Justice for Zimmerman

Status
Not open for further replies.
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,887
138,036
rrr_img_37185.png
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Maester Chuk_sl said:
you misunderstand my question. when was he going to stop pounding this man? when he was unconscious/dead? it took several more minutes before police arrived on the scene. do you think zim would still been alive after getting beat that long?
Click to expand...
That's a valid question, Chuk. How long do most beatings last? After 40 seconds of one-sided beating, Zimmerman had 2 cuts to the back of the head and a broken nose. Would Martin have kept beating him for another 40 seconds after that? Would Zimmerman have gotten another 2 cuts and a black eye? Would Martin continue for another 40 seconds after that? And another? Would Martin tire out eventually? We don't know the answers to these questions. We can't know. But to assume that the beating would have continued until Zimmerman was either dead or seriously injured is ridiculous and has no evidence to back it up. That's not how most fights go, Martin had never beaten someone to death (or serious injury) before, and he had no reason to murder this guy. He could have murdered him by accident by hitting him too hard at a bad angle, sure, but we can't assume that would have happened.

My guess (and it's only a guess) is that Martin would have stopped when he felt he had proved his point, when he had gotten the hormone-driven machismo out of his system and shown that he wasn't someone to be fucked with. Is this a fact? Of course not, but it makes a heck of a lot more sense than "He would have stopped when Zimmerman's lifeless corpse lay bleeding on the sidewalk".
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
khalid_sl said:
You guys don't get it.

Thing Tanoomba agrees with : Zimmerman COULD have died if he hadn't had the gun.

Thing Tanoomba disagrees with : Zimmerman WOULD have died if he hadn't had a gun.

Now it is damn silly Tanoomba has argued for 50 pages on this fact, even made a sig to try and mock someone about it, but there it is.
Click to expand...
Ah ah ah, I already explained that's not was the sig was for.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
fanaskin_sl said:
how should zimmerman have acted different once he was confronted by trayvon? assuming trayvon threw the first punch according to what little evidence we have.

what should have changed in zimmermans decision making when there is no hindsight?
Click to expand...
Zimmerman should have acted in no way different to how he acted. I thought I made that clear.
 
J

Jais

Trakanon Raider
1,896
535
Tanoomba_sl said:
My guess (and it's only a guess) is that Martin would have stopped when he felt he had proved his point, when he had gotten the hormone-driven machismo out of his system and shown that he wasn't someone to be fucked with.
Click to expand...
Sexist. Possibly racist.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
khalid_sl said:
You guys don't get it.

Thing Tanoomba agrees with : Zimmerman COULD have died if he hadn't had the gun.

Thing Tanoomba disagrees with : Zimmerman WOULD have died if he hadn't had a gun.

Now it is damn silly Tanoomba has argued for 50 pages on this fact, even made a sig to try and mock someone about it, but there it is.
Click to expand...
If you notice, I actually did use the word could, not would. Its even right there in his sig.
 
Famm

Famm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
11,041
794
Tanoomba_sl said:
Martin had never beaten someone to death (or serious injury) before, and he had no reason to murder this guy.
Click to expand...
He never killed anyone before, so he was incapable of ever killing someone? Having a reason would be premeditated, or Murder First, so no shit.

You're probably right, the most likely circumstance is the fight wouldn't have ended in Zimmerman's death. So what? What exactly is that relevant to?

Its not relevant to Zimmerman's threat level and force response, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to Zimmerman's motivations, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to the evidence, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to self defense, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to the fact that Martin was the aggressor, that's been addressed.

Why exactly are you stuck on this "point" endlessly?
 
W

W4RH34D_sl

shitlord
661
3
Famm_sl said:
He never killed anyone before, so he was incapable of ever killing someone? Having a reason would be premeditated, or Murder First, so no shit.

You're probably right, the most likely circumstance is the fight wouldn't have ended in Zimmerman's death. So what? What exactly is that relevant to?

Its not relevant to Zimmerman's threat level and force response, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to Zimmerman's motivations, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to the evidence, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to self defense, that's been addressed. Its not relevant to the fact that Martin was the aggressor, that's been addressed.

