Jump to content
orangeeyes

George Zimmerman charged with 2nd Degree Murder

Recommended Posts

Animal    121
[quote]What Zimmerman did goes against the entire concept of self-defense. He was in no real danger until he started stalking Trayvon. [/quote]
His argument for self-defense doesn't start here.

[quote]It shouldn't be legal to go armed to a party with the intention of talking shit to drunk people and shooting anyone that pins you down. [/quote]
This wasn't his intention. He didn't follow Trayvon thinking 'I'm going to start shit and hope he attacks me and kill this guy." He saw suspicious activity in a high-crime area and acted on his instincts, which helped stop crime before. Using this scenario as an example is fucking stupid.

[quote]Also, like I've been saying, you have absolutely zero evidence that Trayvon made the altercation physical. [/quote]
Same could be said for the other side. Unfortunately, the only other eye witness saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, clearly seeing Zimmerman on the ground getting beat, aiding his argument for self-defense.

[quote]A scenario where he had no choice but to try to disable Zimmerman so he doesn't [i]get shot[/i] is entirely plausible. You say that Trayvon had no right to keep hitting Zimmerman/slamming his head against the pavement, but what would you honestly do if someone had a gun? Punch him a couple times? Stop and call the police? Run away so the gunman has an easy opportunity to shoot you? No, I'm probably going to beat the guy unconscious so he can't shoot me and call 911.[/quote]
That's assuming Zimmerman was flaunting his gun and intimidating towards Trayvon. Is it out? Is Zimmerman pointing it at Trayvon? You don't know, and again using this as a scenario is fucking stupid.


[quote]And no, I don't think Zimmerman would have shot Trayvon in the back...but that's with the benefit of hindsight. If you're confronted by a guy stalking you with a gun at night, a rational human isn't going to sit and consider all of the possible reasons the guy has a gun. They're going to do whatever is necessary to not get shot.[/quote]
Unless Zimmerman was threatening Trayvon with the gun, acting out like such is illegal. Read Peddle's post earlier about attacking. Yeah, I admit that might be intimidating being questioned by a guy with a gun, but unless he threatens me I have no [b]right[/b] to attack him. You have to look at that, the legal aspect.

[quote]Although guns are legal here in America, it isn't normal for neighborhood watchmen to follow people with guns. Not even the most right-wing conservatives encourage that or intend for that to happen. Given the current facts, Zimmerman deserves jailtime to some extent.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure it's our right to bear arms, and if he is following all legal procedures of handling he can do what he wants, within the law.


Your argument looks like Zimmerman was just acting like a badass and felt like fucking with someone, so they could retaliate and he could kill when that isn't the situation.
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Malcolm    4612
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»orangeeyes    11863
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335435788' post='3165074']
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
[/quote]
Solid argument, I have no rebuttal.
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»orangeeyes    11863
[quote]This wasn't his intention. He didn't follow Trayvon thinking 'I'm going to start shit and hope he attacks me and kill this guy." He saw suspicious activity in a high-crime area and acted on his instincts, which helped stop crime before. Using this scenario as an example is fucking stupid.[/quote]

No, but it helps to establish a precedent where you could. You could essentially provoke someone into attacking you then shoot them with a legal firearm in a "stand your ground" state as long as you technically don't do anything illegal up to that point (although harassment is illegal, which Zimmerman seems to be guilty of).

[quote]Same could be said for the other side. Unfortunately, the only other eye witness saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, clearly seeing Zimmerman on the ground getting beat, aiding his argument for self-defense.[/quote]

Exactly. I'm not saying Zimmerman or Trayvon definitively started the fight. I'm saying that Conspire is making it sound like Zimmerman's account of the story is 100% true and he's basing all of his arguments on that assumption.

[quote]That's assuming Zimmerman was flaunting his gun and intimidating towards Trayvon. Is it out? Is Zimmerman pointing it at Trayvon? You don't know, and again using this as a scenario is fucking stupid.[/quote]

It is a plausible scenario, just like Trayvon deciding to beat the shit out of Zimmerman just for following him is a plausible scenario.


[quote]Unless Zimmerman was threatening Trayvon with the gun, acting out like such is illegal. Read Peddle's post earlier about attacking. Yeah, I admit that might be intimidating being questioned by a guy with a gun, but unless he threatens me I have no [b]right[/b] to attack him. You have to look at that, the legal aspect.[/quote]

If some random stranger is stalking you with a gun at night, you shouldn't feel threatened until he points it at you or states an intention to use it? Are you high?

