i swear man. reading its shit reminds me of a woman. there is no way a man could type like that. maybe a tranny or a jerle-maximum. definitely a mangina.
Sorry, none of that proves that Martin attacked first.Actually the fact that Trayvon was the person who initiated the confrontation was backed up by Trayvons girlfriend who was on the phone with him at the time. The first thing that gets said was by Trayvon according to her ?What are you following me for?? Now according to George Zimmerman he said "You got a fucking problem, homie?" Now considering the girlfriend didn't think "Crazy ass cracka" was racist or that there was anything wrong with it I am probably not going to believe Trayvons initial interaction was so non threatening.
My guess, he's neither of the two. He is the biggest pussy-whipped man to ever exist and is reiterating his wife's views because at this point he can't think for himself.i swear man. reading its shit reminds me of a woman. there is no way a man could type like that. maybe a tranny or a jerle-maximum. definitely a mangina.
Ya, that prick was a fucking racist.He wasn't a passive victim just minding his own business, he was looking for trouble and he had a gun with him. He chose to focus his attention on an innocent young man (yes, at that point he had not committed any crimes and talking about his past or your assumptions is just more pointless speculation) because he wasunfamiliarandthere had been break-ins in the neighborhood. It was a bad call resulting in a death and he should have to take some responsibility for that.
I'm upset that the actions of a racist prick resulted in the death of a young man who had done nothing wrong.
You're such a piece of shit. He asked an unfamiliar youth dressed in a hoodie what he was doing in a neighborhood that had been suffering from a rash of criminal activity, and that's somehow looking for trouble.Sorry, none of that proves that Martin attacked first.
Personally, although my speculation counts for nothing, I actually believe it's more likely Martindidattack first.
I'm not going to base any of my opinions on what should happen in the case on that, however, since it's just speculation and can't be proven either way.
As far as I'm concerned, as important as that would be in determining legal culpability, it's pretty much a moot point. We're never going to know who made physical contact first. It's honestly not even worth discussing. This is why I'm focusing my views on the case on the level of responsibility Zimmerman should have to take for putting himself in that situation. He wasn't a passive victim just minding his own business, he was looking for trouble and he had a gun with him. He chose to focus his attention on an innocent young man (yes, at that point he had not committed any crimes and talking about his past or your assumptions is just more pointless speculation) because he wasunfamiliarandthere had been break-ins in the neighborhood. It was a bad call resulting in a death and he should have to take some responsibility for that.
Actually I said attack me and you might get killed.Excuse me, what story did I make up? I'm not making claims about who attacked who.
No, I don't need to read what you said again. It was pretty clear. Fuck with me at your own risk and maybe get killed. Got it.
You know why I referenced those male tropes? Because not every guy is gonna take swing at you if you goad him on. Guess what? Alcohol is known to make some people more violent. College jocks are known to make their masculinity as salient as possible. Roid rage is an actual thing, as people who abuse steroids regularly have violent mood swings. These are people who, generally speaking, it might not be too difficult to start a fight with. What the fuck does that have to do with sexism? Oh, I mentioned that attacking someone's masculinity might start a fight? Shit man, even in these message boards it's all "fag" this and "mangina" that... You don't think saying that kind of shit to someone's face might get you punched? Yeah, and my use of the word "macho" (not a derogatory or sexist term, by the way) encompasses the type of guys who won't hesitate to throw a punch when the situation presents itself. If you have a better term, I'll gladly use it.And I am sorry but you are being sexist. "So I can find some drunk guy or a college jock or a roid-raged bodybuilder" "For others, perhaps a direct attack on your masculinity might do the trick." "Then we've got a huge legal loophole where any "macho" type guy". Hey I get it, you are a genius who found a gigantic legal loophole that has allowed for so many people to just out right and commit murder, sorry for arguing with you.
All right, let's do this:Actually I said attack me and you might get killed.
Lets get it straight:
Racism - legal
Following someone around - legal
Ignoring the suggestions of a police dispatcher - legal
Asking them what they are doing here - legal
Attacking them because you think they are unjustified in following you - illegal
Killing someone for attacking you and putting you in reasonable fear for your life or great bodily injury - legal
Can you spot the one person who did anything illegal?
