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 wouldn't put a bullet in Zimmerman's head or oj Simpsons, even though I believe they both murdered. I wouldn't have let either of them off Scott free either.Add a brigade of Marines and you're still a petulant child that hates people who disagree with her.Take his M14 away and he's just a little p shooter.Meh.Still butt-hurt about the "not guilty" verdict, eh?Yup.
Like most people who know how to fight, he could have given him a good swift kick.
But being the gun fetish, right wing punk he was...he shot him.
I don't like seeing anyone getting killed, especially by a gun fetish pussy.
Also, you have an eerie interest in men's butts. Why is that?
Posting to yourself?
Oh damn!!! He did post up the post party shot!!
Odd that you;re so certain about things, all while contending there's so much that's not known.and i contend that had martin lived zimmerman would have gone to jail that night on assault and attempted murder charges.Wrong, we do know. But even if we didn't know for sure, there is no way Zim could be convicted. Trust me, if Trayvon were alive, his assault on Zim would be borne out in court.but we do not know if he was the aggressor. do you understand the difference?There was evidence. Eye witness in fact that could not be impeached. At the time of the shooting, we know that Martin was beating on Zimmerman.There's no evidence of that. And zimmerman, as the pursuer, could easily be called an aggressorhe was the aggressor that why
We fucking know this!
again, we don't know who confronted who, or who threw the first punch. we do know that zimmerman was stalking martin, a threatening action if i've ever heard one.
The fact that you might be shot by someone that pisses you off on the road and you "rage" on them makes you think twice about doing so?These incidents have made me think twice before arguing with a stranger are getting road rage.
Arrested for... stealing his lunch money? Bully..Not to mention I beat a guy up a few years ago and I got arrested.
No one here believes this -- not even you.Funny thing is I got off using stand your ground
Why do you refuse to understand that Martin was not murdered?So murder is justified?There was evidence. Eye witness in fact that could not be impeached. At the time of the shooting, we know that Martin was beating on Zimmerman.There's no evidence of that. And zimmerman, as the pursuer, could easily be called an aggressorenlighten me. what made martin's actions anything other than self defense?doesnt it get tiring
posting to a poster who comes from a position of complete ignorance on the laws
and no matter how you try the poster remains intentionally ignorant
he was the aggressor that why
We fucking know this!
Agai9n, something you know you cannot prove.absolutely true. that's why i contend that zimmerman was the aggressor....These incidents have made me think twice before arguing with a stranger are getting road rage.Today's lesson:Sure.
Only a few months after Bush signed the Florida law, Hammer worked with NRA operatives and friendly legislators on ALEC’s “Criminal Justice Task Force” to develop a new piece of “Stand Your Ground” model legislation for passage in states across the country.
The proposal made a strong impression on ALEC members, who approved model legislation that mirrored the Florida law’s assertion that an individual gunman or a neighborhood watch member “has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”
In states across the country, with support from the gun lobby, ALEC’s model legislation—sometimes in mirror form, sometimes with modest alterations—has been enacted over the years since Peadon and Bush dismissed the warning by Florida state Senator Steve Geller that the “Stand Your Ground” law ran the risk of encouraging Floridians to think that “you ought to be able to kill people that are walking toward you on the street because of this subjective belief that you’re worried that they may get in a fight with you.”
How ALEC Took Florida’s ‘License to Kill’ Law National
“Stand Your Ground” law ran the risk of encouraging Floridians to think that “you ought to be able to kill people that are walking toward you on the street because of this subjective belief that you’re worried that they may get in a fight with you.”
Beating Zimmermann's head on the ground.....doesn't sound like "Stand Your Ground" was needed.
Yup.
Like most people who know how to fight, he could have given him a good swift kick.
But being the gun fetish, right wing punk he was...he shot him.
Don't try to whoop up on somebody. They could be a gun nut and decide to shoot you.
Lesson learned
Not to mention I beat a guy up a few years ago and I got arrested.
Funny thing is I got off using stand your ground. I didn't have to be hit first before I could defend myself. He was swinging and I tackled him before his punch landed. The dumb fucking cop thought I had to let the guy land one before I could protect myself. He was wrong but it cost me $1000 in lawyers fees.
Luckily the guy didn't have a gun to murder me with then claim I was trying to murder him.
If you have a gun you need to do everything you can to avoid shooting someone.
Sprang from the bushes.we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.no, there wasn't. there was a witness that said martin was on top when they saw them - but not who the aggressor wasbut we do not know if he was the aggressor. do you understand the difference?
we certainly do
there was a witness that said so
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
Wrong.This thread is about a gun fetish pussy tweeting his trophy kill.Good to see you understand you have nothing more of value to add to this conversation --assuming you ever did.Meh.
