George Zimmerman's Trial/acquittal/DOJ charges

[Yumyumsuppertime]

There was a protest about a half mile from my place that nearly turned into a riot when about 150 kids decided to use the understandable and legitimate grievances of the anti-Zimmerman protesters as cover for running up and down the streets committing mayhem, breaking windows, and assaulting random people on the street. The cops even ended up standing in the courtyard of our apartment complex, discussing where to go next and looking around for people who had darted from that crowd in an attempt to escape from them. Tense night. Choppers still hovering, and they likely will be for a while. The mayor, a county supervisor, and the police chief just gave a press conference in which they appealed for calm and essentially said "If you pull this shit again tomorrow night, we're cracking skulls".

Guess I'll do my shopping during the day and keep the doors locked at night, just in case.

[Dyakovo]

There is no positive way to spin, "I have no regrets about the night a series of poor decisions were made that resulted in the death of a 17 year old boy, because it was all in accordance with God's Will and not for me to question." Zimmerman is either a smug asshole or dangerously deluded.

Or he rejects free will.

Not seeing how that's different from the second choice...

[Free Soviets]

It is possible for two people in an altercation to simultaneously be acting in self defense.

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

[Herador]

It is possible for two people in an altercation to simultaneously be acting in self defense.

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

You know, assuming that can actually happen, it's a pretty good example of why the law is sort of screwed up.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

It is possible for two people in an altercation to simultaneously be acting in self defense.

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

I guess that's better than having shootouts with automatic weapons?

[Free Soviets]

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

I guess that's better than having shootouts with automatic weapons?

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

[Hathradic States]

I guess that's better than having shootouts with automatic weapons?

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

As they should.

[Occupied Deutschland]

It is possible for two people in an altercation to simultaneously be acting in self defense.

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

SYG laws don't really affect that. Even in states without such laws the state still has to prove who shot first in relation to bringing charges and if their opposing gang is somehow trapped they are perfectly justified in defending themselves under existing self-defense laws in every state (even those without the boogeyman of SYG laws) because they have no place to retreat.

But that's not really the point of this fun 'GANGS R' GUNNA BE SHUTIN EACH UTHER!' hysteria is it?

Would you like to hear more?

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I guess that's better than having shootouts with automatic weapons?

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

I think having shootouts with muzzle loading weapons would be better.

I'm firmly in favor of legalizing gang warfare as long as both sides have to use smoothbores and wear brightly colored outfits with fancy hats.

[Herador]

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

I think having shootouts with muzzle loading weapons would be better.

I'm firmly in favor of legalizing gang warfare as long as both sides have to use smoothbores and wear brightly colored outfits with fancy hats.

Don't they do that already?

[The UK in Exile]

cases where the defendant didn't head towards the danger in defiance of both logic and a direct instruction.

Actually, Stefan Molyneux explains this in the video, at about 17 minutes in. Go watch.

No. Explain it to me in your own words or stop having opinions you can't defend.

[AiliailiA]

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

As they should.

Sure, all we've got to do is persuade gangs to go out in the desert or to an enclosed range on private property before having their shootout.

Problem being that they're fighting over something. Territory, protection of and profits from illegal activities like drug dealing and prostitution, and dare I say it race. They fight over territory in every sense, so they're not going to be gentlemanly about it and go duel in the desert. They're going to fight in cities because that's where the spoils they fight over are.

I could actually legalize duelling. But not on the street where innocents can be hurt or killed.

[Hathradic States]

As they should.

Sure, all we've got to do is persuade gangs to go out in the desert or to an enclosed range on private property before having their shootout.

Problem being that they're fighting over something. Territory, protection of and profits from illegal activities like drug dealing and prostitution, and dare I say it race. They fight over territory in every sense, so they're not going to be gentlemanly about it and go duel in the desert. They're going to fight in cities because that's where the spoils they fight over are.

I could actually legalize duelling. But not on the street where innocents can be hurt or killed.

It's a war, and one that won't end until the Marines are sent in. Like with Philly in the '30s.

[Herador]

Sure, all we've got to do is persuade gangs to go out in the desert or to an enclosed range on private property before having their shootout.

We could go the whole nine yards, film it, and televise it too.

[L Ron Cupboard]

As they should.

Sure, all we've got to do is persuade gangs to go out in the desert or to an enclosed range on private property before having their shootout.

Problem being that they're fighting over something. Territory, protection of and profits from illegal activities like drug dealing and prostitution, and dare I say it race. They fight over territory in every sense, so they're not going to be gentlemanly about it and go duel in the desert. They're going to fight in cities because that's where the spoils they fight over are.

I could actually legalize duelling. But not on the street where innocents can be hurt or killed.

They could use sports stadiums and televise it. Maybe even a gang channel on TV...

[Herador]

Sure, all we've got to do is persuade gangs to go out in the desert or to an enclosed range on private property before having their shootout.

Problem being that they're fighting over something. Territory, protection of and profits from illegal activities like drug dealing and prostitution, and dare I say it race. They fight over territory in every sense, so they're not going to be gentlemanly about it and go duel in the desert. They're going to fight in cities because that's where the spoils they fight over are.

