My only change is that I believe there was a possibly that Zimmerman could have died to Trayvon or even vice versa if the fight kept going on. Not having a gun does not guarantee that someone doesn't die. Do you disagree with that? Surely you don't think there is 0% chance that Zimmerman might have died if the fight had continued? If you disagree with this, why do you think Zimmerman should have been acquitted because of SD?
Of course I would never say there is a 0% chance that Zimmerman could have died. Shit, he could have slipped and fell on the way back to his car and died. But I do think it's very likely no one would have died had Zimmerman not been carrying a gun that night.
No, its not. Gavinrad summarized my position perfectly. You're just too fucking dumb to see that shit.
Wow, you are the pussiest pussy to ever pussy a pussy. Stop hiding behind Gav's apron. Gavin said that whether or not Martin would have killed Zimmerman is irrelevant to the case. I agree.
Yousaid Martin would have killed Zimmerman if not for his gun. I disagree.
Disproven at 40 minutes into the second section of the medical examiner questioning on the stand, intent is irrelevant.
Yeah, so the head is susceptible to stunning, concussions, and possibly death (if hit hard enough). Martin didn't hit hard enough to do any of those. He was angry and beating up the man, not trying to kill him.
Yes, they do. The idea that the death of Martin is Zimmerman's fault for carrying a gun is, in fact, conflicting with the evidence.
Who said Zimmerman was at fault for carrying the gun? Not me.
Its already been shown that you gave yourself plusses to get to positive through other accounts and that you then began giving negs before you made a post on this forum.
Askamod thread. You must have missed it.
He didn't need to generate one, he already has a few. Take a look at my profile. There's two of them. Exactly 5 posts. Seems pretty non coicidental. If they're real posters let them come in here and defend Tanoomba.
It has been shown? By whom? This is literally the first I've heard of this even being discussed in the Askamod thread. But shit, it's easy to make baseless claims when you know it can't be proven either way. Basically you're saying the only way to prove it is if people I have zero control over happen to read your post and decide I'm somehow worth defending just to make you look like even more of an idiot. But you know what, even if they did, you wouldn't buy it anyway. You'd say I'm doing it somehow, wouldn't you? And then you call
mepathetic. How the mighty have fallen.
