The guy in the link that dxdx posted I hope gets murder ( iMO ).if the guys music pisses you off that bad stfu,hurry up,finish your business and leave then problem solved.people like this is what gives the rest of us who has a carry permit the image of trigger happy and why you hear more about gun control.
I demand justice for Daniel AdkinsJr
- Thread starter Pyramid_Party
- Start date
Race was never a part of anything. It was not proven in court. The FBI investigated Zimmerman there official conclusion he's not a racist. The Prosecutions opening statement they said this is not about race. So people who don't know the facts and media got to stop repeating the lie the sold the american people.
You seem to question my stand that Jude is guilty of murder. I assume your stand is he innocent.
Race was a huge factor in initial media and social media coverage.
Still waiting for when I claimed anyone was innocent
How about you find someone else to argue with. You're assuming and making up far too many things for my taste
Still waiting for when I claimed anyone was innocent
How about you find someone else to argue with. You're assuming and making up far too many things for my taste
The issue the op is referring to is cut and dry. The guy who shot him is going to jail. Period. Punk who felt disrespected in front of his girl so he shot him. The Trayvon case is different. While I do believe Zimmerman should have been guilty of manslaughter, I don't believe he should have been tried for murder. I certainly don't think he should have been found innocent. Trayvon wasn't the good kid the media seemed to portray him as, and quite frankly, it became more about race than anything else imo. Zimmerman is a punk and a coward who was getting his ass beat by a 17 year old. Instead of being man and fighting back, he just shot him like a coward.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Hello; I fall onto the camp that the jury verdict was correct. The concept of self defense is a main issue that appears to reflect in the opinions posted on this thread as well as the more recent closed thread on the same sort of issue. For example you seem to have a sort of notion that a physical assault, fist fight, should remain a fist fight. That Perhaps if I or a person like Zimmerman is losing a fight and about to possibly be beaten to death that we should take it and not use some available means to defend ourselves. Allow me to guess that you think you some how know that a person beating on me, or in the Zimmerman incident, will stop before I am seriously injured or even dead. My understanding is that people have been beaten to death many times in the past. My personal assumption is that if anyone begins to beat on me it may well end in my demise and I hope to fight back for all that I am worth, including the use of whatever weapon may be available. That you or others may think of me as a punk or coward seems a reasonable price to pay.
I do happen to agree with you that the young man Martin was not the way much of the media has often portrayed him. I also strongly suspect that race colors the opinion of many, if not most. The comparison between the incident cited in the initial post of this thread and the Zimmerman self defense case does not seem so straight forward. There are too many significant differences.
The jury verdict was correct in as much that they followed the law. The fact that the law allows you to instigate a situation and then claim self defense is where the issue lies. The two cases have a similarity in that both are claiming to be in fear for their lives, difficult to prove otherwise, how do you say someones feelings are wrong. There is much a case fore racism in these cases. A part white male killed an unarmed black male and people say self defense. In the other a black man kills an unarmed white man and everyone wants justice. Carrying your piece, since you feel the need to, does not necessarily make one a punk and a coward. Willing to get into possible dangerous situations when not needed just because you have it does.
It's interesting to watch the interplay between the three groups. Those that think the shooter is guilty no matter what, those that realize the laws are what are flawed and need to be changed and the want to be gunslingers who want to go back to Dodge City and the OK Corral.
You say someone's feelings are wrong because of witnesses... In the taco bell case this thread is about, there were witnesses who said the victim was unarmed. The shooter was in a car and had the capability to get away if he felt threatened. He was not in any danger, he committed murder.
At least the Zimmerman case is debatable because there were no witnesses to the actual fight. My problem is that Zimmerman is some wanna be cop vigilante who went against the 911 advice. If he was a concerned citizen he would've let the police do their job.
Way to have a decent conversation... I can see you're a level headed person who looks at all the angles before drawing conclusions.
I don't know what you're referring to, so I'll cite all points:
1. No witnesses - OK, maybe "NO" is a strong word, how about no CLEAR witnesses:
"So far no witness has testified about who started the fight and there have been conflicting accounts about who was on top during the fight. "
Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zim...tion-witnesses/story?id=19517236#.Uea5_axO5uA
2. Wanna be cop -
"The jury at George Zimmerman's murder trial were told about his rejection letter from a Virginia police department, his course work for a class that discussed self-defense laws, and his application to do a police ride-along, Judge Debra Nelson ruled Wednesday."
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/03/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-trial/2485825/
3. Going against 911 advice -
911: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
911: Ok, we don't need you to do that
Source: http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html
