(07-13-2013 11:01 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:58 PM)boss man Wrote:  The jury has spoken, Tom. I know it burns you that they actually followed the letter of the law and came back with the ONLY verdict possible. The prosecution had an extremely weak case and just got smoked in a court of law.

Quit complaining like one of MSNBC crybaby b!tches.

happens. STAND YOUR GROUND like a man.

That is a result of NRA/GOP/ALEC laws...."Hey, see someone Black who you think is 'up to no good'....just whack em and get away with it"

Hey moron, how many blacks are killed by other blacks compare to anyone else?

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Bet if you had called Martin a 'child' he would have been willing to fight you to prove he was a man. 17 is not a child.
Zimmerman was still responing to 911 operators right up to the start of the altercation.
Only those that fear guns can think that current gun laws are insane.
Prove Zimmerman started the confrontation. The prosecution couldn't, and neither can you.

And Zimmerman is hispanic.

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

Name one you cane prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

(07-13-2013 11:04 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Bet if you had called Martin a 'child' he would have been willing to fight you to prove he was a man. 17 is not a child.
Zimmerman was still responing to 911 operators right up to the start of the altercation.
Only those that fear guns can think that current gun laws are insane.
Prove Zimmerman started the confrontation. The prosecution couldn't, and neither can you.

And Zimmerman is hispanic.

I certainly, along with millions of Americans now have CONCRETE evidence to fear firearms holders now. They can kill without consequences, even if they start the confrontation.

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

Um, all of them.

There is zero evidence Zimmerman started a confrontation with TM. Following him doesn't start a confrontation.

The NRA had nothing to do with this as stand your ground laws had nothing to do with the case.

Your third is factually wrong because your first is factually wrong.

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

1. Start a confrontation?
2. Zimmerman called 911 and was ADVISED by the 911 to not follow. That's not the cops.
3. That's your left wing opinion.
4.Zimmerman was also brutally assaulted by the victim.

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

1) Facts NOT In evidence. You present an opinion, the jury CANNOT use your opinion, or mine, or anyone else's opinion. Please look up the Jury Instructions.
2) Your "CHILD" was beating the crap out of GZ and suffered no blows by GZ, per State's witness.
3) I know many Dems and Reps who are in and/or support NRA and gun rights. They ALL preach and teach gun safety.
4) TM was using the weapons of his fist and the sidewalk. Courts have routinely ruled that anything can be used as a weapon if it can cause bodily harm or death. TM was armed per the State's own witnesses.

(07-13-2013 11:08 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

Name one you cane prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

George Zimmerman sought Trayvon out. That is not in dispute.
George Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That is also not in dispute
The NRA/ALEC/GOP passed laws providing cover for those that kill even if the person they kill is unarmed and is not the instigator. That isn't in dispute
Trayvon Martin was Black. That is not in dispute.

(07-13-2013 11:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:08 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

Name one you cane prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

George Zimmerman sought Trayvon out. That is not in dispute.
George Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That is also not in dispute
The NRA/ALEC/GOP passed laws providing cover for those that kill even if the person they kill is unarmed and is not the instigator. That isn't in dispute
Trayvon Martin was Black. That is not in dispute.

None of which were you're original arguments, except for martin being black. Your understanding of gun laws is pathetic.
What race is Zimmerman?
Awww, did I hurt your feelings by negging your rep because younsaid all firearm owners can get away with murder????

Just a thought:

The Stand Your Ground law was NOT applicable in this case. Neither the prosecution nor the defense nor the Jury Instructions addressed SYG. Why worry about SYG?

Just another thought:

If GZ was black, would the race pimps have come out about SYG? Self defense? Demanded a trial?

Recall that the local prosecutor did NOT want to prosecute this case because the facts at the time were weak.

(07-13-2013 11:23 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:08 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:53 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Excellent fiction.

Name one statement that wasn't true.

Name one you cane prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

George Zimmerman sought Trayvon out. That is not in dispute.
George Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That is also not in dispute
The NRA/ALEC/GOP passed laws providing cover for those that kill even if the person they kill is unarmed and is not the instigator. That isn't in dispute
Trayvon Martin was Black. That is not in dispute.

None of which were you're original arguments, except for martin being black. Your understanding of gun laws is pathetic.
What race is Zimmerman?
Awww, did I hurt your feelings by negging your rep because younsaid all firearm owners can get away with murder????

Yea, right, now any self appointed vigilante can be judge, jury and executioner against any person that they think is up to no good. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Thanks NRA/ALEC/GOP.

And of course its the black kid who gets whacked. Best not back talk any random gentlemen hassling you for being black (wearing a hoodie) cause he can whack you for no reason at all.

I'm not saying all firearm owners can get away with murder. But apparently in Florida, any firearm owner hassling a black kid can get away with starting a confrontation and then killing someone, if the victim is Black and the kid is carrying skittles. And this is a forseeable consequence of NRA/ALEC lobbied for legislation.

The sad thing is that you guys can't even see how bad this is. For the gun lobby.

