George Zimmerman Arrested On Domestic Violence And Weapons Charge

[RavenSky]

The people here that believe Zimmermans's lies coincidentally are pro-authoritarian and spin wild yarns themselves about Martin. Search some of Loren's posts in this thread in case you missed them and need examples.

Alternately, you're simply assuming that since Martin was an unarmed black teen he must be innocent.

Wrong. We are *assuming* he was innocent because there is not a single shred of evidence to show that he was "up to no good". He told his little brother he was going to the store. He did, in fact, go to the store. He purchased his beverage and candy with lawful money in the correct amount. He didn't steal anything nor shove the store-keeper. He was then walking home, talking with his friend on his phone.

If you can find any shred of not innocent in those facts, present them. And no, I don't mean your wild speculations and utter fantasies about Purple Drank or any of the other slanderous shit you have been spewing about Trayvon Martin from day one. I mean any shred of actual fact to support your claim that Trayvon was not an INNOCENT VICTIM of George Zimmerman's violent aggression.

 

[RavenSky]

Please let us know what crime Martin committed.

Is pot smoking legal in florida? Especially for 17 year olds? I don't think there were any crimes, but I do believe the ingredients he bought that night weren't for his brother.

No pot found on him that night. No evidence he was even smoking pot that night. And your "belief" about Skittles and Arizona Watermelon beverage are wrong, stupid and slanderous. And even IF Trayvon had smoked pot that night or had other plans for his little brother's Skittles, neither would justify Zimmerman KILLING him.

So if this is the best you can come up with, you have utterly failed to show how Trayvon was not an innocent victim that night.

(And the more some of you try, the less respect I have for you. Your words about Trayvon Martin are irrational, vile and slanderous; and I find it beyond disgusting that anyone on a "rational" discussion board would still be trying to pretend that Trayvon Martin was "up to no good" that night)

 

[RavenSky]

And what crime was committed? What crime was he being followed for?

he was being followed for a suspicion of trespassing, loitering, drug use.

All of which was false, AND the asshole Zimmerman had no right to follow Trayvon in any case

 

[bilby]

I know Florida has some crazy laws on the books, but I was under the impression that they had not yet made 'Suspicion of Intent to Smoke Marijuana' a capital crime.

 

[RavenSky]

Maybe people from your part of the world have ingested too much lead and talk slowly, but it would take less than two seconds to do this. Although, granted he had already called the police and would lose face from the nature of the call.

A normal confrontation would go like this:

Martin: "Why are you following me?"
Zimmerman: "I'm the neighborhood watch. What's up?"
Martin: "Oh, I am on my way to my girlfriend's house."
Zimmerman, "Ahhh, Okay. Does she live here?"​

So why didn't Zimmerman identify himself or his intentions?

It should have gone that way and on most occasion that's what will happen. Except Zimmerman said Martin's first question was "Do you have a problem" and then gets punched.

1. No DNA on Trayvon's hands to support the claim that he punched Zimmerman.
2. This alleged exchange is not supported by what Jeantel heard.
3. Zimmerman is a known liar.

In other words, it is entirely irrational for anyone to believe, much less continue to state as if a fact, that Trayvon just up and punched Zimmerman.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Let me just clear this up

YOU DON'T GET TO SHOOT BLACK PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, AND HAVE EVERYBODY SAY "THAT'S OKAY!"

Is that clear enough for you?

 

[Bronzeage]

I know Florida has some crazy laws on the books, but I was under the impression that they had not yet made 'Suspicion of Intent to Smoke Marijuana' a capital crime.

Actually it's a misdemeanor and not subject to a citizen's arrest.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Let me just clear this up

YOU DON'T GET TO SHOOT BLACK PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, AND HAVE EVERYBODY SAY "THAT'S OKAY!"

Is that clear enough for you?

And since OJ was found innocent of killing Nicole Brown is the same thing true, it's okay for black men to kill white women? His case was very much on an edge and could have gone either way so it would be very tricky for someone to do the exact thing and expect the same results.

 

[Arctish]

Let me just clear this up

YOU DON'T GET TO SHOOT BLACK PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, AND HAVE EVERYBODY SAY "THAT'S OKAY!"

Is that clear enough for you?