I don't like seeing anyone getting killed, especially by a gun fetish pussy.
Also, you have an eerie interest in men's butts. Why is that?
None of this changes the fact that you are a petulant child that hates people who disagree with her..I wouldn't put a bullet in Zimmerman's head or oj Simpsons, even though I believe they both murdered. I wouldn't have let either of them off Scott free either.Add a brigade of Marines and you're still a petulant child that hates people who disagree with her.Take his M14 away and he's just a little p shooter.Meh.Still butt-hurt about the "not guilty" verdict, eh?Yup.
Like most people who know how to fight, he could have given him a good swift kick.
But being the gun fetish, right wing punk he was...he shot him.
I don't like seeing anyone getting killed, especially by a gun fetish pussy.
Also, you have an eerie interest in men's butts. Why is that?
And I don't defend whites who murder blacks just because they are black
You're no better than oj supporters.
Then arm every high school boy in your home town. At the end of the year when 20 boys are gone because of fights, what would you say happened to the 20 guys who won the fight but lost their lives.Why do you refuse to understand that Martin was not murdered?So murder is justified?There was evidence. Eye witness in fact that could not be impeached. At the time of the shooting, we know that Martin was beating on Zimmerman.There's no evidence of that. And zimmerman, as the pursuer, could easily be called an aggressorenlighten me. what made martin's actions anything other than self defense?
he was the aggressor that why
We fucking know this!
Sprang from the bushes.we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.no, there wasn't. there was a witness that said martin was on top when they saw them - but not who the aggressor waswe certainly do
there was a witness that said so
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
I can't even begin to tell you all the ways Zimmerman's story stinks.
Who came up with such a bad law? It wasn't the Florida GOP. It was a.l.e.c. did the GOP even read the bill or just fast track it into law?
This isn't the only bad bill a.l.e.c has passed all around the country. Walker Snyder Christie kasich santorum and jeb have all done whatever a.l.e.c. says.
Yea, when the black guy isn't provoked to whip your ass.Wrong.This thread is about a gun fetish pussy tweeting his trophy kill.Good to see you understand you have nothing more of value to add to this conversation --assuming you ever did.Meh.
I don't like seeing anyone getting killed, especially by a gun fetish pussy.
Also, you have an eerie interest in men's butts. Why is that?
It is about people who refuse to accept a "Not Guilty" verdict and hate the fact that it is sometimes legal for a white guy with a gun to kill a black person.
Although I agree with you I think Zimmerman is guilty of a lesser crime but that wasn't an option for the jury.Sprang from the bushes.we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.no, there wasn't. there was a witness that said martin was on top when they saw them - but not who the aggressor was
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
I can't even begin to tell you all the ways Zimmerman's story stinks.
Who came up with such a bad law? It wasn't the Florida GOP. It was a.l.e.c. did the GOP even read the bill or just fast track it into law?
This isn't the only bad bill a.l.e.c has passed all around the country. Walker Snyder Christie kasich santorum and jeb have all done whatever a.l.e.c. says.
the debris field left behind as evidence in court proved zimmermans claim
Although I agree with you I think Zimmerman is guilty of a lesser crime but that wasn't an option for the jury.Sprang from the bushes.we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
I can't even begin to tell you all the ways Zimmerman's story stinks.
Who came up with such a bad law? It wasn't the Florida GOP. It was a.l.e.c. did the GOP even read the bill or just fast track it into law?
This isn't the only bad bill a.l.e.c has passed all around the country. Walker Snyder Christie kasich santorum and jeb have all done whatever a.l.e.c. says.
the debris field left behind as evidence in court proved zimmermans claim
If I were Zimmerman I would have already had my gun drawn if I was in pursuit.
Who was the aggressor: Martin or Zimmerman?Then prove it.[
are you contending that zimmerman was not following martin at night in the rain? this is an established fact.
Yes.. but here, you presume to speak for others, which is not related in any way.it's called the reasonable man doctrine and it's used in self defense cases
Your presumption of what others think does not even qualify as evidence of what others think - and thus, you support your position with nothing.
It has has certain other provisions, none of which you even try to meet here; especially given your concession that Martin attacked Zimmerman.Florida's stand your ground law means he has no obligation to retreat and can meet the threat with appropriate force
Thus, you have proven nothing.
See above, You have proven nothing.again, this is just the stand your ground law. he had no obligation to retreat.
Given your inability this far to prove your hypothesis, its no wonder you tried to get others to disprove it by begging the question.
that would be news to me. and i think everyone else, too. do you have that evidence?Sprang from the bushes.we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.no, there wasn't. there was a witness that said martin was on top when they saw them - but not who the aggressor was
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
I can't even begin to tell you all the ways Zimmerman's story stinks.