[quote]Your argument looks like Zimmerman was just acting like a badass and felt like fucking with someone, so they could retaliate and he could kill when that isn't the situation.
[/quote]
Except that's not what I'm saying at all.

[img]http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/blogimages/strawman2.jpg[/img]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beetle    1115
Zimmerman put himself in danger by stalking an unarmed man. Treyvon felt threatened by Zimmerman who had a gun (let's be honest, he's not carrying a purse, I'm sure anyone could have seen his gun in plain site). Tryvon likely fought to protect himself against his stalker. Stalker gets the upperhand, gets on top of Treyvon. Treyvon is screaming for help for 10+ seconds fighting to get out. Zimmerman shoots and kills Treyvon.

Florida apparently has a law that makes it cool to carry around a gun and stalk people. If the person you're stalking tries to fight back, it's perfectly fine to murder... err I mean defend yourself against your stalk-ee.

Zimmerman should've be charged with manslaughter at least. He was putting his and Treyvon's life in danger by following and stalking him. Shit got real and Zimmerman killed an unarmed person. Retarded situation handled terribly by someone that should have followed officer's directions.
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Animal    121
[quote]No, but it helps to establish a precedent where you could. You could essentially provoke someone into attacking you then shoot them with a legal firearm in a "stand your ground" state as long as you technically don't do anything illegal up to that point (although harassment is illegal, which Zimmerman seems to be guilty of).[/quote]

This doesn't pertain to the case directly. While laws could be made for future incidents, this can't be used for now. Zimmerman's intentions will be looked at, and with his history, will most likely not be a malicious vigilante.

[quote]It is a plausible scenario, just like Trayvon deciding to beat the shit out of Zimmerman just for following him is a plausible scenario.[/quote]
Could it be plausible? Sure. Is it likely? No. I can name a thousand different scenarios, but the ones that have credibility behind them are the only ones considered. No where in all the evidence does it indicate Zimmerman was flaunting his weapon.

[quote]
If some random stranger is stalking you with a gun at night, you shouldn't feel threatened until he points it at you or states an intention to use it? Are you high?[/quote]
Are you? Did you even comprehend what I said? I said I would feel threatened being questioned by a guy with a gun, but that gives me no [b]right[/b] to attack him.

[quote]
Except that's not what I'm saying at all.[/quote]
Well please be more clear.
[quote]What Zimmerman did goes against the entire concept of self-defense. He was in no real danger until he started stalking Trayvon. It shouldn't be legal to go armed to a party with the intention of talking shit to drunk people and shooting anyone that pins you down. If you don't have a problem with what Zimmerman did, how could you possibly have a problem with such a scenario? What's to stop people from knowingly getting into fights and killing the other person when it gets out of hand? Even if the trial is fair and Zimmerman gets off, it just encourages a form of legal vigilantism.[/quote]
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conspire    2391
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335400159' post='3164664']
[quote]Zimmerman chased a guy knowing if shit hit the fan he could pull out his gun, yes. Isn't that why civilians are allowed to carry weapons in your country? Martin made it a physical altercation. He is the one who turned it into a situation where Zimmerman has to use his gun.[/quote]
What Zimmerman did goes against the entire concept of self-defense. He was in no real danger until he started stalking Trayvon. It shouldn't be legal to go armed to a party with the intention of talking shit to drunk people and shooting anyone that pins you down. If you don't have a problem with what Zimmerman did, how could you possibly have a problem with such a scenario? What's to stop people from knowingly getting into fights and killing the other person when it gets out of hand? Even if the trial is fair and Zimmerman gets off, it just encourages a form of legal vigilantism.[/quote]

I can see your point here, but talking shit doesn't excuse aggravated assault either. If there is any evidence that Martin and Zimmerman were fighting, I'd have to see a much more dire situation for Zimmerman to justify using his weapon. All the evidence points to the fact that Martin was the only one engaging in violent activity until Zimmerman shot him.

[quote]Also, like I've been saying, you have absolutely zero evidence that Trayvon made the altercation physical. A scenario where he had no choice but to try to disable Zimmerman so he doesn't [i]get shot[/i] is entirely plausible. You say that Trayvon had no right to keep hitting Zimmerman/slamming his head against the pavement, but what would you honestly do if someone had a gun? Punch him a couple times? Stop and call the police? Run away so the gunman has an easy opportunity to shoot you? No, I'm probably going to beat the guy unconscious so he can't shoot me and call 911.[/quote]

My evidence that Martin is the one who made the altercation physical is that Martin has no signs of being touched by Zimmerman, while Zimmerman does. Also a witness sees Martin on top of and attacking Zimmerman.

