Post Reply
Page 19 of 27  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 27 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Zimmerman: I was attacked first
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 2:13PM #181
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

Mar 30, 2012 -- 1:56PM, rabello wrote:


Mar 30, 2012 -- 1:22PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


You're welcome to your views, but I really don't care what you think. 




This time around, tell that to the poor parents of the murdered victim.   I'd recommend that you leave out the "so sad/too bad, just glad it wasn't my kid" portion of your "shoot first/ask questions later" philosophy, though.




First, a blatant appeal to emotion.


The parents get a free pass, as far as I'm concerned -- they are not in a position from which to think objectively or rationally. Nobody whose kid just died could.


As to your other assertion, it's a wierd non-sequitor.


Again, I will repeat -- why do you keep bringing up firearms in response to my observations -- why do you keep assuming I see this case as somehow a threat to my Second Amendment rights. I don't. 


I've merely stated, that the gross-oversimplifications of this incident, in order to fit a certain narative, and assumptions about racism -- are questionable. 


We simply don't know all the facts. And probably won't for quite some time. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 2:44PM #182
rabello
Posts: 20,964

Mar 30, 2012 -- 2:13PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Again, I will repeat -- why do you keep bringing up firearms in response to my observations -- why do you keep assuming I see this case as somehow a threat to my Second Amendment rights. I don't. 




Well, if you read back, you'll see that it was you who brought up "gun rights" in response to my post, which said:


His "duties" were of his own creation. He was neither voted to head up a "neighborhood watch" program, nor was he authorized by any of his neighbors to stalk "strangers" as part of a neighborhood watch program.  In fact, it was reported on a news program that he was in violation of Florida state law for carrying a gun in a law enforcement capacity without a permit. 


So, what do you think of that information -- that even though he takes credit for being a "neighborhood watch" volunteer, he didn't get the proper permit to use his weapon in such a capacity?  That has nothing to do with the second amendment, which YOU brough up, not me.


It was further reported by a "carry" advocate, that those who DO choose to "carry" are prohibited from seeking confrontation, and in fact, are supposed to back off.  What do you think of THAT violation by Zimmerman, which also has nothing to do with the second amendment, which YOU brought up, not me.


Mar 30, 2012 -- 2:13PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


We simply don't know all the facts. And probably won't for quite some time. 




If you listen to the 9-1-1 tapes, which clearly show Zimmerman singling out this kid and only this kid, and clearly show the 9-1-1 dispatcher telling Zimmerman he didn't need to follow the kid he targetted, couple that with the eyewitness testimony and the police tape that shows a completely nonchalant & uninjured Zimmerman, consider the testimony of the funeral director who says there were no injuries to the body of the victim, except a bullet hole in the chest, the we DO know enough of "the facts".  The only issue is how much we insist on denying what we see and hear in order to justify the pass Zimmerman the Shooter already got.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 3:40PM #183
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782

Mar 30, 2012 -- 2:44PM, rabello wrote:


Mar 30, 2012 -- 2:13PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Again, I will repeat -- why do you keep bringing up firearms in response to my observations -- why do you keep assuming I see this case as somehow a threat to my Second Amendment rights. I don't. 




Well, if you read back, you'll see that it was you who brought up "gun rights" in response to my post, which said:


His "duties" were of his own creation. He was neither voted to head up a "neighborhood watch" program, nor was he authorized by any of his neighbors to stalk "strangers" as part of a neighborhood watch program.  In fact, it was reported on a news program that he was in violation of Florida state law for carrying a gun in a law enforcement capacity without a permit. 


So, what do you think of that information -- that even though he takes credit for being a "neighborhood watch" volunteer, he didn't get the proper permit to use his weapon in such a capacity?  That has nothing to do with the second amendment, which YOU brough up, not me.


It was further reported by a "carry" advocate, that those who DO choose to "carry" are prohibited from seeking confrontation, and in fact, are supposed to back off.  What do you think of THAT violation by Zimmerman, which also has nothing to do with the second amendment, which YOU brought up, not me.


