The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[QuickHitCurepon]

It has occurred to me that GZ's actions that night will likely have a positive impact on future crimes considered by the weak who prey on law abiding citizens

The thug might stop to think- 'What if this guy or woman is armed?

Libs are onto something, maybe TM death will result in something positive

-Geaux

That worked well in the Old West, but at the cost of how many innocent lives?

Wow. You know even less about the Old West than you do about the Zimmerman case. That's fucking impressive. I didn't know knowledge on a subject could actually hit negative integers.

Vigilantism in the Old West was exactly what turned the tide against outlaws and outlaw gangs. I'm not saying it was all vigilantism, but much of it was, and a lot of innocent people were hanged without a trial, as one example.

Whatever you were thinking about, I have no idea. How old are you?

 

[Oldstyle]

Rachel Jenteal testified that after Trayvon ran that he was right outside the townhouse he was staying at. So why DIDN'T he simply walk inside? Why did he feel the need to walk back a hundred yards to confront George Zimmerman, who doesn't have a clue where Martin has gone to? Zimmerman is walking back to his SUV to meet the Police. This "conflict" is over. Or it would have been except one of the parties involved decided to turn it into a fight.

 

[Cecilie1200]

People on trial for deaths in similar manners are scrutinized at least 100 times greater than in the original death. I'm not suggesting anyone watch this movie to ascertain what I said, but I thought I'd post it anyway since it's very interesting.

The Staircase Murders (2007) - YouTube

I know you dipshits just LOVE posting Youtube videos with no commentary and just expecting everyone to ASSUME there's something meaningful and relevant there to make your point for you, but that doesn't work with me, because I don't watch other people's Youtube videos.

You're just going to have to use your words to explain what the hell you think the connection between the Staircase Murders and Zimmerman-Martin is. I shall wait with bated breath.

LOL Did you read what I wrote? I actually said not to watch it unless you find it interesting.

We were talking about a hypothetical so what connection to Zimmerman-Martin could there be?

Newbie, you should probably just save time asking me, "Did you read what I wrote?" when I say, "Try explaining what you mean, instead of hoping everyone will assume you said something", and operate on the premise that I read what you wrote, thought it was an empty, ignorant pile of shit, and am now calling you on that and requiring that you say something substantial.

Take notes, fucktard. I don't like repeating myself. Nor am I particularly interested in carrying on debates based on your meth-induced imaginings of "what might be", so you'd best have some real, solid reason for posting that Youtube video, and be presenting it posthaste (that means "fast", by the way).

 

[Oldstyle]

That worked well in the Old West, but at the cost of how many innocent lives?

Wow. You know even less about the Old West than you do about the Zimmerman case. That's fucking impressive. I didn't know knowledge on a subject could actually hit negative integers.

Vigilantism in the Old West was exactly what turned the tide against outlaws and outlaw gangs. I'm not saying it was all vigilantism, but much of it was, and a lot of innocent people were hanged without a trial, as one example.

Whatever you were thinking about, I have no idea. How old are you?

People in the Old West protected themselves in large part. They carried guns and knew how to use them. When an outlaw gang tried to commit a crime they might very well run into the same thing that the James-Younger gang encountered when they tried to rob a bank in Northfield, Mn. and got shot to ribbons. That's not vigilantism...it's citizens protecting their town from law breakers. A vigilante breaks the law. Someone like George Zimmerman or those townsfolk in Northfield were upholding the law.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

I know you dipshits just LOVE posting Youtube videos with no commentary and just expecting everyone to ASSUME there's something meaningful and relevant there to make your point for you, but that doesn't work with me, because I don't watch other people's Youtube videos.

You're just going to have to use your words to explain what the hell you think the connection between the Staircase Murders and Zimmerman-Martin is. I shall wait with bated breath.

LOL Did you read what I wrote? I actually said not to watch it unless you find it interesting.

We were talking about a hypothetical so what connection to Zimmerman-Martin could there be?

Newbie, you should probably just save time asking me, "Did you read what I wrote?" when I say, "Try explaining what you mean, instead of hoping everyone will assume you said something", and operate on the premise that I read what you wrote, thought it was an empty, ignorant pile of shit, and am now calling you on that and requiring that you say something substantial.

Take notes, fucktard. I don't like repeating myself. Nor am I particularly interested in carrying on debates based on your meth-induced imaginings of "what might be", so you'd best have some real, solid reason for posting that Youtube video, and be presenting it posthaste (that means "fast", by the way).

You're barking up the wrong tree, if you think I'm interested in petty arguments. The posts are there and clear as what was said.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Wow. You know even less about the Old West than you do about the Zimmerman case. That's fucking impressive. I didn't know knowledge on a subject could actually hit negative integers.

Vigilantism in the Old West was exactly what turned the tide against outlaws and outlaw gangs. I'm not saying it was all vigilantism, but much of it was, and a lot of innocent people were hanged without a trial, as one example.

Whatever you were thinking about, I have no idea. How old are you?

People in the Old West protected themselves in large part. They carried guns and knew how to use them. When an outlaw gang tried to commit a crime they might very well run into the same thing that the James-Younger gang encountered when they tried to rob a bank in Northfield, Mn. and got shot to ribbons. That's not vigilantism...it's citizens protecting their town from law breakers.

