By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Breaking News: George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty!

killerzX said:
o_O.Q said:
killerzX said:

somebody is throwing or beating me with that rock, im going to use whatever means necessary to defend myself, that includes using a gun.

you guys are so illogical, and emotional driven, instead of rationally


you heard it here first folks advocating the use of a gun to blow someone's head off if they throw a rock at you is "rational"


if someone is beating your head in with a rock, please dont defend yourself, let them carry out their act of agression, you wouldnt want to be hypocritical now.


you just said that if someone chucks a rock at you, that you're justified in taking that person's life... i simply repeated that



Around the Network
WrathofTank said:
disolitude said:
WrathofTank said:
 

If this circumstance happened to me, I would be in fear for my safety and life.  I'm pretty sure you would be to.

Why would you be following a suspicious looking individual in the dark when you were clearly instructed not to do so and cops are on their way? And then out of the blue be blindsided by an attack and afraid for your life when a conflict takes place?

I wouldn't, but it isn't a crime to follow someone, and it isn't a crime to continue to do so after the dispatcher told you not to.  The only part that was relevant to the case is when Zimmerman and Martin engadged each other.


It may not be against the law to do these things but its also incredibly stupid. I know you can't be tried for stupidity but in cases like this where only one side lives to tell the story and there are no clear eyewitnesses, the cause and effect of the decisions made by people involved should be considered as much as the actual altercation.

No one really knows what happened in the dark. What if Zimmerman called Treyvon a filthy ni***r and he lost it and jumped on him?

All that is clear as day is that because Zimmerman decided to follow Treyvon and get himself involved, things escalated to a point where he apparently had to use a gun to defend himself.



killerzX said:
psrock said:
badgenome said:
psrock said:

Too bad he wasnt being attacked by a man. Too bad he was the one following the child.

A 6'2", 17 year old "child" who would have magically become a man within the next 12 months.

Insisting on calling Martin a child is a naked appeal to emotion, nothing more.

A 17 year is child no matter what you say. Too bad a grown ass man killed him. He's a child by law, by nature by any which way. 

i guess children are allowed to join the military then. fly jets, drop bombs, fire machine guns, rocket launchers throw grenades, etc.

yeah he was a child.

Child or man he got shot because he was provoked by a man who thought he was suspicious because of his fucking hoodie. Basically based on this ruling I can go out there right now, provoke a kid or man, then shoot him out of self-defense. Doesn't defense imply that you were attacked first not you forced someone to attack you. I mean what kind of logic is this.



Cobretti2 said:
WrathofTank said:
Cobretti2 said:
WrathofTank said:

The scenario I explained above is how many people are murdered, beaten, raped, etc.  They are attacked unexpectely and usually can't defend themselves properly.

It's great that you feel confident in your ability to defend yourself.  Unfortunately with this type of thinking you would likely become a victim of serious bodily injury or death (if put into the scenario mentioned above).  If you had a gun on you and didn't defend yourself from the attacker it would be unwise.


My problem with this is the fact that all the stuff you describe happens to many people. Rather then using guns as a solution to self defence why not work out the root cause of these issues? Here in Aus we do have those crimes but at the same time no one fears it will happen to them because they are so rare. If they do happen 9/10 times there was a motive behind it.

As someone who has travelled to America it amazes me how you can have some of the nicest places in the world and very friendly people and at the same time have areas that you feel like you are going to die in if you enter them.

Look I understand he was defending himself and all and I do agree by American law he is innocent. However the situation could have  been handled better and would have been if shoot first ask questions later wasn't bread into America's society.

First why aren't these neighbourhood watch guys trained in self defense and give say tazors etc as first choice of weapon?

Secondly why didnt he just annouce himself as neighbourhood watch?

Thirdly why arn't they patrolling in pairs in a job that may lead to altercations? 

We don't live in fear of these things in the USA either, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be prepared to deal with it if the situation occurs.  I agree that the incident could have been avoided and handled differently, but once the attack occurred, Zimmerman's actions were reasonable.

I like your solutions  for preventing this type of incident in the future, but people should always have the right to defend themselves if a sitution where their life or safety is at risk.


The thing is you shouldn't need to be prepaired if these crimes were rare. These types of crimes need to be reduced. However I don't know what the solution is because of the long American culture of guns and race vs race isn't something you will fix overnight.

Even in this thread you see some people bring up the whole black vs white thing. Why is this even a factor in modern America? This will only fuel more violence because of the verdict. Plus Jessie Jackson isn't helping the situation with his rants.

Slightly of topic but are people still hung up about slavery? Like when was the last black slave? Also what about the indians? why no one care about them? Granted all this was wrong in Americas history, but that is what it is, history and it is not like it happened only a few years ago. People need to move on and work out their differences. Kids arnt born racist they are tought to be by their parents and generations before them and friends.