I could actually legalize duelling. But not on the street where innocents can be hurt or killed.

They could use sports stadiums and televise it. Maybe even a gang channel on TV...

Can I bring my toga?

[The UK in Exile]

indeed, in florida the law lets gangs legally have shootouts on the streets with semi-automatic weapons. as long as nobody can prove who shot first, everybody is just defending themselves.

SYG laws don't really affect that. Even in states without such laws the state still has to prove who shot first in relation to bringing charges and if their opposing gang is somehow trapped they are perfectly justified in defending themselves under existing self-defense laws.

the point is that in florida the gang that trapped them can also claim to act in self defence.

[New Chalcedon]

This misses the point so massively that it isn't even funny.

When Sean Bell was shot to death by five New York City police officers in 2006, the city's African-American community didn't notice that black officres were involved in the killing right along with the white ones and say, "Oh, well, there were black officers involved in the killing, so no problem, then!"

No, the whole problem with this shooting — just as with all of the other shootings of unarmed black men and youths under various circumstances — is the recurring theme of profiling: The idea that African-American men are being targeted for violence and killed because of societal perceptions of them as violent, dangerous, and intrinsically criminal.

Yes, the African-American community is extremely unhappy with black-on-black violence; gang warfare and the ocean of illegal arms flowing into our inner cities are matters of grave concern among American blacks (and part of the reason black Americans support gun control). But profiling is just as much of a concern: Indeed, it's especially painful for upper income blacks, who are almost as likely to be victimized by it as poor blacks.

This is part of what's so painful about the shooting at Twin Lakes. A black family works to get their kids into a good neighborhood, and some guy who thinks that those kids don't "belong" there chases after them, provokes a confrontation, and guns one of them down.

So African-Americans get upset. And why shouldn't they, really? Isn't all the profiling in this case saying that there's no safe place in America for their kids? Isn't it saying that there's no place here in America where they really belong?

Once again, it is unlikely that this had anything to do with race. Blather on all you like about attitudes, but Zimmerman did not profile Martin do to the color of his skin.

Bullshit. George Zimmerman had a long history of reporting "suspicious" black people - and only black people by specific description - to the police. When you make 46 calls reporting suspicious people to the cops, and the only people you specifically describe in any of the calls are black, that's evidence that in your (Zimmerman's) mind, black = suspicious.

The only times he even mentioned that he was black on the police call was when he was asked what Martin's race was.

On this call, perhaps. However, he got quite agitated when he realised that Martin was black, and jumped straight to the conclusion that Martin was one of the burglars that "always get away" in the area. But that's not profiling, nosiree.

Christ, he wasn't even sure until half way through the call. Your baseless allegation that George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin because he was black is getting quite absurd.

Not with the amount of evidence backing it up. What's absurd is your counter-allegation that because Zimmerman claims he wasn't profiling, clearly he wasn't doing so and, in fact, was as pure as the driven snow. Without any supporting evidence, I may add.

Zimmerman simply thought that it was suspicious that a person was walking through the rain in the middle of the night,

7PM =/= "middle of the night". In point of fact, 7PM is not at all an unusual time to be walking around. Please try to stop lying to support Zimmerman. The rest of your post has no foundation without the parts I've already demolished, so I'm not going to repeat it.

[Tesseria]

Look, we all know that Zimmerman was an inbred Southern KKK member. I mean didn't we all clearly see the Nazi flag wrapped around him like a cloak, and the Confederate flag that was attached to his truck? Of course he was a racist. He saw a black and took the opportunity with his .50 machine gun. It's quite obvious we should both ban guns and charge him with a hate crime.

[Herador]

Look, we all know that Zimmerman was an inbred Southern KKK member. I mean didn't we all clearly see the Nazi flag wrapped around him like a cloak, and the Confederate flag that was attached to his truck? Of course he was a racist. He saw a black and took the opportunity with his .50 machine gun. It's quite obvious we should both ban guns and charge him with a hate crime.

Wow, all those words to say pretty much nothing.

[Tesseria]

Or, you know. We could move onto a more important issue.

[Tesseria]

Look, we all know that Zimmerman was an inbred Southern KKK member. I mean didn't we all clearly see the Nazi flag wrapped around him like a cloak, and the Confederate flag that was attached to his truck? Of course he was a racist. He saw a black and took the opportunity with his .50 machine gun. It's quite obvious we should both ban guns and charge him with a hate crime.

Wow, all those words to say pretty much nothing.

Because it's all bullshit, like this debate and topic.

[AiliailiA]

Or, you know. We could move onto a more important issue.

Near the bottom of the page is a button called "Return to General". If you're done here, click that button.

[Den Svenska Riket]

you know they'd make that legal if the federal gov't would let 'em.

I think having shootouts with muzzle loading weapons would be better.

I'm firmly in favor of legalizing gang warfare as long as both sides have to use smoothbores and wear brightly colored outfits with fancy hats.

Thank you for making my night, I would love that. Imagine this: GTA: VI The 30 Year's Gang War

[New Chalcedon]

Or, you know. We could move onto a more important issue.

No-one's forcing you to read this topic, sweetie. And if you're quite done trivialising the death of an innocent teenager.....