I didn't focus on individual events, and of course, using a firearm during the commission of a robbery is still accepted today.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That worked well in the Old West, but at the cost of how many innocent lives?

Wow. You know even less about the Old West than you do about the Zimmerman case. That's fucking impressive. I didn't know knowledge on a subject could actually hit negative integers.

Vigilantism in the Old West was exactly what turned the tide against outlaws and outlaw gangs. I'm not saying it was all vigilantism, but much of it was, and a lot of innocent people were hanged without a trial, as one example.

Whatever you were thinking about, I have no idea. How old are you?

Newbie, my age is none of your fucking business, nor is it relevant (that means "connected to the fucking topic"). "Whatever I was thinking about" was that I actually LIVE in the area that was the "old West", so I know a bit more about it than what you saw in the spaghetti Western movies.

Now, you and other lefty-leaners might want to define communities setting up rules and policing themselves as "vigilantism", but I see it as the quintessential definition of government. And it WAS the various community organizations set up by the inhabitants of the West that kept it peaceful.

In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.

In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

(from W. Eugene Hollon’s book “Frontier Violence: Another Look”)

"My colleague Terry Anderson and I have been studying the history of the West for nearly 30 years. We found that wherever "people on the ground" got together, they generally found ways to cooperate rather than fight.

* * *

There were, of course, a few exceptions to the story of harmonious relations. After the Civil War, the nation had a standing army that did not have much to do. Settlers were much more likely to call upon the cavalry to take land from the Indians than to engage in trade with the native tribes, as they had previously done.

There were fisticuffs in barroom brawls. When a large group of unattached males had time on their hands, violence could erupt.

* * *

Larry Schweikart, a historian at the University of Dayton, estimates that there were probably fewer than a dozen bank robberies in the entire period from 1859 through 1900 in all the frontier West. Schweikart summarizes: "The record is shockingly clear: There are more bank robberies in modern-day Dayton, Ohio, in a year than there were in the entire Old West in a decade, perhaps in the entire frontier period!"

(Peter J. Hill is co-author with Terry L. Anderson of "The Not So Wild, Wild West: Property Rights on the Frontier" (Stanford University Press, 2004).)

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0717hill0717.html

 

[Cecilie1200]

LOL Did you read what I wrote? I actually said not to watch it unless you find it interesting.

We were talking about a hypothetical so what connection to Zimmerman-Martin could there be?

Newbie, you should probably just save time asking me, "Did you read what I wrote?" when I say, "Try explaining what you mean, instead of hoping everyone will assume you said something", and operate on the premise that I read what you wrote, thought it was an empty, ignorant pile of shit, and am now calling you on that and requiring that you say something substantial.

Take notes, fucktard. I don't like repeating myself. Nor am I particularly interested in carrying on debates based on your meth-induced imaginings of "what might be", so you'd best have some real, solid reason for posting that Youtube video, and be presenting it posthaste (that means "fast", by the way).

You're barking up the wrong tree, if you think I'm interested in petty arguments. The posts are there and clear as what was said.

In other words, "Oh, shit, I said it because I thought you'd just accept it, and now that you're asking me to back it up, I'm running like a scalded bitch."

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

It is only one example of vigilantism in the Old West @4:30, but it's a start.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3mi8HN2L6w]Real Wild West - 2of4 - YouTube[/ame]

This is a series from the History Channel that I own on DVD. I recently watched the whole thing and is where a lot of what I was talking about came from.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Newbie, you should probably just save time asking me, "Did you read what I wrote?" when I say, "Try explaining what you mean, instead of hoping everyone will assume you said something", and operate on the premise that I read what you wrote, thought it was an empty, ignorant pile of shit, and am now calling you on that and requiring that you say something substantial.

Take notes, fucktard. I don't like repeating myself. Nor am I particularly interested in carrying on debates based on your meth-induced imaginings of "what might be", so you'd best have some real, solid reason for posting that Youtube video, and be presenting it posthaste (that means "fast", by the way).

You're barking up the wrong tree, if you think I'm interested in petty arguments. The posts are there and clear as what was said.

In other words, "Oh, shit, I said it because I thought you'd just accept it, and now that you're asking me to back it up, I'm running like a scalded bitch."

We were talking about if Zimmerman killed again. Would you like to talk about that and proceed anew? Otherwise GTFO.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Now, you and other lefty-leaners might want to define communities setting up rules and policing themselves as "vigilantism", but I see it as the quintessential definition of government. And it WAS the various community organizations set up by the inhabitants of the West that kept it peaceful.

Community organizations didn't guarantee the protections of the Bill of Rights or Constitution.

 

[koshergrl]

Try sticking to the topic, asswad, and don't presume to dictate the terms of engagement.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Try sticking to the topic, asswad, and don't presume to dictate the terms of engagement.

Vigilantism is part of the topic, and I the original question that started this was about Zimmerman. It is all entirely on topic. Read back to the beginning of the dialogue, you lazy fuck

Edit:

I did it for you.

The malicious attacks on Trayvon should stop. Nobody knows who attacked first.

Are you saying those scratches Zimmerman sustained did anything at all to him except require the changing of some band-aids?

It has occurred to me that GZ's actions that night will likely have a positive impact on future crimes considered by the weak who prey on law abiding citizens

The thug might stop to think- 'What if this guy or woman is armed?

Libs are onto something, maybe TM death will result in something positive

-Geaux

That worked well in the Old West, but at the cost of how many innocent lives?

 

[JohnL.Burke]

This is nothing more than a media invented story. The media invented that Zimmerman was white. The media invented that Tryavon Martin was thirteen (the pictures they showed). The hundred city protests sparked by sharpton had less people attend than MSNBC has viewers. As the knee jerk reactionary echos fade and the forced "conversations" on stand your ground laws (which had nothing to do with the Zimmerman case) become a dim memory and race baiting subsides as worries of a poor economy take hold, all I see are a few angry dudes saying some angry things as the rest of the country moves on. Thus is life.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

There is still a decent chance Zimmerman will be charged with civil rights violations, as long as they don't try to prove murder or manslaughter.

Leaving aside a repetition of "You lost, suck it up and take your lynch mob and noose home", which I already said, would you care to explain how you're planning to persecute - I mean, prosecute - Mr. Zimmerman for "civil rights violations" when the FBI has already said he's in the clear on that score? If the federal government does not wish to believe it's own Federal Bureau of Investigation on the subject of law enforcement, who do they wish to believe? You?!

No, the FBI said that they couldn't PROVE Zimmerman was racial profiling or saying the words, "fucking coons."

You stretched a stretch into a mile-long stretch there.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is only one example of vigilantism in the Old West @4:30, but it's a start.

Real Wild West - 2of4 - YouTube

This is a series from the History Channel that I own on DVD. I recently watched the whole thing and is where a lot of what I was talking about came from.

Ooh, look another "Here's a Youtube video, with no accompanying summation or commentary, just assume that it makes my point" post.

I'd neg rep you for being an obtuse dipshit, except I already did.

This post is now considered an admission that you have nothing to say, and nothing with which to back up the nothing you say.

NEXT!

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're barking up the wrong tree, if you think I'm interested in petty arguments. The posts are there and clear as what was said.

In other words, "Oh, shit, I said it because I thought you'd just accept it, and now that you're asking me to back it up, I'm running like a scalded bitch."

We were talking about if Zimmerman killed again. Would you like to talk about that and proceed anew? Otherwise GTFO.

No, fucknut, we weren't. I have been talking with OTHER people about George Zimmerman, and I have been talking TO you about the fact that Youtube videos without commentary are the exact same as posting a blank screen. YOU, on the other hand, have "talked" about nothing at all (see the aforementioned blank screen).

Would you like to START talking and proceed anew? Otherwise:

1) Grow a big enough pair of balls to MAKE me get the fuck out.

2) Grow a big enough pair of balls to actually USE the obscenity, rather than hinting at it, or admit you're a wuss and skip it altogether.

3) Run crying again with a lame attempt at "Your remarks are not worth commenting on" that no one whatsoever is buying.

You're on Strike Two here, newbie, and rapidly making a fool out of yourself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now, you and other lefty-leaners might want to define communities setting up rules and policing themselves as "vigilantism", but I see it as the quintessential definition of government. And it WAS the various community organizations set up by the inhabitants of the West that kept it peaceful.

Community organizations didn't guarantee the protections of the Bill of Rights or Constitution.

So beyond lame AND irrelevant that it's not worth anything else. Try again.

 

[paulitician]

This is nothing more than a media invented story. The media invented that Zimmerman was white. The media invented that Tryavon Martin was thirteen (the pictures they showed). The hundred city protests sparked by sharpton had less people attend than MSNBC has viewers. As the knee jerk reactionary echos fade and the forced "conversations" on stand your ground laws (which had nothing to do with the Zimmerman case) become a dim memory and race baiting subsides as worries of a poor economy take hold, all I see are a few angry dudes saying some angry things as the rest of the country moves on. Thus is life.

Sums it up perfectly. Thanks.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

In other words, "Oh, shit, I said it because I thought you'd just accept it, and now that you're asking me to back it up, I'm running like a scalded bitch."

We were talking about if Zimmerman killed again. Would you like to talk about that and proceed anew? Otherwise GTFO.

No, fucknut, we weren't. I have been talking with OTHER people about George Zimmerman, and I have been talking TO you about the fact that Youtube videos without commentary are the exact same as posting a blank screen. YOU, on the other hand, have "talked" about nothing at all (see the aforementioned blank screen).

Would you like to START talking and proceed anew? Otherwise:

1) Grow a big enough pair of balls to MAKE me get the fuck out.

2) Grow a big enough pair of balls to actually USE the obscenity, rather than hinting at it, or admit you're a wuss and skip it altogether.

3) Run crying again with a lame attempt at "Your remarks are not worth commenting on" that no one whatsoever is buying.

You're on Strike Two here, newbie, and rapidly making a fool out of yourself.

So you're going to continue a conversation that I say never happened. Even if I were wrong, that would be retarded.