregone conclusion. I'm talking about the two other women that aren't about to get arrested for manslaughter(one white/one hispanic if that matters) that heard a "young boy" screaming, heard a gunshot, then looked out the window to see Zimmerman on top of Martin. I'd say the jury will find that a bit more compelling than Zimmerman saying "Yo he came at me first."




Whether the jury believes him or not is another issue...but self-defense cases almost always come down to whether or not the jury believes the defendant...This is nothing new.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblepsychotropicwhale
Cetacean


Registered: 02/17/12
Posts: 817
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Enlil]
    #15980746 - 03/22/12 10:59 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Stretching the truth a bit here...no one cheered when they were killed...They cheered when he was acquitted...




To me that's even more sick.  They were happy that he not only committed murder but also that he got away with it.  It makes me wonder how many people fantasize about the same thing.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: psychotropicwhale]
    #15980766 - 03/22/12 11:02 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

psychotropicwhale said:
Quote:

Enlil said:
Stretching the truth a bit here...no one cheered when they were killed...They cheered when he was acquitted...




To me that's even more sick.  They were happy that he not only committed murder but also that he got away with it.  It makes me wonder how many people fantasize about the same thing.



I think they were happy to see that someone actually got a fair verdict...I don't think they were even thinking about the actual crime...

I'm just guessing, of course...I wasn't in the street cheering...

Of course, this is getting a bit off topic.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineqman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 33,648
Last seen: 3 hours, 1 minute
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: Enlil]
    #15980774 - 03/22/12 11:04 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Quote:

Diploid said:
Funny I didn't see black people this pissed off when OJ killed two white people in cold blood. They were cheering in the streets, as I recall.



Stretching the truth a bit here...no one cheered when they were killed...They cheered when he was acquitted...A verdict that many, many people agree with...myself included...





Enlil, I like your posts and agree with many of the things you have said, I know you are a attorney as well, why did you agree with the OJ verdict?

I thought most of the jurors said that they knew he was guilty, but did not want to convict him because of unfair convictions against blacks in the past, am I missing something?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEnlilM
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 49,774
Re: trayvon martin shooting [Re: qman]
    #15980799 - 03/22/12 11:09 AM (8 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

qman said:
Enlil, I like your posts and agree with many of the things you have said, I know you are a attorney as well, why did you agree with the OJ verdict?




Not to derail anything, but it isn't a matter of thinking he didn't do it...The state totally failed to present anything close to a case...
I watched every second of testimony and read every word of the transcripts, and I can't see any way the jury could have found any differently.

The jurors basically said the same thing...the state didn't make a case...although most of them believed he did it.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | Next > | Last >

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Moore hits back
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Edame 4,672 62 10/02/03 07:29 AM
by Anonymous
* Gun violence in America, why?
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 4,014 49 08/25/03 10:45 PM
by Cornholio
* Academy Awards Anti-War Message from Michael Moore
( 1 2 3 all )
mjshroomer 2,863 57 03/24/03 12:59 PM
by mjshroomer
* What is wrong with Black America?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
RandalFlagg
12,596 148 12/29/03 11:19 AM
by Phred
* Letters from soldiers in Iraq, to M. Moore... RunDMT 529 1 10/05/04 01:36 PM
by RunDMT
* Who Rules America? Who Owns The Media? - The Facts usefulidiot 1,863 13 01/18/05 06:00 AM
by GazzBut
* 2nd amendment to justify shooting pigs?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
dee_N_ae 11,467 131 09/19/02 01:08 PM
by francisco
* 'Fahrenheit 9/11' a No. 1 Hit Across America fft2 784 13 06/29/04 12:22 AM
by Swami

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
99,618 topic views. 4 members, 2 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
North Spore
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2020 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.089 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 17 queries.