**Official** Trayvon Martin thread

Well, being that he never should've exited his car, er wait.....doing that blows the bias out of the water, now doesn't it?

Did he not have the right to exit his car? Does exiting his car somehow make Martin attacking him ok?
 
I'm the sick puppy, your the one talking about murdering my children. How about you fucking apoligize or leave it alone. Eitherway, I don't give a shit. Was George Zimmerman acting in self defense or racist anger, that is the point of this thread and I attacked nobody in this thread, only offered my opinion and backed that up with logic, reason, and fact. You asked a hypothetical question about murdering my three children. Hmmm.

So says the guy threatening people with murder if they merely walk in his neighborhood.
 
Why ?

If part of his blockwatch duty is to check signs for whatever reason, it's part of his volunteer duty.

Follow along here.....................................

But don't the CCW requirements that he NOT engage take precedent?
 
Did he not have the right to exit his car? Does exiting his car somehow make Martin attacking him ok?

WHEN HE IS CARRYING IN FLORIDA, IN THIS SITUATION, NO HE DOES NOT. Read the fucking law.

How many fucking times do I have to say this?
 
I'm the sick puppy, your the one talking about murdering my children. How about you fucking apoligize or leave it alone. Eitherway, I don't give a shit. Was George Zimmerman acting in self defense or racist anger, that is the point of this thread and I attacked nobody in this thread, only offered my opinion and backed that up with logic, reason, and fact. You asked a hypothetical question about murdering my three children. Hmmm.

Based on the witness details, it appears it was self-defense, but he used excessive force, which may lead to an appropriate manslaughter charge.
 
I'm the sick puppy, your the one talking about murdering my children. How about you fucking apoligize or leave it alone. Eitherway, I don't give a shit. Was George Zimmerman acting in self defense or racist anger, that is the point of this thread and I attacked nobody in this thread, only offered my opinion and backed that up with logic, reason, and fact. You asked a hypothetical question about murdering my three children. Hmmm.

No, I never threatened you or your children. In fact, I'm on record as being against such behavior. You approve of murder and hunting of kids.
 
Not while carrying the gun.

Brandishing or carrying? Brandishing I could understand but concealed? He should be able to carry CCW even on his watch. There are so many potential variables that you could encounter.
 
IMO, only if the other party is also banned ... The comment you quote would not be there, if not for the other party.

No, one was a hypothetical example. The other was the deranged rantings of a homocidal lunatic.
 
Any investigation of a death that does not include a toxicology test of the killer is not thorough. Instead they did one on the victim, so if he had weed in his system or something they could plaster that all over the report.

Oh yeah-now that you mention this:

Florida CCW law REQUIRES a Drug Test be IMMEDIATELY performed anytime said CCW is involved in a shooting....
 
With that said, we have no idea who escalated it after first contact was made. It takes two to tango.

Certainly. And we will never know the facts. The only person that will know a good portion of the story is Zimmerman, and no doubt after rehashing it a million times he will no longer remember what actually happened. No doubt he has been coached at this point. And all of the charlatans jumping on this story have no desire for the truth.

Isn't this the "gold standard" in some parts as to how the world would ideally work?

The non-aggression principle (also called the non-aggression axiom, the anti-coercion principle, the zero aggression principle, the non-initiation of force), or NAP for short, is a moral stance which asserts that aggression is inherently illegitimate. Aggression, for the purposes of the NAP, is defined as the initiation or threatening of violence against a person or legitimately owned property of another. Specifically, any unsolicited actions of others that physically affect an individual’s property, including that person’s body, no matter if the result of those actions is damaging, beneficiary or neutral to the owner, are considered violent when they are against the owner’s free will and interfere with his right to self-determination, as based on the libertarian principle of self-ownership. Supporters of NAP use it to demonstrate the immorality of theft, vandalism, assault, and fraud. In contrast to pacifism, the non-aggression principle does not preclude violence used in self-defense or defense of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle
 
Brandishing or carrying? Brandishing I could understand but concealed? He should be able to carry CCW even on his watch. There are so many potential variables that you could encounter.

Maybe that's the way it should be, but scroll up and read the law. Coastie posted it here. When you're carrying, under Florida law, you have an obligation not to inject yourself into a situation like Zimmerman did.
 
And you know that based on what Moo? Anderson Cooper? Nancy Grace? Obama?

Based on what a witness says.........

But after the shooting, a source inside the police department told ABC News that a narcotics detective and not a homicide detective first approached Zimmerman. The detective pepppered Zimmerman with questions, the source said, rather than allow Zimmerman to tell his story. Questions can lead a witness, the source said.

Another officer corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help.

The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborho...s-questionable/story?id=15907136#.T3Cre2EgdMg
 
Did some stupid bomb blow up on your head recently? That comment was uncalled for regardless of what was said.

I'm really beginning to think you are 13 years old, because that's the logic mine tries to use on me sometimes.

So the other guy can hypothetically threaten my children, (attack me), I respond with a hypothetical acceptance of his threat and then I use a hyperbolic threat(to defend myself) and I should get banned? But he attacked me first, don't I have the right to defend myself? How about nobody gets banned cause banning people is gay and counter productive.
 
Zimmerman was questioned and told his story that night...the only one I think being coached is Trayvon's girlfriend...
 
The law says "you may not exit your car?"

Are you being fucking serious right now? Really? You must've missed the "read the fucking law part" in my comment.

He CANNOT engage someone in the manner he did, while CCW in Florida. PERIOD.
 
And you know that based on what Moo? Anderson Cooper? Nancy Grace? Obama?


based on the fact that the PEOPLE are asking questions that were never asked by the SPD. the PEOPLE are asking for evidence that was never obtained by the SPD. the PEOPLE are doing the SPD jobs. the DOJ had to investigate this case. if there was a THOROUGH investigation zimmerman wouldve been arrested by the SPD.
 
Back
Top