If I guy has a gun I'm certainly not going to punch him in the face. If I'm going to attempt any physical altercation it's going to be centred around disarming the gunman. Most likely I'm just going to run to some place where there are other people, or home, if I'm as close as Martin is. Listening to the 911 transcript it seems like Martin was running and could have got away. How he ended up in an altercation with Zimmerman is entirely up to speculation, but I honestly feel he could have just run home.

[quote]And no, I don't think Zimmerman would have shot Trayvon in the back...but that's with the benefit of hindsight. If you're confronted by a guy stalking you with a gun at night, a rational human isn't going to sit and consider all of the possible reasons the guy has a gun. They're going to do whatever is necessary to not get shot.[/quote]

The problem I have with the picture you're painting is that you make it seem like Zimmerman is walking with a gun in his hand. I don't think the gun was visible at all. If some evidence comes to light that Zimmerman was being threatening with the gun I'd think twice about saying Martin shouldn't be beating on Zimmerman.

[quote]Although guns are legal here in America, it isn't normal for neighborhood watchmen to follow people with guns. Not even the most right-wing conservatives encourage that or intend for that to happen. Given the current facts, Zimmerman deserves jailtime to some extent.[/quote]

Do you believe Zimmerman should have left his gun in his truck? If he does who knows what happens to him. What if Martin has a weapon? Zimmerman doesn't know what's going to happen, so he keeps his weapon on him. That's why he has it. So that in the worst case scenario he's prepared to defend himself.

[quote]EDIT: I get what you're saying and I think most would agree, assuming Zimmerman's life was threatened (with Trayvon beating the shit out of him), he was justified in pulling out the gun to save his life. But that's not what is [i]really[/i] being argued here. I'm arguing that Zimmerman should be held criminally accountable for Trayvon's death (manslaughter or otherwise) due to his role in the altercation. You can't just disregard what happened leading up to it.[/quote]

I don't agree that Zimmerman should be held criminally accountable. I don't think Zimmerman did anything wrong according to American law. If some evidence comes to light that Zimmerman pushed Martin beyond reasonable limits to attack him I'll change my mind. Simply having a gun on him does not justify the assault by Martin. The assault does justify the shooting by Zimmerman.
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»orangeeyes    11863
[quote name='Animal' timestamp='1335477214' post='3165607']This doesn't pertain to the case directly. While laws could be made for future incidents, this can't be used for now. Zimmerman's intentions will be looked at, and with his history, will most likely not be a malicious vigilante.[/quote]

There are various examples of case decisions accounting for error or lack of precedent.

Either way, you're still missing my point. I'm not really trying to make a prediction for what will happen, I'm arguing that he [i]should[/i] see jailtime even if his account is completely correct and he was within the existing legal boundaries (that are obviously flawed).

[quote]Could it be plausible? Sure. Is it likely? No. I can name a thousand different scenarios, but the ones that have credibility behind them are the only ones considered. No where in all the evidence does it indicate Zimmerman was flaunting his weapon.[/quote]

So go fetch me conclusive evidence that Zimmerman didn't take out his weapon until he had no choice.

[quote]Are you? Did you even comprehend what I said? I said I would feel threatened being questioned by a guy with a gun, but that gives me no [b]right[/b] to attack him.[/quote]

But I thought you said "but unless he [b]threatens[/b] me I have no right to attack him." If someone has a reasonable belief that they are being threatened (and being followed very aggressively by a stranger at night seems pretty threatening), doesn't the SYG law give them the right to meet force with force without duty to retreat? And like I said, where is the evidence that Zimmerman never, ever posed an explicit threat to Martin? I'm sure the defense would love to see it.