Meanwhile, in Florida this week, a Black persons was sentence to 20 years in prison for firing a gun up in the air.

(07-13-2013 11:41 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:23 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:08 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Name one statement that wasn't true.

Name one you cane prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

George Zimmerman sought Trayvon out. That is not in dispute.
George Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That is also not in dispute
The NRA/ALEC/GOP passed laws providing cover for those that kill even if the person they kill is unarmed and is not the instigator. That isn't in dispute
Trayvon Martin was Black. That is not in dispute.

None of which were you're original arguments, except for martin being black. Your understanding of gun laws is pathetic.
What race is Zimmerman?
Awww, did I hurt your feelings by negging your rep because younsaid all firearm owners can get away with murder????

Yea, right, now any self appointed vigilante can be judge, jury and executioner against any person that they think is up to no good. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Thanks NRA/ALEC/GOP.

And of course its the black kid who gets whacked. Best not back talk any random gentlemen hassling you for being black (wearing a hoodie) cause he can whack you for no reason at all.

I'm not saying all firearm owners can get away with murder. But apparently in Florida, any firearm owner hassling a black kid can get away with starting a confrontation and then killing someone, if the victim is Black and the kid is carrying skittles. And this is a forseeable consequence of NRA/ALEC lobbied for legislation.

The sad thing is that you guys can't even see how bad this is. For the gun lobby.

Meanwhile, in Florida this week, a Black persons was sentence to 20 years in prison for firing a gun up in the air.

Your entireost except the last sentence is just completely ignorant.
That woman should not be going to jail, and im not sure what sort of lawyer and judge would bring that charge and uphold the sentence.

(07-13-2013 10:40 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guns don't kill people...but ALEC/GOP/NRA legislation allows those that do kill people to get away with cold blooded murder. But then again, the murdered persons was Black, so of course getting shot because some unhinged racist was acceptable to the gun nuts and their cheerleaders.

Good lord, Tom. Talk about unhinged.

Your entire evidence of this "unhinged racist" is AT MOST about 5 minutes of his life.... and that assumes I buy your definition of being a racist in the first place.

What else in his history convinces you he is an unhinged racist?

BTW, a racist is someone who makes assumptions about people's character based on very limited aspects of that person's character... kinda like you are here. It may not be race based, but it is the exact same bigotry.

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman confronted an individual who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops
3)
4) Zimmerman was exonerated.

But Martin was Black.

You can't pass subjection off as fact regardless of your agenda. Fify

(07-13-2013 11:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:40 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guns don't kill people...but ALEC/GOP/NRA legislation allows those that do kill people to get away with cold blooded murder. But then again, the murdered persons was Black, so of course getting shot because some unhinged racist was acceptable to the gun nuts and their cheerleaders.

Good lord, Tom. Talk about unhinged.

Your entire evidence of this "unhinged racist" is AT MOST about 5 minutes of his life.... and that assumes I buy your definition of being a racist in the first place.

What else in his history convinces you he is an unhinged racist?

BTW, a racist is someone who makes assumptions about people's character based on very limited aspects of that person's character... kinda like you are here. It may not be race based, but it is the exact same bigotry.

Not 5 minutes, but how about all the calls to the cops complaining about 'suspicious characters' in the neighborhood? How many of those 'suspicious characters' were white? Any of them?

(07-13-2013 11:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

You can't pass subjection off as fact regardless of your agenda.

So Zimmerman didn't kill Trayvon Martin?
He didn't call the cops and then choose to start a confrontation?

Come on.

Two people know the truth of what happened here and one is 6 feet in the ground. We will never know the full story here.

(07-13-2013 11:59 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

You can't pass subjection off as fact regardless of your agenda.

So Zimmerman didn't kill Trayvon Martin?
He didn't call the cops and then choose to start a confrontation?

Come on.

Zimmerman did kill Trayvon, but was it self defense, the jurors seem to have thought so. He called the police this much is fact, who started what with who hasn't been established firmly. I can't say definitively since I wasn't there. People can be disappointed but we can't pass of our own biases as fact regardless of which side we fall on.

(07-14-2013 12:03 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:59 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 11:56 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-13-2013 10:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea..facts.

1) Zimmerman went out to start a confrontation with a CHILD who was packing no more than skittles
2) Zimmerman called the cops, but then decided to be a vigilante
3) The GOP/ALEC/NRA has priorly passed legislation that is INSANE
4) Zimmerman got away with killing someone unarmed that he started a confrontation with, with no consequences.

But Martin was Black.

You can't pass subjection off as fact regardless of your agenda.

So Zimmerman didn't kill Trayvon Martin?
He didn't call the cops and then choose to start a confrontation?

Come on.

Zimmerman did kill Trayvon, but was it self defense, the jurors seem to have thought so. He called the police this much is fact, who started what with who hasn't been established firmly. I can't say definitively since I wasn't there. People can be disappointed but we can't pass of our own biases as fact regardless of which side we fall on.

The Jury had reasonable doubt that it might have been self defense.

That isn't the same as saying the jury thought it was self defense.

Proving reasonable doubt was not a very difficult threshold.