Why exactly are you stuck on this "point" endlessly?
Click to expand...
There is a thing called accidental dealth. What if he had a blot clot in his head? Or brain swelling?
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,887
138,036
Tanoomba_sl said:
Zimmerman should have acted in no way different to how he acted. I thought I made that clear.
Click to expand...
what's the point of the last 3 pages? why do you keep bringing it up?

if your point has no bearing on reality what's the point of your point?
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Jais_sl said:
What lead you to that conclusion?
Click to expand...
A) After 40 seconds of a one-sided beating, he only had 2 cuts on the back of the head and a broken nose, nothing anywhere close to life-threatening injuries.
B) Martin had never killed anyone before, nor had he ever beat someone to the point where they suffered permanent injury.
C) Martin had no reason to kill Zimmerman. (He technically had no reason to attack him at all, but fighting is how some hormone-riddled young men handle conflict)
D) He was in the back yard of a populated neighborhood full of people, very close to where his dad's girlfriend lived. If he had killed Martin, there's no way he would get away with it.
E) The grand majority of fights that have ever occurred, even the one-sided ones, did not end in fatality or permanent injury.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
http://www.brainline.org/content/200...-hospital.html

How do you know when you should go to the hospital after having "your bell rung"?


Going to the hospital after a head injury can mean the difference between life and death. But how do you know when to go? This can seem like a difficult decision, but let me sum up the answer for you: when in doubt, go to the hospital. Not later. Not tomorrow. Now!

Here's why.

The hospital is the only place that has a CAT scanner that can "look" inside your head and determine if there is any bleeding in your brain. Bleeding in the brain can be life-threatening when there is enough blood in the right spot to press down on the brain and squeeze it. These dangerous forms of bleeding are called epidural and subdural hematomas. Because the brain is trapped inside the skull, slow bleeding can force important parts of the brain against the inside of the skull and through the small hole in the base of the skull called the foramen magnum. These important brain areas, which control breathing and heart rate, stop working when they get squeezed and this is what results in death. With a CAT scan, epidural and subdural hematomas are easily diagnosed. The treatment requires surgery to remove the blood clot. The quicker the surgery, the better the chances for a good outcome.

So, how do you know when to go to the hospital? The decision is easy if you're the one making it for someone else and that person is not responding to you or looks asleep. This is called coma. The risk of a subdural or epidural hematoma in comatose head injured patients is high and you should summon an ambulance immediately!

But what if the head injury doesn't cause a coma? What if the head injury just causes a brief loss of consciousness, brief period of amnesia, or a sensation of feeling dazed? A person who has such an injury - termed concussion or mild traumatic brain injury - can look, and even feel, just fine. The problem is, even though the person looks good on the outside, inside the skull there is a small chance that slow bleeding is taking place. After a concussion, the chances of this happening are not large -about 1 in 1000- but the only way to diagnose it is with that hospital-based CAT scan.
Click to expand...
Que Tanoomba telling us 1 in 1000 is really far too small to be significant, really.

Tanoomba_sl said:
A) After 40 seconds of a one-sided beating, he only had 2 cuts on the back of the head and a broken nose, nothing anywhere close to life-threatening injuries.
B) Martin had never killed anyone before, nor had he ever beat someone to the point where they suffered permanent injury.
C) Martin had no reason to kill Zimmerman. (He technically had no reason to attack him at all, but fighting is how some hormone-riddled young men handle conflict)
D) He was in the back yard of a populated neighborhood full of people, very close to where his dad's girlfriend lived. If he had killed Martin, there's no way he would get away with it.
E) The grand majority of fights that have ever occurred, even the one-sided ones, did not end in fatality or permanent injury.
Click to expand...
What classes on biology have you had, again?

Classes in medicine?

Are you an EMT? Trained with a pre med career at all?

Any human physiology courses, preferably with an included lab component?

Anything at all? What about a basic statistics class, did you have to take that, to have any authority to be talking about probabilities?

No?

Bueller? Bueller?
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,887
138,036
ok tanoomba nit picked us into existential but meaningless correctness, resume posting as normal.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Maester Chuk_sl said:
tanoomba assumes that a fight is still a fight even after the opponent has been beaten. hopefully he is never asked to referee a boxing match.
tongue.png
Click to expand...
Really?Really?It was a one-sided fight, but Zimmerman wasn't "beaten" in the sense that he couldn't take any more punishment. He had two cuts to the back of the head and a broken nose. Hecertainlywasn't KO'd. You know how many high school fights end with worse injuries than that?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Notice how Tanoomba thinks he can talk with authority on medicine but yet has zero actual experience, or education, in the area?

Notice how he can't even explain what happens when a skull strikes an object?

Notice how he just rants and rants in circles over and over again?

Notice how incrediblywronghe is about all this?

Tanoomba_sl said:
Most cases? Nothing.
Click to expand...
Wrong. The human brain shifts inside the skull, striking the insides, bouncing back and forth, ricocheting. Even though there may be no damage visible on the outside, hemmorhaging occurs, brain cells die, veins burst. Blood pours onto the brain. In severe cases this blood may clot. It can kill you.

You have just proven you have zero fucking idea what you are talking about. Congratulations, you're an idiot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.