Mar 30, 2012 -- 2:13PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


We simply don't know all the facts. And probably won't for quite some time. 




If you listen to the 9-1-1 tapes, which clearly show Zimmerman singling out this kid and only this kid, and clearly show the 9-1-1 dispatcher telling Zimmerman he didn't need to follow the kid he targetted, couple that with the eyewitness testimony and the police tape that shows a completely nonchalant & uninjured Zimmerman, consider the testimony of the funeral director who says there were no injuries to the body of the victim, except a bullet hole in the chest, the we DO know enough of "the facts".  The only issue is how much we insist on denying what we see and hear in order to justify the pass Zimmerman the Shooter already got.




If he was in violation of any of Florida's gun laws (which I am not familiar with), that will probably come out.


As to the "facts": 


•The 9-1-1 tapes indicate he "singled Martin out." Huh? Martin was the only one there are that time. You can't "single out" somebody when they're alone. Had a black kid and a white kid both been there, and Zimmerman had said something like, "Oh, that white boy can't be bad, I'm goin' after the n***er," then the assertion of "singling out a black" might make sense. Otherwise, it's pure nonsese.


•The video tape could poke holes in Zimmerman's story. Or, it could not. He's young enough, it's perfectly feasible that, even after a pretty dire struggle, he would appear "fine" on a few seconds of grainy video. He appears to be uninjured, or at least, not seriously hurt. But appearances in this case could mean diddly squat. Plenty of people, especially young people under 30, might appear to be "just fine" only a relatively short while later, and for a few seconds of grainy video. I once helped a young car accident victim who looked "just fine," until you got close enough to see the hole in his head. That injury would not have shown up on the sort of video Zimmerman was in.


•It's also perfectly feasible that Martin would have no signs of trauma that a funeral director would notice. 



Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 4:07PM #184
Marcion
Posts: 2,883

Mar 30, 2012 -- 1:42PM, teilhard wrote:


I agree that "OJ" probably was Guilty ...


BUT the Investigation was so badly handled by The LAPD (including especially by a self-admitted racist Cop, Mark Fuhrman) that the Jury DID have "Reasonable Doubt" ... the Jury DID essentially find "The System" GUILTY of screwing-up ...


(BTW, the Prosecutor of The "OJ" Case, Marcia Clark, has come out in Public indicating that The Night Stalker probably did NOT have reasonable Grounds for Self-Defense ... So ...)


Mar 30, 2012 -- 12:57PM, Marcion wrote:


Mar 30, 2012 -- 10:14AM, teilhard wrote:


An of course, many of us recall that The Rodney King Case figured prominently in the Fact that The SYSTEM was as much on Trial then as was "OJ" ...


Mar 30, 2012 -- 9:06AM, Marcion wrote:


Mar 28, 2012 -- 3:47PM, rabello wrote:


Mar 28, 2012 -- 3:38PM, Marcion wrote:


Prudent black leaders recognize Reverend Al and Jese Jackson as the racist trouble makers they are.


dailycaller.com/2012/03/28/alveda-king-s...




You mean the rightwing Republican ones who opine on FAUX News and on rightwing blogs like Daily Caller, which are at the forefront in demonizing a murdered teenager?


Maybe Alveda King and other black rightwingers can get around to explaining exactly WHY the Shooter Zimmerman "suspected" Trayvon Martin of being a "no gooder" just because he was walking through a "gated community" on the way back from a store where he bought candy and a nonalcoholic drink in a can? 


How about it Alveda?  What's your considered opinion on that event? White rightwingers do not see a need to question or explain that particular, precipitating event...maybe you, Alveda, can enlighten us.




Your responses remind me of the people who said you weren't really black unless you believed OJ was innocent. Facts be damned








The difference was OJ was guilty. People went to prison on less compelling evidence. Jury nullification is not justice. If Zimmermn goes to trial we may very well see jury nullification again.