It turns out, showing poor judgment isn't against the law either. What consequences are you looking for him to suffer as a result of this poor judgment?All right, let's do this:
Racism - legal*Never said it wasn't.
Following someone around - legal*Ditto.
Ignoring the suggestions of a police dispatcher - legal*Yup, same here.
Asking them what they are doing here - legal*Sure, no argument.
Attacking them because you think they are unjustified in following you - illegal*Definitely. Too bad we can never know if this happened. Moot point. No proof. Drop it.
Killing someone for attacking you and putting you in reasonable fear for your life or great bodily injury - legal*Well, let's change it to:
Killing someone for putting you in reasonable fear for your life or great bodily injury - legal, since we can't prove Martin attacked.
Are we OK so far?
You'll notice I'm not saying Zimmerman broke the law.
I'm saying Zimmerman's actions, legal as they were, were poor judgement on his part and led to the death of a young man.
I believe (for what it's worth) that he should have to take some responsibility for that.
Can I make it any clearer?
I hadn't really thought about it but...It turns out, showing poor judgment isn't against the law either. What consequences are you looking for him to suffer as a result of this poor judgment?
So even though the man is on trial for his life, you come and totally shit up the thread just to throw some white privilege guilt punishment into the mix?I hadn't really thought about it but...
Are you ready for this?
I think Zimmerman should...
Live with a black family for several months. As though he were a member of the family.
That's it.
It's late. I'm going to bed. Peace out, my brothers.
They'll probably be bigger. They'll learn nothing from it. The media will be surprised. Racial tensions will grow deeper.Will the riots from this be bigger or as big as the Rodney King riots or MLK riots?
Posting on the internet - LegalSo even though the man is on trial for his life, you come and totally shit up the thread just to throw some white privilege guilt punishment into the mix?
What the fuck man. This isn't playing around. You think life in prison is a joke? You think racism is the problem here and not a troubled aggressive youth?
Jesus H Christ
Again, guilty of what you are accusing me of. The whole crux of your easier arguments was that there is a giant loophole that low for someone to kill aggressive males. Guess what there isnt such a loophole. You just like creating a scenario in your head where "jock" and "macho" type guys can be murdered and the person who commits it can get away.Ummm, can we stop pretending there's a possibility Zimmerman isn't a racist? He clearly showed himself to be one on his own Myspace page. He's a racist. I'm not assuming anything.
You know why I referenced those male tropes? Because not every guy is gonna take swing at you if you goad him on. Guess what? Alcohol is known to make some people more violent. College jocks are known to make their masculinity as salient as possible. Roid rage is an actual thing, as people who abuse steroids regularly have violent mood swings. These are people who, generally speaking, it might not be too difficult to start a fight with. What the fuck does that have to do with sexism? Oh, I mentioned that attacking someone's masculinity might start a fight? Shit man, even in these message boards it's all "fag" this and "mangina" that... You don't think saying that kind of shit to someone's face might get you punched? Yeah, and my use of the word "macho" (not a derogatory or sexist term, by the way) encompasses the type of guys who won't hesitate to throw a punch when the situation presents itself. If you have a better term, I'll gladly use it.
You don't have to apologize for arguing with me. Nobody ever has to apologize for that. Argument is what stimulates thought and makes the world go 'round. Youshouldapologize for making such shitty arguments, though.
Banning is also legal.Posting on the internet - Legal
Touch?. I guess his punishment for this poor judgment will be to go live with another troll for a month. Should it be fedor or lumie it tyen?Posting on the internet - Legal
He'd get pretty fucking confused in his head if it was a white woman who happened to patrol that night, pursued a unarmed black man, and got ambushed. in exchange, shoots back and defends herself after a struggle.Again, guilty of what you are accusing me of. The whole crux of your easier arguments was that there is a giant loophole that low for someone to kill aggressive males. Guess what there isnt such a loophole. You just like creating a scenario in your head where "jock" and "macho" type guys can be murdered and the person who commits it can get away.