[quote]What Zimmerman did goes against the entire concept of self-defense. He was in no real danger until he started stalking Trayvon. It shouldn't be legal to go armed to a party with the intention of talking shit to drunk people and shooting anyone that pins you down. If you don't have a problem with what Zimmerman did, how could you possibly have a problem with such a scenario? What's to stop people from knowingly getting into fights and killing the other person when it gets out of hand? Even if the trial is fair and Zimmerman gets off, it just encourages a form of legal vigilantism.[/quote]
I don't think Zimmerman intended to fight or shoot Trayvon. But this case would show that doing such would be within legal boundaries, regardless of the law's intentions (and we all know that's never happened in the history of the USA). Somehow, I don't think pointing out that he was blatantly racially profiling will help him come time for the trial, but we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conspire    2391
[quote]]If you can give me more scenarios where Zimmerman would have been able to keep his gun concealed from Trayvon until the point that he was shot, then let me know, since I am honestly having a hard time coming up with any.[/quote]

Really? There's a lot of ways to conceal a weapon... And when the aggressor is using both his hands to beat your face in, yours are free to grab the gun from your pants, hoodie, the holster inside your jacket.
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Medb    773
[quote name='Conspire' timestamp='1335481980' post='3165679']
[quote]]If you can give me more scenarios where Zimmerman would have been able to keep his gun concealed from Trayvon until the point that he was shot, then let me know, since I am honestly having a hard time coming up with any.[/quote]

Really? There's a lot of ways to conceal a weapon... And when the aggressor is using both his hands to beat your face in, yours are free to grab the gun from your pants, hoodie, the holster inside your jacket.
[/quote]
While yes there are a lot of ways to conceal a weapon, most of the time, the weapon would become visible during the fight, especially if you have the person pinned down, which is my point. While he may not have seen it before starting some physical contact, there's going to be a point where he'd see it, and probably think "oh shit, this guy was stalking me and he had a gun" and would try to incapacitate the guy.

For the record, I don't believe Zimmerman should be charged with anything. What he did was legal in Florida as he felt threatened and had been getting beaten. However, my whole thing is that both parties are at fault here. Zimmerman didn't have to follow Martin, which him being overzealous is what caused the whole issue. Martin should not have turned around and confronted Zimmerman. But hindsight is 20/20. I can see the reasons both people did what they did. Zimmerman trying to protect his neighborhood by profiling someone he doesn't know, and Martin confronting the person who followed them are both normal actions given the circumstances. I'm just saying that there's reasons as to why both people took the actions they did, and what transpired had. My whole problem is the fact that it could have been avoided had Zimmerman just listened to the 911 operator, that was the action that lead to everything (which is why my comments seem to be primarily defending Martin, as Zimmerman is at fault for what he did that caused everything else to happen). Both people could have done a LOT of things differently over the course of what happened that would not result in Martin's death, but they didn't happen, and both parties are at fault for that. Its not unreasonable as to why they both took the actions they did though, as given the circumstances, they're responses almost anyone would have (not necessarily what each person would do), and obviously neither of them knew what the outcome would be.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Donnie    2189
Great now no one can say it's racism, the dumb fuck killed a kid that's all there is to it.
  • Downvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Malcolm    4612
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335453687' post='3165240']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335435788' post='3165074']
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
[/quote]
Solid argument, I have no rebuttal.
[/quote]

i am absolutely correct in my assessment of you idiots.

i find it pretty sad that the arguments presented wouldn't even fly for kids in highschool, let alone adults attending university/graduated university.

also, anyone who negged that post is an insecure little bitch who felt i was talking about them. that or they actually believe the arguments presented are worth anything, which would throw them in with the idiots regardless.
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Pharaoh Atem    15769
We could honestly make do with some actual review of pertinent laws, though, rather than this casual back-and-forth. A random reader like me gets nothing from a session of "Peddle and Friends go to Court"
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ammit    5159
[quote name='Terra' timestamp='1335488248' post='3165813']
[quote name='Conspire' timestamp='1335481980' post='3165679']
[quote]]If you can give me more scenarios where Zimmerman would have been able to keep his gun concealed from Trayvon until the point that he was shot, then let me know, since I am honestly having a hard time coming up with any.[/quote]

Really? There's a lot of ways to conceal a weapon... And when the aggressor is using both his hands to beat your face in, yours are free to grab the gun from your pants, hoodie, the holster inside your jacket.
[/quote]
While yes there are a lot of ways to conceal a weapon, most of the time, the weapon would become visible during the fight, especially if you have the person pinned down, which is my point. While he may not have seen it before starting some physical contact, there's going to be a point where he'd see it, and probably think "oh shit, this guy was stalking me and he had a gun" and would try to incapacitate the guy.