The purpose of a jury trial is to determine guilt or innocense, not to "send a message".








Oh yes Marcia Clark who had more time to tell Johnny Cochran that she was wearing crotchless panties rather than pursue a case. Of course having an idiot for a judge who was more concerned about how he appeared on the Jay Leno, plus allowing booze soaked F Lee Bailey o question Furman if he ever used the N word, what a crock, what did that have to do with anything. As one black detective later remarked he couldn't understand why Mark was that stupid since all detectives in South Central used the N word.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 8:17PM #185
Stardove
Posts: 15,297

I would think buried in this thread somewhere is Zimmerman saying through others he was walking back to his car and Martin approached him.  If not here it's certainly been reported.


Check out this video at the 7.48 mark of a picture of the location and where Martin was killed.  Martin was found dead on the grass face down with his head away from the sidewalk, not near the street where Zimmerman's car would have been parked.


An arrow point to where Martin's body was found.  At around the 13 minutes mark in video the location is talked about in detail.  At 14.30 on the video you can see where the shooting took place and the path Martin was taking to get home.


(A short ad before video begins.)


Then considered the following:


According to the version of events police apparently gave to Martin's parents, after Zimmerman got out of his car, Martin approached him and asked "did he have a problem," Fulton said.


After seeing where the killing took place there is no way the version of events above could be correct.


Beliefnet Community Wide Moderator ~ Peace Love Stardove
Problems? Send a message to Beliefnet_community

The words I speak and write carry energy and power, so I choose them with care and clear purpose. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 9:35PM #186
Iwantamotto
Posts: 8,158

I think that's what gets me riled up more than anything else:  an entire community lying their asses off to protect a psychotic killer.  It's disgusting.  The pro-Zimmerman stories reeked of desperation the moment they spoke them.

Knock and the door shall open.  It's not my fault if you don't like the decor.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 10:58PM #187
arielg
Posts: 9,116

It doesn't seem to be any more clearer today than the first day this became news. Those who were for at the beginning are more for and those who were against are more against.  And everybody protesting  they have an open mind.


I wish there was more discussions about the elephant in the room: guns and why it is so easy to go around carrying one and using them to "solve" these kinds of problems. 


 There may be a lot of interpretations regardings  motivations, frames of minds and attitudes people have about race, safety and other issues, but there  is nothing unclear about the usual outcomes of accepting violence as an acceptable way to deal with conflicts.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2012 - 12:24AM #188
teilhard
Posts: 50,888

Unfortunately, The SCOTUS Decision re: Amendment Two recently made The Gun Question MOOT ...


Mar 30, 2012 -- 10:58PM, arielg wrote:


It doesn't seem to be any more clearer today than the first day this became news. Those who were for at the beginning are more for and those who were against are more against.  And everybody protesting  they have an open mind.


I wish there was more discussions about the elephant in the room: guns and why it is so easy to go around carrying one and using them to "solve" these kinds of problems. 


 There may be a lot of interpretations regardings  motivations, frames of minds and attitudes people have about race, safety and other issues, but there  is nothing unclear about the usual outcomes of accepting violence as an acceptable way to deal with conflicts.





Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2012 - 2:07AM #189
arielg
Posts: 9,116

Unfortunately, The SCOTUS Decision re: Amendment Two recently made The Gun Question MOOT ...



Screw SCOTUS.  We have a brain to think, not just to acquiesce.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 31, 2012 - 7:22AM #190
teilhard
Posts: 50,888

One certainly WISHES that Common Sense woud "stand its Ground," eh ... ???


Mar 31, 2012 -- 2:07AM, arielg wrote:


Unfortunately, The SCOTUS Decision re: Amendment Two recently made The Gun Question MOOT ...



Screw SCOTUS.  We have a brain to think, not just to acquiesce.





Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 19 of 27  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 27 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook