Standup Citizen George Zimmerman

[Svnla]

When you have nothing more to argue, you change the topic. Like I said you're an idiot.

Nope. You said one thing in one post and then said another thing totally opposite in the next post. I just gave the readers your proven history (in your own words) of pure hypocrisy.

Again, in summary (in your own words):

1) "You do understand not guilty does not mean innocent right?" versus "OJ was innocent."

2) "This is going to be my last post in this thread and in this forum." versus you are here in this very same forum.


You can make all of the excuses you want....context this and that. Dig deeper, dude. That's why I mentioned OJ in my original post to you above because I know about your posting history of double talk from the long TM vs. GZ thread a while back.

Let the readers decide for themselves.

 

[emperus]

Nope. You said one thing in one post and then said another thing totally opposite in the next post. I just gave the readers your proven history (in your own words) of pure hypocrisy.

Again, in summary (in your own words):

1) "You do understand not guilty does not mean innocent right?" versus "OJ was innocent."

2) "This is going to be my last post in this thread and in this forum." versus you are here in this very same forum.


You can make all of the excuses you want....context this and that. Dig deeper, dude. That's why I mentioned OJ in my original post to you above because I know about your posting history of double talk from the long TM vs. GZ thread a while back.

Let the readers decide for themselves.

You seem to have taken your argumentative technique from DruidX. Take someone's words out of context and run with it. You must win a lot of arguments that way. (Just because you have a hard time distinguishing sarcasm, that last sentence was indeed sarcasm. Exactly like "I'm a black man and so I obviously thought OJ was innocent" was sarcasm speaking to how you see everything as black vs. white.)

 

[Svnla]

You seem to have taken your argumentative technique from DruidX. Take someone's words out of context and run with it. You must win a lot of arguments that way. (Just because you have a hard time distinguishing sarcasm, that last sentence was indeed sarcasm. Exactly like "I'm a black man and so I obviously thought OJ was innocent" was sarcasm speaking to how you see everything as black vs. white.)

Oh, now it is "sarcasm"? Earlier, it was "context". What will be next? Gonnna use the "racist/racism" card next? You are the master of usage of the "R" excuse.


So tell us stupid readers, when you said a while back it was your last post in this forum ever, was it sarcasm or context or racism or <insert more excuses> because I am not smart enough to know which was it.

:biggrin: Must. Stop. Laughing. So. Hard. Or. I. Will. Fall. Out. Of. The. Chair.

 

[positivedoppler]

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

The physical evidence simply did not support a guilty verdict regardless of what any of us think happened. I don't know what really happened but I do know that the jury delivered the correct verdict considering the evidence that was presented.

So to answer your question, yes, I would rather a murderer roaming around a free man than an innocent man in jail. If he has done illegal shit since then, charge him and put him on trial for it but I do find it rather odd that no one has pressed charges out of 4 separate events.

The Jury handed out the correct verdict given the circumstance yes. I don't disagree with any of what you said and any of your point, but that really wasn't the question I impose.


The question is, "are you open to the possibility that GZ might have started the physical confrontation and that a possibly murderer is roaming the around a free man?"

 

[Orignal Earl]

:biggrin: Must. Stop. Laughing. So. Hard. Or. I. Will. Fall. Out. Of. The. Chair.

Every time you post something like this, are you really sitting there laughing uncontrollably?

 

[Victorian Gray]

Every time you post something like this, are you really sitting there laughing uncontrollably?

 

[BeeBoop]

Zimmerman is like a celebrity now. Every time something big or small happens to him, haters come on out. If you have haters, you must be doing something right.

 

[cubby1223]

The question is, "are you open to the possibility that GZ might have started the physical confrontation and that a possibly murderer is roaming the around a free man?"

Martin is dead. Zimmerman has been handed a life-long punishment by the angry mob. You have zero evidence he is a murderer. Whether you like it or not, the legal system in the U.S. is meant to work where the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

Personally, I prefer not to live in a society where a mob can accuse, charge, convict, and punish someone based on zero evidence. You can prefer that kind of society if you wish. Just don't expect to win everyone's sympathy.

 

[Bitek]

Martin is dead. Zimmerman has been handed a life-long punishment by the angry mob. You have zero evidence he is a murderer. Whether you like it or not, the legal system in the U.S. is meant to work where the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

Personally, I prefer not to live in a society where a mob can accuse, charge, convict, and punish someone based on zero evidence. You can prefer that kind of society if you wish. Just don't expect to win everyone's sympathy.

Cry a river for GZ. There have been many cases where the legal system does not have the evidence to convict, yet who's obviously been negligent, but the suspect gets his just reward by public shaming. Conversely, there are plenty who end up dead and never get a chance to defend their name or tell their story, but get labeled as criminals and forgotten.

GZ holds plenty of blame for TM's death, and I don't feel any sympathy for his dumbass, and he's only proven that correct.

 

[chimaxi83]

Zimmerman is like a celebrity now. Every time something big or small happens to him, haters come on out. If you have haters, you must be doing something right.

You sound like the thousands of dumbass Facebook simpletons who are always talking about their "haters".

 

[dank69]

Zimmerman is like a celebrity now. Every time something big or small happens to him, haters come on out. If you have haters, you must be doing something right.

That's exactly what I say about Kim Kardashian.

 

[dank69]

Oh, now it is "sarcasm"? Earlier, it was "context". What will be next? Gonnna use the "racist/racism" card next? You are the master of usage of the "R" excuse.


So tell us stupid readers, when you said a while back it was your last post in this forum ever, was it sarcasm or context or racism or <insert more excuses> because I am not smart enough to know which was it.

:biggrin: Must. Stop. Laughing. So. Hard. Or. I. Will. Fall. Out. Of. The. Chair.

If you couldn't tell that line was sarcasm the instant you read it, you have no business participating in an online forum. Of course, I've known you were ill-equipped to participate for awhile now, but this just solidifies that fact.

 

[Svnla]

If you couldn't tell that line was sarcasm the instant you read it, you have no business participating in an online forum. Of course, I've known you were ill-equipped to participate for awhile now, but this just solidifies that fact.

What did I told you the last time? Troll elsewhere, troll. Too stupid to remember, eh? Stop following me around and sniffing/licking my butt. So nasty.

I am sure you will reply with some pathetic come back lines in which you think they are so clever. <snickering>. I ignored you the last time. Get a clue.

Again: stop.sniffing.my.butt.

 

[dank69]

What did I told you the last time? Troll elsewhere, troll. Too stupid to remember, eh? Stop following me around and sniffing/licking my butt. So nasty.

Awful, childish retort there chief. What makes you think you can tell anyone else here what to do? Interesting to see where your mind wanders when you get all emotional though.

I am sure you will come back with some pathetic come back lines in which you think they are so clever. <snickering>

Yes, I think many of my comments are clever, but you need to have a basic grasp of simple concepts like sarcasm, so that's probably why you don't understand them.

 

[Svnla]

Awful, childish retort there chief. What makes you think you can tell anyone else here what to do? Interesting to see where your mind wanders when you get all emotional though.



Yes, I think many of my comments are clever, but you need to have a basic grasp of simple concepts like sarcasm, so that's probably why you don't understand them.

I do not need or want to tell you what to do. It is pathetic that you keep following, quoting me and licking my butt hole again. Why is that? Oh, never mind. Don't answer that.

I am done with you here, until you quote me and lick my butt in another thread, again. <snickering>

Get a new hobby, seriously. This is not healthy.

How about this? Just a suggestion. Go lick someone else butthole, ok? You might like it and feel better. LOL.

 

[Tombstone1881]

Zimmerman is like a celebrity now. Every time something big or small happens to him, haters come on out. If you have haters, you must be doing something right.

That must explain why Obama has so many haters!

 

[dank69]

I do not need or want to tell you what to do. ...

You don't?

What did I told you the last time? Troll elsewhere, troll. ...

:hmm:

 

[emperus]

Oh, now it is "sarcasm"? Earlier, it was "context". What will be next? Gonnna use the "racist/racism" card next? You are the master of usage of the "R" excuse.


So tell us stupid readers, when you said a while back it was your last post in this forum ever, was it sarcasm or context or racism or <insert more excuses> because I am not smart enough to know which was it.

:biggrin: Must. Stop. Laughing. So. Hard. Or. I. Will. Fall. Out. Of. The. Chair.

Geez. You do understand that by understanding the context of a line in relation to a paragraph, you can interpret the sarcasm of that line. No wonder why sarcasm is lost on you. You have more fundamental issues with Reading Comprehension.

 

[alzan]

According to the Prosecutions star witness, TM was the one who initiated verbal contact with the "creepy ass cracker"

True but only after being followed by GZ. Had GZ reported to police and not followed, as per NW guidelines, no confrontation would have occurred between GZ and TM.

Yet GZ was not able to talk to TM as he ran away. TM then came back minutes later to physically acost and assault GZ.

GZ chose to follow TM which initiated the eventual confrontation. He alone made the choice to follow. His only duties per NW guidelines were to report to the police and to not confront the suspicious individual.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

GZ chose to follow TM which initiated the eventual confrontation. He alone made the choice to follow. His only duties per NW guidelines were to report to the police and to not confront the suspicious individual.

His duties as the NW was to observe and report, which is what he tried to do by trying to see if TM had ran out the back gate as others had previously. Based on the evidence TM is the one that came back to confront GZ and not the other way around.

 

[cubby1223]

True but only after being followed by GZ. Had GZ reported to police and not followed, as per NW guidelines, no confrontation would have occurred between GZ and TM.

GZ chose to follow TM which initiated the eventual confrontation. He alone made the choice to follow. His only duties per NW guidelines were to report to the police and to not confront the suspicious individual.

Zimmerman likely followed Martin because he knew he was capable of protecting himself. Choices he made led to the encounter. That doesn't give Martin a free pass to initiate a violence. All the evidence points to Martin initiating the violence, and Zimmerman responding in self defense. What point are you trying to make?

Let's just take your logic to absurd levels. Zimmerman followed Martin to identify him for the police. If God had not chosen to hide the sun and release the rain clouds, Zimmerman would not have been forced to pursue Martin for identification. Therefore it is God's fault the encounter occurred.

Same logic.

 

[dank69]

His duties as the NW was to observe and report, which is what he tried to do by trying to see if TM had ran out the back gate as others had previously. Based on the evidence TM is the one that came back to confront GZ and not the other way around.

I can't find this evidence on Wikipedia, am I missing it somewhere?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

double post

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I can't find this evidence on Wikipedia, am I missing it somewhere?

So wikipedia is not mentioning the fact there was 4 minutes from the time TM ran until the altercation occurred, which is close to the area from which he had run?

 

[dank69]

Zimmerman likely followed Martin because he knew he was capable of protecting himself. Choices he made led to the encounter. That doesn't give Martin a free pass to initiate a violence. All the evidence points to Martin initiating the violence, and Zimmerman responding in self defense. What point are you trying to make?

I never claimed that anything gives Martin a free pass. I merely mentioned that the actions (Zimmerman living out his dream as an armed security guard) have consequences. Isn't this exactly the result he was looking for? Saving the community from this criminal?