[b]For the record, I don't believe Zimmerman should be charged with anything. What he did was legal in Florida as he felt threatened and had been getting beaten.[/b] However, my whole thing is that both parties are at fault here. Zimmerman didn't have to follow Martin, which him being overzealous is what caused the whole issue. Martin should not have turned around and confronted Zimmerman. But hindsight is 20/20. I can see the reasons both people did what they did. Zimmerman trying to protect his neighborhood by profiling someone he doesn't know, and Martin confronting the person who followed them are both normal actions given the circumstances. I'm just saying that there's reasons as to why both people took the actions they did, and what transpired had. My whole problem is the fact that it could have been avoided had Zimmerman just listened to the 911 operator, that was the action that lead to everything (which is why my comments seem to be primarily defending Martin, as Zimmerman is at fault for what he did that caused everything else to happen). Both people could have done a LOT of things differently over the course of what happened that would not result in Martin's death, but they didn't happen, and both parties are at fault for that. Its not unreasonable as to why they both took the actions they did though, as given the circumstances, they're responses almost anyone would have (not necessarily what each person would do), and obviously neither of them knew what the outcome would be.
[/quote]
The whole point of this case is that he was the instigator of the fight or whatever you want to call it, and thus his killing of Travyon was not protected by the Stand Your Ground law. The law only applies to the defender, not the aggressor, and according to what we know of the situation, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this instance when he started to stalk after Martin. In fact, if anything Martin has right to SYG, because the law states that you can attack/kill a person if you even feel threatened by them, Travyon would have been in the right to attack his unknown stalker.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gear    712
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335512386' post='3166167']
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335453687' post='3165240']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335435788' post='3165074']
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
[/quote]
Solid argument, I have no rebuttal.
[/quote]

i am absolutely correct in my assessment of you idiots.

i find it pretty sad that the arguments presented wouldn't even fly for kids in highschool, let alone adults attending university/graduated university.

also, anyone who negged that post is an insecure little bitch who felt i was talking about them. that or they actually believe the arguments presented are worth anything, which would throw them in with the idiots regardless.
[/quote]
Instead of lashing out care to explain your views and thoughts on the case legally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Medb    773
[quote name='Ammit' timestamp='1335521863' post='3166220']
[quote name='Terra' timestamp='1335488248' post='3165813']
[quote name='Conspire' timestamp='1335481980' post='3165679']
[quote]]If you can give me more scenarios where Zimmerman would have been able to keep his gun concealed from Trayvon until the point that he was shot, then let me know, since I am honestly having a hard time coming up with any.[/quote]

Really? There's a lot of ways to conceal a weapon... And when the aggressor is using both his hands to beat your face in, yours are free to grab the gun from your pants, hoodie, the holster inside your jacket.
[/quote]
While yes there are a lot of ways to conceal a weapon, most of the time, the weapon would become visible during the fight, especially if you have the person pinned down, which is my point. While he may not have seen it before starting some physical contact, there's going to be a point where he'd see it, and probably think "oh shit, this guy was stalking me and he had a gun" and would try to incapacitate the guy.

[b]For the record, I don't believe Zimmerman should be charged with anything. What he did was legal in Florida as he felt threatened and had been getting beaten.[/b] However, my whole thing is that both parties are at fault here. Zimmerman didn't have to follow Martin, which him being overzealous is what caused the whole issue. Martin should not have turned around and confronted Zimmerman. But hindsight is 20/20. I can see the reasons both people did what they did. Zimmerman trying to protect his neighborhood by profiling someone he doesn't know, and Martin confronting the person who followed them are both normal actions given the circumstances. I'm just saying that there's reasons as to why both people took the actions they did, and what transpired had. My whole problem is the fact that it could have been avoided had Zimmerman just listened to the 911 operator, that was the action that lead to everything (which is why my comments seem to be primarily defending Martin, as Zimmerman is at fault for what he did that caused everything else to happen). Both people could have done a LOT of things differently over the course of what happened that would not result in Martin's death, but they didn't happen, and both parties are at fault for that. Its not unreasonable as to why they both took the actions they did though, as given the circumstances, they're responses almost anyone would have (not necessarily what each person would do), and obviously neither of them knew what the outcome would be.
[/quote]
The whole point of this case is that he was the instigator of the fight or whatever you want to call it, and thus his killing of Travyon was not protected by the Stand Your Ground law. The law only applies to the defender, not the aggressor, and according to what we know of the situation, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this instance when he started to stalk after Martin. In fact, if anything Martin has right to SYG, because the law states that you can attack/kill a person if you even feel threatened by them, Travyon would have been in the right to attack his unknown stalker.
[/quote]
Both parties could have claimed to feel threatened. And while I agree that him stalking Trayvon is what led to everything happening, that isn't directly starting the conflict. Both sides have valid points, and in each one both people could be considered to standing their ground, from their own perspective. Martin felt threatened by being followed so he confronted Zimmerman (legal). The fight occurred, and Zimmerman felt threatened for his life with Martin on him beating him up. In this whole thing, both parties end up being the aggressor, at different points, making both people feel threatened for their lives. I'm just thinking that the key thing is that Zimmerman didn't directly start the fight himself, and that why he's not considered to be aggressor for the entirety of it. Both people can be seen as standing their ground.

