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.
I never said that threats of violence were protected. I posted that to show you dweebs that the 'n' word or it's equivalents, which you all claim Z said, is not considered by the courts to be a 'fighting word.' I even bolded it and put it in red. Now, what did Z say to li'l Trayvon that was a threat of violence. And don't give me any more of that 'following' shit. Z lived there in that complex, and had the right to be there.
SS
Would any of you be arguing GZ's point of view if TM was one of your unarmed teenage relatives?
I doubt it seriously.
So what REALLY then are we debating here?
HMMMMMM?
I raised two teenagers. They were never out carousing around the neighborhood at night. They were never expelled from school. They stayed at home at night and did school work. In the summer they did other things like band and camp, etc. Your question is stupid and entirely moot.
SS
I find it hard to believe that your daughters never went to the store around 7:00PM, never?
Can we also assume that your daughters were never arrested for felony assault on a police officer, never directed to anger management classes as part of a pretrial diversion program?
>>>>
From my understaing, not quite.
From the same link that Sunshine provided:
"The Supreme Court reversed Street's conviction because his comments, considered a possible factor in his conviction, were constitutionally protected by the First Amendment. Emphasizing that the mere offensiveness of words does not strip them of constitutional protection, the Court again noted that fighting words must present an actual threat of immediate violence, not merely offensive content."
The fighting words doctrine does not protect whatever words are spoken. Only offensive speech. If a person conveys a thread of immediate violence, that is not protected under fighting words.
ETA: Just to be clear I'm not saying there is any evidence of fighting words that night.
>>>>
I never said that threats of violence were protected. I posted that to show you dweebs that the 'n' word or it's equivalents, which you all claim Z said, is not considered by the courts to be a 'fighting word.' I even bolded it and put it in red. Now, what did Z say to li'l Trayvon that was a threat of violence. And don't give me any more of that 'following' shit. Z lived there in that complex, and had the right to be there.
SS
Maybe not to the courts but to a black person it is fighting words in the circumstances and context in which the ****** word was used.
My teenage relatives would answer questions posed by an adult. They wouldn't bloody his nose and head or cop an attitude because they were being asked why they were hanging around outside at night in the rain. Seriously.
My daughter goes to school away from home. She and I took martial arts when she was growing up.
My daughter has been trained that if a guy following you halfway across campus (housing development) and then pursues you on foot after trying to get away is always to be treated as a threat. If they get close, take them out. Key shafts extending between fingers to go for the eyes. Side kick to the knees to keep them from chasing you.
>>>>
Walking behind someone is not illegal. You probably set the poor girl up for a similar situation.
I never said that threats of violence were protected. I posted that to show you dweebs that the 'n' word or it's equivalents, which you all claim Z said, is not considered by the courts to be a 'fighting word.' I even bolded it and put it in red. Now, what did Z say to li'l Trayvon that was a threat of violence. And don't give me any more of that 'following' shit. Z lived there in that complex, and had the right to be there.
SS
Maybe not to the courts but to a black person it is fighting words in the circumstances and context in which the ****** word was used.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman used the word ****** that night, Sunshine is attempting to divert and is using a clear strawman fallacy (arguing against something not claimed) in doing so.
>>>>
Maybe not to the courts but to a black person it is fighting words in the circumstances and context in which the ****** word was used.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman used the word ****** that night, Sunshine is attempting to divert and is using a clear strawman fallacy (arguing against something not claimed) in doing so.
>>>>
Where have you been? It has been all over the internet for months that in the 911 call Z said 'fucking coons.' I think he could have just as easily said, 'fucking kids.' But the race baiters are all over this one. And, no doubt, blacks can consider what they want to be fighting words. Clearly sneaky thinks they should be above the laws the rest of us must abide by.
I never said that threats of violence were protected. I posted that to show you dweebs that the 'n' word or it's equivalents, which you all claim Z said, is not considered by the courts to be a 'fighting word.' I even bolded it and put it in red. Now, what did Z say to li'l Trayvon that was a threat of violence. And don't give me any more of that 'following' shit. Z lived there in that complex, and had the right to be there.
SS
Maybe not to the courts but to a black person it is fighting words in the circumstances and context in which the ****** word was used.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman used the word ****** that night, Sunshine is attempting to divert and is using a clear strawman fallacy (arguing against something not claimed) in doing so.
>>>>
Omg. This is the simplest murder case in history! IT'S RECORDED! SMH
If Z is found not guilty can you imagine the precedent it will set?
CNN repeatedly put GZ calling TM a racial slur that rhymed with "boon". How did you miss that Testy?
CNN repeatedly put GZ calling TM a racial slur that rhymed with "boon". How did you miss that Testy?
CNN repeatedly put GZ calling TM a racial slur that rhymed with "boon". How did you miss that Testy?
