Treyvon Martin issue is starting to irritate the hell out of me

pspr · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from Lucrum:

Why, you hungry?

BigArrow and his liberal friends are having a Clan meeting? Let's get some red spray paint and crash their party!!!

MarketMasher · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from Lucrum:

Again, you seem to be obsessed with largely irrelevant points.

I certainly don't know/recognize everyone in my neighborhood. But had I been doing a neighborhood watch I may very well have followed this kid the same as the shooter did. I have no particular problem with that. Now, if we were to learn later that the shooter initiated any confrontation, then I'd be a lot less harsh on the dead kid. Until then, the facts as they are know now, the kid assaulted the shooter. And got shot in the process. I'm OK with that.

I consider this one of the most level-headed comments posted.

gwb-trading · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from pspr:

There's no crime to walk down the street. There's no crime to follow someone. There's no crime to call 911 if you see someone you consider suspicious.

The crime happened when he attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman defended himself and shot him. The only crime was the assault on Zimmerman. End of story.

Most rational people think that it is more likely that Zimmerman aggressively approached the boy and attempted to tackle Trayvon after a verbal altercation. At this point Trayvon defended himself from Zimmerman's assault and gained the upper hand. This, of course, led to Zimmerman pulling out a gun and shooting Trayvon.

By the way there is no physcial evidence that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first, but plenty of supporting evidence that Zimmerman had the mindset where he was likely to assault another person -- including all of Zimmerman's previous arrests.

trefoil · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from MarketMasher:

I consider this one of the most level-headed comments posted.

Except for the very very simple fact the shooter had to exit his SUV in order for that confrontation to take place.
That alone means we know who started the confrontation, and who finished it. It ain't the one who ended up dead.

gwb-trading · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from 377OHMS:

Eyewitness says Martin ambushed Zimmerman who was walking back to his truck. Did you miss that or are you unable to read due to cranium extrajus rectum?

I'm calling Bullshit on this. Having heard all the 911 calls, there is NO eyewitness that claimed "Martin ambushed Zimmerman who was walking back to his truck". The one eyewitness claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman.

There was never a statement from anyone except for Zimmerman who claimed "Martin ambushed Zimmerman who was walking back to his truck".

Let me also state that based on the location that this shooting occurred at does not support the idea that Zimmerman was walking back to his truck, it only supports that Zimmerman pursued Martin.

bigarrow · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from Lucrum:

Why, you hungry?

I was when I posted but I had some Mexican food so I'm good now.
I know in the south pork is favorite but I like beef BBQ better.

pspr · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from gwb-trading:

Most rational people think that it is more likely that Zimmerman aggressively approached the boy and attempted to tackle Trayvon after a verbal altercation. At this point Trayvon defended himself from Zimmerman's assault and gained the upper hand. This, of course, led to Zimmerman pulling out a gun and shooting Trayvon.

By the way there is no physcial evidence that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first, but plenty of supporting evidence that Zimmerman had the mindset where he was likely to assault another person -- including all of Zimmerman's previous arrests.

The law doesn't work on what "most rational people think". It works on facts and what the evidence proves.

The witness saw Zimmerman being pummeled on the ground and then heard a shot. Zimmerman was all bloodied up and just defended himself.

The only facts say Zimmerman just defended himself. Unless and until another witness comes forward or somehow something else can show that Zimmerman started the physical altercation, it was a simple matter of self defense. Conjecture is not evidence. You've been watching too many TV law and detective shows.

This should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about the law.

Lucrum · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from bigarrow:

I was when I posted but I had some Mexican food so I'm good now.
I know in the south pork is favorite but I like beef BBQ better.

I like all three. Apparently I'm more into diversity that you are.

Lucrum · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from trefoil:

Except for the very very simple fact the shooter had to exit his SUV in order for that confrontation to take place.
That alone means we know who started the confrontation...

NO, it doesn't. It's merely an assumption you're all to willing to make. Because you're caught up in the emotion of a black kid being killed.

gwb-trading · Mar 24, 2012

Quote from pspr:

The law doesn't work on what "most rational people think". It works on facts and what the evidence proves.

The witness saw Zimmerman being pummeled on the ground and then heard a shot. Zimmerman was all bloodied up and just defended himself.

The only facts say Zimmerman just defended himself. Unless and until another witness comes forward or somehow something else can show that Zimmerman started the physical altercation, it was a simple matter of self defense. Conjecture is not evidence.

This should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about the law.

pspr - here is the plan. Lucrum can feel free to join us.

Step 1) Travel to Florida
Step 2) Get out of our vehicle and aggressively pursue the biggest black male we can find.
Step 3) Verbally confront and then start shoving the black guy.
Step 4) Black guy beats the heck out of us.
Step 5) Shoot the black guy dead.

Repeat until all the those darkie people who you dislike are no longer present in Florida.

I call it the Zimmerman plan