And this is also why the Stand Your Ground law is crap, since all you have to do is "feel" threatened to be able to use lethal force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»orangeeyes    11863
[quote name='Gear' timestamp='1335533650' post='3166297']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335512386' post='3166167']
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335453687' post='3165240']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335435788' post='3165074']
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
[/quote]
Solid argument, I have no rebuttal.
[/quote]

i am absolutely correct in my assessment of you idiots.

i find it pretty sad that the arguments presented wouldn't even fly for kids in highschool, let alone adults attending university/graduated university.

also, anyone who negged that post is an insecure little bitch who felt i was talking about them. that or they actually believe the arguments presented are worth anything, which would throw them in with the idiots regardless.
[/quote]
Instead of lashing out care to explain your views and thoughts on the case legally.
[/quote]
Why would he do that? If he just vaguely insults people without offering any insight or argument, he can hide his ignorance. As long as he doesn't give anyone any points to attack he doesn't risk looking unintelligent. It's Internetology 101.
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Pharaoh Atem    15769
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335541668' post='3166370']
[quote name='Gear' timestamp='1335533650' post='3166297']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335512386' post='3166167']
[quote name='Fear the Deer v2.0' timestamp='1335453687' post='3165240']
[quote name='XxMalcolm' timestamp='1335435788' post='3165074']
bunch of fucking morons in this thread.

i really hope the majority of you are not trying to major in law.
[/quote]
Solid argument, I have no rebuttal.
[/quote]

i am absolutely correct in my assessment of you idiots.

i find it pretty sad that the arguments presented wouldn't even fly for kids in highschool, let alone adults attending university/graduated university.

also, anyone who negged that post is an insecure little bitch who felt i was talking about them. that or they actually believe the arguments presented are worth anything, which would throw them in with the idiots regardless.
[/quote]
Instead of lashing out care to explain your views and thoughts on the case legally.
[/quote]
Why would he do that? If he just vaguely insults people without offering any insight or argument, he can hide his ignorance. As long as he doesn't give anyone any points to attack he doesn't risk looking unintelligent. It's Internetology 101.
[/quote]
And doesn't Internetology 101 also more or less boil to "if you call someone out as doing precisely that, you fuck up their insults unless they start offering perfect insights and invulnerable arguments?"

Tate, you don't know what you've done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»orangeeyes    11863
wat
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Barron    7988
[url="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/george-zimmerman-myspace-page-trayvon-martin-shooter-called-180717152.html"]http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/george-zimmerman-myspace-page-trayvon-martin-shooter-called-180717152.html[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»neptune    3789
kinda makes me wonder if conspire doesn't like black people.

just sayin'
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twitter    2057
apparently there were target practice print outs of Trayvon and they sold out in 2 days

what kind of fucked shit....
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Twitter' timestamp='1336859432' post='3178852']
apparently there were target practice print outs of Trayvon and they sold out in 2 days

what kind of fucked shit....
[/quote]

Yeah I heard about that too. Zimmerman's lawyer was like FUUU- how am I gonna get Zimmerman off if people keep doing this shit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twitter    2057
where did you read about it? I read it on hpost and apparently the people who bought it believed zimmerman shot a thug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Twitter' timestamp='1336860058' post='3178859']
where did you read about it? I read it on hpost and apparently the people who bought it believed zimmerman shot a thug
[/quote]

I saw it on HuffPo too. There was the video embedded where they interviewed the lawyer, and he was crying about getting a fair trial.

Yeh, they wouldn't say how many they had sold either. I have a feeling they'll be making another batch though if they sold out so quickly. When I heard about it I thought they'd have just a hoodie but they had iced tea and Skittles sticking out of his pocket.

I think we should lobby Skittles to sue the guy who sold it for using their product without their consent. Skittles has to be trademarked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×