The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[Cat-Scratch]

Has anyone here heard Michelle Williams' hate filled rhetoric? How is her "get the honkys, it's a long time coming" speech all that different from the Klan's stuff?

Her's advocates killing honkys. The KKK advocates killing blacks... jews... hispanics... asians... Her's is more focused for one.

[kingbeavis]

Let's all hope that he's dead.

And every other media whore surrounding this entire story.

There is so much bullshit surrounding this story that I don't believe anything anymore. I hope the guy goes free because he will never get a fair trial at this point.

[Benderbrau]

And every other media whore surrounding this entire story.

There is so much bullshit surrounding this story that I don't believe anything anymore. I hope the guy goes free because he will never get a fair trial at this point.

Go free?? With no authority he shot and killed an unarmed kid in a situation that he himself provoked against the express orders of a 911 operator. These facts are not in dispute and alone are enough to hang him.

[GOSD]

Go free?? With no authority he shot and killed an unarmed kid in a situation that he himself provoked against the express orders of a 911 operator. These facts are not in dispute and alone are enough to hang him.

Not necessarily.

"We don't need you to do that" vs. "Do not get out of your car" or "Do not follow him" are different animals.

There are some gray areas in this story which could bring up reasonable doubt.

I think this is why the DA is taking her time.

[habitual]

And every other media whore surrounding this entire story.

There is so much bullshit surrounding this story that I don't believe anything anymore. I hope the guy goes free because he will never get a fair trial at this point.

Still fairer than what that kid got.

Hab

[habitual]

Not necessarily.

"We don't need you to do that" vs. "Do not get out of your car" or "Do not follow him" are different animals.

There are some gray areas in this story which could bring up reasonable doubt.

I think this is why the DA is taking her time.

She's not taking her time, she was scheduled to announce the decision tomorrow.

Coincidence? Doubtful....

Hab

[kingbeavis]

These facts are not in dispute and alone are enough to hang him.

It seems the me that almost every "fact" is in dispute. The debates of the "facts" are being used to paint a picture of both people involved and to drive ratings.

[GOSD]

She's not taking her time, she was scheduled to announce the decision tomorrow.

Coincidence? Doubtful....

Hab

Don't get all excited. She'll get to it eventually.

[Benderbrau]

It seems the me that almost every "fact" is in dispute. The debates of the "facts" are being used to paint a picture of both people involved and to drive ratings.

The kid wasn't armed and Zimmerman was in no immediate danger. The fact that he chose to put himself in danger by confronting the kid does not permit him to use deadly force.

[Benderbrau]

Not necessarily.

"We don't need you to do that" vs. "Do not get out of your car" or "Do not follow him" are different animals.

There are some gray areas in this story which could bring up reasonable doubt.

I think this is why the DA is taking her time.

All of which include the words "do not" as in "stop" as in "back the fuck away"

[achilles]

Still fairer than what that kid got.

Hab

Only if you buy the line that the shooting was completely based on race, and that the kid was minding his own business when he was shot, instead of actively trying to murder Zimmerman. Both positions have been fairly well discredited to this point.

It's like a shooting out here by the cops, in which they shot an unarmed black kid who they say was reaching for his waistband at the time. There's a huge stink locally about this saintly kid who got shot. The background was that the saintly kid had robbed a Mexican guy's car of a number of valuables, and the Mexican guy had called the cops on him, lying by saying he was armed, claiming he figured it would get a faster response time, (which apparently it did). So the cops were chasing a guy they thought was armed, who made a suspicious movement. And he got shot for it.

To here the kid's family and friends and the black community, the kid was out delivering meals to the elderly in between visiting sick kids at the local hospital, rather than robbing cars. The media too. But he wouldn't have been shot if he hadn't been committing a crime in the first place. The Mexican guy BTW wasn't charged. And the cops are coming under a ton of criticism by the black community.

In Martin's case, if he hadn't jumped Zimmerman and pounded his head into the ground repeatedly, he would still be here, according the the available physical and other evidence at this point.

[achilles]

The kid wasn't armed and Zimmerman was in no immediate danger. The fact that he chose to put himself in danger by confronting the kid does not permit him to use deadly force.

At the time of the shooting he was in immediate danger, and yes, he is permitted to defend himself in that case, stand your ground law or no. The law doesn't permit Martin to assault Zimmerman because he was feeling dissed. It doesn't permit him to attempt to kill Zimmerman because he felt dissed. It does permit lethal force in defense of life, as Zimmerman claims, and as is so far backed up by the evidence.

[Benderbrau]

At the time of the shooting he was in immediate danger, and yes, he is permitted to defend himself in that case, stand your ground law or no. The law doesn't permit Martin to assault Zimmerman because he was feeling dissed. It doesn't permit him to attempt to kill Zimmerman because he felt dissed. It does permit lethal force in defense of life, as Zimmerman claims, and as is so far backed up by the evidence.

You can't cry self defense in a confrontation that you created. If I walk up to a gangbanger and punch him I don't have the right to then shoot him when he responds and claim it was "self defense". Do you realize the bloodshed that such a precedent would create?

[achilles]

You can't cry self defense in a confrontation that you created. If I walk up to a gangbanger and punch him I don't have the right to then shoot him when he responds and claim it was "self defense". Do you realize the bloodshed that such a precedent would create?

Zimmerman didn't walk up to Martin and punch him in the face. That was what Martin did. And yes, Zimmerman absolutely can claim self defense in the case he was describing. Think of the havoc BTW that would be created if you don't have the right to self defense against someone actively trying to kill you.

[Snug]

You can't cry self defense in a confrontation that you created.

Sure you can. It happened twice here last year.

In the first instance, some dude whacked a guy with a wrench and stole his beer outside a convenience store. Guy goes to his truck, gets his pistol, and goes after Beer Thief. Beer Thief hits him again with the wrench, and Guy shoots him dead.

In the second instance, Guy was hosting a kegger and charging guests $2 admission. He shuts the party down when some people he doesn't like the looks of show up. They try to abscond with the keg. Guy and his wife follow Beer Thieves out to the street. Beer Thief #1 punches Guy's wife. Beer Thief #2 shoves Guy and knocks him on his ass. Guy pulls out pistol and shoots #1 and #2. Beer Thieves #3 and #4 leave their friends bleeding in the street and drive off with the keg. They are later indicted for felony murder.

Both shooters could have just let their beer get stolen. But they didn't. They pursued, confronted, and when attacked, killed their attackers.

I'm sure in some other states they would have been charged with a crime. Not in Arizona, though.