The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Chubbles** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:25 pm

Jackofhearts wrote:The problem with Zimmerman playing victim is, none of this probably would have happened if he had carried his ass home and let the authorities deal with this as they initially told him.

I keep getting hung up on that point but the more i hear and they have a witness saying the black kid was the first to use force and was beating on this other guy makes me think that zimmerman was defending himself after all is said and done. zimmerman was wrong to get that involved in the first place but it does look more and more like he was defending himself

by **Chubbles** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:26 pm

Herald wrote:The whole thing sounds fishy to me. Was Trayvon really supposed to be attacking this guy while carrying a can of soda and a bag of Skittles??

"TASTE THE @#$%-ing RAINBOW!!!"
*throws candy at Mr. Neighborhood Watch*

No. If he was there to start trouble, he'd have been packing, too.

I don't see how having a can of soda in your pocket would prevent you from attacking someone :smt017

by **Herald** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:29 pm

Chubbles wrote:
I don't see how having a can of soda in your pocket would prevent you from attacking someone

ITT: Chubbles doesn't know that it's a bad idea to violently shake a carbonated beverage and/or potentially bust it open during, say, a violent altercation with another person.

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:49 pm

Iced tea isn't carbonated. Herald is wrong as usual.

by **DMM** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:53 pm

SMH at the people mailing Skittles to the Police Department, or marching with 'hoodies' skittles and iced tea. And really shaking my head at the Black Panthers. :smt011

by **Herald** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:01 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:Iced tea isn't carbonated. Herald is wrong as usual.

Heard that it was soda, not iced tea. Jude missed the point as usual.
That point being, you don't want ANY such thing in your pocket that can bust open during a fight.

by **Chubbles** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:02 pm

It was grape drink obviously

by **S.F. Jude Terror** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:03 pm

Herald wrote:
Heard that it was soda, not iced tea. Jude jumped the gun as usual.

Clearly this is racial tension with you being black and Chubbles being a Mexican.

by **Herald** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:05 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
Clearly this is racial tension with you being black and Chubbles being a Mexican.

Nah. Now I'm opposing a fat white guy who moved cross-country to escape his crazed in-laws.

by **Chubbles** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:06 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
Clearly this is racial tension with you being black and Chubbles being a Mexican.

Guy acts like I slept with his wife or something, as if I would do such a thing

by **Cat-Scratch** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:10 pm

Skittles and iced tea should be banned as they can lead to death.

/Geraldo'd

by **Cat-Scratch** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:12 pm

Chubbles wrote:
Guy acts like I slept with his wife or something, as if I would do such a thing

Now you've gone and insulted him by saying his wife is good enough to sleep with on him!

NOT WINNING!!!

by **Cat-Scratch** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:15 pm

Chubbles wrote:
I keep getting hung up on that point but the more i hear and they have a witness saying the black kid was the first to use force and was beating on this other guy makes me think that zimmerman was defending himself after all is said and done. zimmerman was wrong to get that involved in the first place but it does look more and more like he was defending himself

Here's the thing now, since I asked earlier and do so again.

How is it that Martin was not using that same law that Zimmerman is attempting to use, not the justification for his supposed attack?

To whom does the "Stand your ground" law really work for in this?

by **Herald** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:17 pm

Chubbles wrote:
Guy acts like I slept with his wife or something, as if I would do such a thing

I'll need that guarantee in writing and notarized! In QUADRUPLICATE!! :twisted:

by **GOSD** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:25 pm

DMM wrote:Well, my first point was that your "comparison" post about Obama treating the murder in the story in your link equally to the Martin killing was completely wrong, which it was.

As to my second point, the human body is very resilient. It is hard to kill somebody in hand-to-hand combat unless you choke somebody to death or crush their windpipe. If you pick up a rock or other weapon, you may be able to crush somebody's skull in, or--as is the case based on the details in Scratch's post--pound somebody's head into concrete or rock. Sounds like Zimmerman really may have felt his life was in danger with some justification. It's a bad situation, and I just hope this teaches him to stop trying to play hero and let the police do their jobs instead.

My comparison story was a joke. One you obviously didn't get.

Secondly, you're getting off the point. If Martin was beating Zimmerman, he had every right to defend himself. Regardless if the kid could have killed him or not. We'll just have to see if those "facts" hold up in court.

All I can say is that if Zimmerman has no charges filed against him or is found innocent in a trial against him, all whites and hispanics better watch out.

It's the Rodney King stuff all over again.

Time will unfortunately prove me right.

Just wait and see. :-(