Who came up with such a bad law? It wasn't the Florida GOP. It was a.l.e.c. did the GOP even read the bill or just fast track it into law?
This isn't the only bad bill a.l.e.c has passed all around the country. Walker Snyder Christie kasich santorum and jeb have all done whatever a.l.e.c. says.
the debris field left behind as evidence in court proved zimmermans claim
So it was a fair fight because they both used stand your ground?Who was the aggressor: Martin or Zimmerman?Then prove it.[
are you contending that zimmerman was not following martin at night in the rain? this is an established fact.
Yes.. but here, you presume to speak for others, which is not related in any way.it's called the reasonable man doctrine and it's used in self defense cases
Your presumption of what others think does not even qualify as evidence of what others think - and thus, you support your position with nothing.
It has has certain other provisions, none of which you even try to meet here; especially given your concession that Martin attacked Zimmerman.Florida's stand your ground law means he has no obligation to retreat and can meet the threat with appropriate force
Thus, you have proven nothing.
See above, You have proven nothing.again, this is just the stand your ground law. he had no obligation to retreat.
Given your inability this far to prove your hypothesis, its no wonder you tried to get others to disprove it by begging the question.
there. plainly stated zimmerman followed martin, it was night, and it was raining. established facts.
reasonable man doctrine is opinion. what would a reasonable man do or believe? now, i'm asking you, i think it's reasonable to believe that a man following you at night in the rain would make a reasonable person feel threatened. do you disagree?
since martin had no obligation to retreat i believe that he was acting within his rights, under the reasonable belief of an imminent threat, to meet zimmerman with force, if that is what happened. now, if you believe there is a provision of the stand your ground law that would require martin to retreat please inform me of it. if zimmerman attacked martin, then martin would certainly be within his rights. either way, martin would be within his rights to stand his ground. if you disagree, please tell me why.
so, it's my belief that martin could only have been acting within his rights and in self defense. do you have a reason to disagree?
we know that at one point during the struggle martin gained the upper hand. we do not know and will never know who started the conflict. in fact, the only things we do now are that zimmerman followed martin, a struggle happened, at some point martin gained the upper hand, and zimmerman shot martinYou have pretty much reached the point of no return, and lost. Overwhelming evidence is an obvious legal consideration.no, there wasn't. there was a witness that said martin was on top when they saw them - but not who the aggressor wasbut we do not know if he was the aggressor. do you understand the difference?
we certainly do
there was a witness that said so
Trayvon was assaulting Zim when the shot was fired. And there was only one shot.
zimmerman was blind sided by martin
when martin sprang from the bushes
as in evidence at court
So it was a fair fight because they both used stand your ground?Who was the aggressor: Martin or Zimmerman?Then prove it.[
are you contending that zimmerman was not following martin at night in the rain? this is an established fact.
Yes.. but here, you presume to speak for others, which is not related in any way.it's called the reasonable man doctrine and it's used in self defense cases
Your presumption of what others think does not even qualify as evidence of what others think - and thus, you support your position with nothing.
It has has certain other provisions, none of which you even try to meet here; especially given your concession that Martin attacked Zimmerman.Florida's stand your ground law means he has no obligation to retreat and can meet the threat with appropriate force
Thus, you have proven nothing.
See above, You have proven nothing.again, this is just the stand your ground law. he had no obligation to retreat.
Given your inability this far to prove your hypothesis, its no wonder you tried to get others to disprove it by begging the question.
there. plainly stated zimmerman followed martin, it was night, and it was raining. established facts.
reasonable man doctrine is opinion. what would a reasonable man do or believe? now, i'm asking you, i think it's reasonable to believe that a man following you at night in the rain would make a reasonable person feel threatened. do you disagree?
since martin had no obligation to retreat i believe that he was acting within his rights, under the reasonable belief of an imminent threat, to meet zimmerman with force, if that is what happened. now, if you believe there is a provision of the stand your ground law that would require martin to retreat please inform me of it. if zimmerman attacked martin, then martin would certainly be within his rights. either way, martin would be within his rights to stand his ground. if you disagree, please tell me why.
so, it's my belief that martin could only have been acting within his rights and in self defense. do you have a reason to disagree?
I guess trevon underestimated his opponent. If I knew a guy had a gun and I didn't I wouldn't attack the guy. And if I did and got shot, I guess I fucked up. I may not have been obligated to run but maybe I should have.
Like the old west. Don't want to be in a gun fight, get out of town.
He was talking to his girl. Why didn't he call 911 if he was scared?