Look at Europe and Germany as an example, do you see many people still hating them because of Hitler and his action? If you look at the older generations sure but the younger ones just don't care as it is in the past and all they can do is learn not to do the same. Even throught history someone has enslaved someone and are we all meant to hate each other because of it? 

 

 

 

It is easy to say you shouldn't need to be prepared, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

As for all the racist talk.  Unfortunately we have some people like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton who do a lot of race bating, racism would be a non issue if it weren't for people like them.  I guess they can't get over the past history.



Slimebeast said:
o_O.Q said:

a picture of the guy that was "mauled" and "battered" directly after the incident

 

well fk me 

anyways all the peope calling treyvon a thug amuse me... who had a gun? who had an actual criminal record? who pursued who?

finally why exactly was treyvon a street thug?

Because he viciously attacked Zimmerman, then sat on his chest and punched his fists in the poor man's face.

first off we don't know who actually initiated the physical conflict

what we do know is that he had a strange man following him at night... 

tell me what would you do if its dark and you notice you have someone following you, keeping in mind that such situations generally lead to robberies

the odd thing is that when you look at it logically you realise that for some people only zimmerman had the right to fear for his life ( even though he was responsible for the situation in the first place )



Around the Network
psrock said:
killerzX said:
psrock said:
badgenome said:
psrock said:

Too bad he wasnt being attacked by a man. Too bad he was the one following the child.

A 6'2", 17 year old "child" who would have magically become a man within the next 12 months.

Insisting on calling Martin a child is a naked appeal to emotion, nothing more.

A 17 year is child no matter what you say. Too bad a grown ass man killed him. He's a child by law, by nature by any which way. 

i guess children are allowed to join the military then. fly jets, drop bombs, fire machine guns, rocket launchers throw grenades, etc.

yeah he was a child.

what? how old are you? 

im 20, a marine, who is surrounded by many other marines from the ages of 17 and up. most are between the ages 17-22 ish



o_O.Q said:
killerzX said:
o_O.Q said:
killerzX said:

somebody is throwing or beating me with that rock, im going to use whatever means necessary to defend myself, that includes using a gun.

you guys are so illogical, and emotional driven, instead of rationally


you heard it here first folks advocating the use of a gun to blow someone's head off if they throw a rock at you is "rational"


if someone is beating your head in with a rock, please dont defend yourself, let them carry out their act of agression, you wouldnt want to be hypocritical now.


you just said that if someone chucks a rock at you, that you're justified in taking that person's life... i simply repeated that

clearly im not talking about some school yard fun of throwing rocks at each other. im talking stoning, the type of thing that still happens in the middle east and stuff. a little common sense would go a long way for you.



disolitude said:
WrathofTank said:
disolitude said:
WrathofTank said:
 

If this circumstance happened to me, I would be in fear for my safety and life.  I'm pretty sure you would be to.

Why would you be following a suspicious looking individual in the dark when you were clearly instructed not to do so and cops are on their way? And then out of the blue be blindsided by an attack and afraid for your life when a conflict takes place?

I wouldn't, but it isn't a crime to follow someone, and it isn't a crime to continue to do so after the dispatcher told you not to.  The only part that was relevant to the case is when Zimmerman and Martin engadged each other.


It may not be against the law to do these things but its also incredibly stupid. I know you can't be tried for stupidity but in cases like this where only one side lives to tell the story and there are no clear eyewitnesses, the cause and effect of the decisions made by people involved should be considered as much as the actual altercation.

No one really knows what happened in the dark. What if Zimmerman called Treyvon a filthy ni***r and he lost it and jumped on him?

All that is clear as day is that because Zimmerman decided to follow Treyvon and get himself involved, things escalated to a point where he apparently had to use a gun to defend himself.

I agree that better judgement could have been used, but it is easy to play Monday morning quarterback.



Slimebeast said:
o_O.Q said:

a picture of the guy that was "mauled" and "battered" directly after the incident

 

well fk me 

anyways all the peope calling treyvon a thug amuse me... who had a gun? who had an actual criminal record? who pursued who?

finally why exactly was treyvon a street thug?

Because he viciously attacked Zimmerman, then sat on his chest and punched his fists in the poor man's face.


If you harass me on my way home and a fight ensues I will beat you up. If you want to start a fight then dont pull a fucking gun when you start to lose. Quote from zimmerman after police told him to stay away "THEY always get away". Who is they??? The kid lived in the neigborhood too smh, from now on if someone harasses me from wearing a hoody I will break their necks before they shoot me whoever they are.

Better yet, I will go start a fight then after taking a couple of punches, I will shoot him out of self defense.



killerzX said:


you just said that if someone chucks a rock at you, that you're justified in taking that person's life... i simply repeated that

clearly im not talking about some school yard fun of throwing rocks at each other. im talking stoning, the type of thing that still happens in the middle east and stuff. a little common sense would go a long way for you.

you just said that if someone chucks a rock at you, that you're justified in taking that person's life... i simply repeated that