Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Monday can't get here too soon
IOU + rep when I can.
See agree with her, she provides a reach around. Disagree with her and she brings down her "rep" authority down on your ass. ROFL I bet she'd love it if negs sent electric shocks through the interweb
Cool!!! I think I could design the physical system. Any software designers here?
There we go... take my authority or leave.. ROFL Authoritarians never disappoint.IOU + rep when I can.
See agree with her, she provides a reach around. Disagree with her and she brings down her "rep" authority down on your ass. ROFL I bet she'd love it if negs sent electric shocks through the interweb
I give rep. I get rep. If you don't have the stomach for an internet discussion forum you are free to find other digs.
You get in touch with Cory yet and set her straight on that stalking deal?
Are you a nurse and a lawyer?
Good point.. the all female jury does sort of meet up with the requirement to find Zimmerman's peers.It is a jury of his peers, not Trayvon's peers.
Misogynist too, huh?
I did not become 'a nurse instead.' I was already a board certified NP when I enrolled in law school. I never intended to practice law. A person who only teaches law is not required to hold a license. I got the degree to be better in my field, and to be able to start my own business upon retirement. Fact is, my business has been started for some time now. And FYI a lot of nurses get doctorates, and a lot of us get JDs. We even get paid in our clinical practice for having it because it is a doctorate in a related field. We also have a professional organization known as The American Association of Nurse Attorneys.
As to the wiki and sites from which I post, well you can just suck that one up. I am under no obligation to pay for a service like WestLaw or Lexus/Nexus to post cases on a message board even though I can get free access to both of those through other services available to me through my schools, and through various court websites. But the thing you fail to recognize is that I know which cases to look for, obscure cases, obscure laws, etc. A person who does not have command of the law cannot hone in on those things because they don't have the knowledge of what to look for. So you can suck it up. And am still a board certified nurse practitioner, and I can legally teach the law if I so choose.
You are very young. You would do well to spend your time in pursuit of formal education. I can assure you your life will improve if you do.
Or maybe you just took a couple of criminal justice classes...none of us will ever know or care. You're just another online braggart to me who calls people they dont know faggot. You should have taken some maturity classes.
Im not as young as you think and have a degree. I just dont feel the need to boast of my degrees, certifications, sports trophies and employment as you do. Especially not to an internet message board. You have a need to post your resume every time you think your words or claims will give you some credibility or an edge in your argument.
LMAO. I haven't had any trouble convincing those who have JDs and those who are attorneys because we all know the sweat and toil that goes into it. Clearly you have no clue what it takes to get a JD. I can tell you, and so will they you will read more in your first year of law school than you read in your entire undergraduate career. I didn't even go full time and it was 2,000 pages a week. Every week.
And you have to suck up the faggot thing too. You called me a bigot, and my response was going to rhyme. Get over it. That's how forums work.
And yes, when I can produce the case laws and statutes and you cannot, I do have more credibility and an edge over you.
Why don't you? Do you assume that because his story indicates self defense he has to be lying?
Not automatically, but I see that he has a vested interest in lying; in claiming the attack was more brutal and unprovoked than it was.
My position is not that enigmatic. He sought out a confrontation. I don't think he set out to kill or even hurt someone, but that's what happened. It stemmed from a God complex, from a guy who thought he was Wyatt Earp because he had a gun. He acted recklessly, confronted someone who was doing nothing wrong and who didn't want to be confronted, and got his ass whooped.
Had he not had a gun, the story probably would have ended there. He's all healed up now and he'd be getting on with his life, probably with the wisdom not to fuck with someone just because you don't like the way they look (meaning that he "looked suspicious," not black).
I think that Martin threw the first shot, but I think he did so because he feared he was about to be attacked. I don't think that was irrational on his part. A stranger is following you and now you ask him what the deal is and he reaches into his pocket. If this happens to me and I'm unarmed, I'm thinking this might be my only shot (like I said earlier).
The fact that he was losing a fight is not relevant. Who is ultimately responsible for that fight, is.
So you discount any altruistic motive Zimmerman may have had and assume the unpaid NW volunteer set out to kill instead of protect the property of his neighbors?
OK. Bias acknowledged.
IOU + rep when I can.
See agree with her, she provides a reach around. Disagree with her and she brings down her "rep" authority down on your ass. ROFL I bet she'd love it if negs sent electric shocks through the interweb
Cool!!! I think I could design the physical system. Any software designers here?
All you left wing racist asshats are ignoring an important pice of the testimony. That TM actuall got home and could have been in the house and safe, but instead he chose to go back and confront GZ.
That clearly puts TM in the wrong.
Fact.
[MENTION=22602]Cuyo[/MENTION].
Trayvon confronted Zimmerman. DD, the prosecutions "star" witness testified to that.
That "God Complex" and "Wyatt Earp Syndrome" is a product of your bias...not any facts in evidence.
Good point.. the all female jury does sort of meet up with the requirement to find Zimmerman's peers.It is a jury of his peers, not Trayvon's peers.
Misogynist too, huh?
All you left wing racist asshats are ignoring an important pice of the testimony. That TM actuall got home and could have been in the house and safe, but instead he chose to go back and confront GZ.
That clearly puts TM in the wrong.
Fact.
Even if I stipulate, doesn't mean a goddamn thing.
All it proves is that Martin MAY be guilty of what we already know Zim is guilty of - NOT avoiding a confrontation that was avoidable.
At best, it puts him at par with Zim
Sorry to piss in your cereal... I know you probably thought you were pretty profound there.
And since there's been so much talk about Zim's rights - Right to follow, right to pack, etc - Wouldn't you agree also, that Martin had the right to confront the man following him?
They WANT it to say:
That is what they keep arguing - that Zimmerman's injuries weren't severe enough to justify deadly force....
It's easy for someone to want it that way when they weren't the one having their head slammed into the concrete and weren't the one that had their nose broken.
[MENTION=22602]Cuyo[/MENTION].
Trayvon confronted Zimmerman. DD, the prosecutions "star" witness testified to that.
That "God Complex" and "Wyatt Earp Syndrome" is a product of your bias...not any facts in evidence.
Twisted logic^All you left wing racist asshats are ignoring an important pice of the testimony. That TM actuall got home and could have been in the house and safe, but instead he chose to go back and confront GZ.
That clearly puts TM in the wrong.
Fact.
Even if I stipulate, doesn't mean a goddamn thing.
All it proves is that Martin MAY be guilty of what we already know Zim is guilty of - NOT avoiding a confrontation that was avoidable.
At best, it puts him at par with Zim
Sorry to piss in your cereal... I know you probably thought you were pretty profound there.
And since there's been so much talk about Zim's rights - Right to follow, right to pack, etc - Wouldn't you agree also, that Martin had the right to confront the man following him?
Since TM was safely out of it, his "decision" to go back and confront and assault Zimmerman for the "sin" of having followed TM earlier translates into something pretty clear: Zimmerman could NOT be guilty of having "provoked" anything. Indeed, it appears that the only things he did were all legal.
And no. TM had no right to "confront" Zimmerman in any manner that involved a physical assault.
Zimmerman came close to being a convicted felon. He assaulted a police officer once and beat up his girlfriend.
TM has a clean record.
All you left wing racist asshats are ignoring an important pice of the testimony. That TM actuall got home and could have been in the house and safe, but instead he chose to go back and confront GZ.
That clearly puts TM in the wrong.
Fact.
Even if I stipulate, doesn't mean a goddamn thing.
All it proves is that Martin MAY be guilty of what we already know Zim is guilty of - NOT avoiding a confrontation that was avoidable.
At best, it puts him at par with Zim
Sorry to piss in your cereal... I know you probably thought you were pretty profound there.
And since there's been so much talk about Zim's rights - Right to follow, right to pack, etc - Wouldn't you agree also, that Martin had the right to confront the man following him?
Since TM was safely out of it, his "decision" to go back and confront and assault Zimmerman for the "sin" of having followed TM earlier translates into something pretty clear: Zimmerman could NOT be guilty of having "provoked" anything. Indeed, it appears that the only things he did were all legal.
And no. TM had no right to "confront" Zimmerman in any manner that involved a physical assault.
That is what they keep arguing - that Zimmerman's injuries weren't severe enough to justify deadly force....
It's easy for someone to want it that way when they weren't the one having their head slammed into the concrete and weren't the one that had their nose broken.
There is no evidence that anyone slammed his head into the concrete or he had a broken nose.. He could have got those two very small cuts from a number of things.