And since OJ was found innocent of killing Nicole Brown is the same thing true, it's okay for black men to kill white women? His case was very much on an edge and could have gone either way so it would be very tricky for someone to do the exact thing and expect the same results.

Are we really going to argue whether justice for black citizens comes at the expense of justice for white citizens? Or are we going to agree that justice for all is the goal here, and it doesn't matter if the pedestrian being pursued by a creepy ass stranger in the dark and the rain is black, white, Hispanic, Native American, Asian, Australian Aborigine, Polynesian, or whatever?

A teenaged pedestrian was pursued, confronted, and killed by a man with a history of violence. What changes if he was Sephardic, or Swedish, or Samoan? What changes if the pursuer was Cherokee, or Chinese American, or Cajun? Nothing, that's what.

 

[Playball40]

Let me just clear this up

YOU DON'T GET TO SHOOT BLACK PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, AND HAVE EVERYBODY SAY "THAT'S OKAY!"

Is that clear enough for you?

And since OJ was found innocent of killing Nicole Brown is the same thing true, it's okay for black men to kill white women? His case was very much on an edge and could have gone either way so it would be very tricky for someone to do the exact thing and expect the same results.

Not defending OJ here, but the cases are NOT comparable. No one actually SAW who killed Nicole. There was no question who killed Trayvon. If OJ were claiming self-defense against Nicole and STILL were acquitted, I think you would have a comparison.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Let me just clear this up

YOU DON'T GET TO SHOOT BLACK PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, AND HAVE EVERYBODY SAY "THAT'S OKAY!"

Is that clear enough for you?

And since OJ was found innocent of killing Nicole Brown is the same thing true, it's okay for black men to kill white women? His case was very much on an edge and could have gone either way so it would be very tricky for someone to do the exact thing and expect the same results.

You do realize what you just said makes no fucking sense with regards to Trayvon Martin but what it says about you is that you might have issues with race you might want to deal with.

 

[coloradoatheist]

And since OJ was found innocent of killing Nicole Brown is the same thing true, it's okay for black men to kill white women? His case was very much on an edge and could have gone either way so it would be very tricky for someone to do the exact thing and expect the same results.

You do realize what you just said makes no fucking sense with regards to Trayvon Martin but what it says about you is that you might have issues with race you might want to deal with.

The law in Florida and other states allows someone to use lethal force if it meets certain circumstances. That's what the argument about this case has been. The law wasn't, "Anybody can shoot a black person" If your statement was a law, then a black person would have immunity from anything they did.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You do realize what you just said makes no fucking sense with regards to Trayvon Martin but what it says about you is that you might have issues with race you might want to deal with.

The law in Florida and other states allows someone to use lethal force if it meets certain circumstances. That's what the argument about this case has been. The law wasn't, "Anybody can shoot a black person" If your statement was a law, then a black person would have immunity from anything they did.

naw, naw, naw

This right here,

This what going on here

Isn't about what happened to Trayvon years ago, this isn't about Florida Law, this is about paranoid fears of black planet. Every argument your side has made has been shot down in flames time and time again. You refuse to speak of or see Trayvon as a human being much less a citizen with a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At this point, this is just a feeble and pathetic attempt to somehow be right in a sea of wrong, to make it okay to kill black people wholesale and have it be alright.

It ain't.

A black person come at you with a gun, you have right to defend yourself
A black person walks from the store, you don't have a right to put into motion and then carry out his murder. Just like for white people. Shocking I know, to think a black kid should have the same right to do a snack run as a white kid, but it's the truth.

Deal with it.

Zimmerman is a bad man who does bad things and has been doing bad thing for some time. Trayvon was a kid with a soft drink and candy. Zimmerman is alive. Trayvon is dead, murdered and his murderer walks free. not a new thing in the history of America.

You want Zimmerman to be not the author of madness? Build a time machine, go back in time, and keep his ratchet ass IN THE GODDAMN TRUCK. other than that, this is ALL ON HIM.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

On Athena's point: would Zimmerman have acted differently if the kid was a preppy white boy (even with actual Sprite, Jolly Ranchers and Robitussen?

I'm pretty sure he would have. Does anyone here disagree?

I guess my point is that Americans see strange Black teens and almost always suspect they are up to "no good"

 

[EPresence2]

naw, naw, naw

This right here,

This what going on here

Isn't about what happened to Trayvon years ago, this isn't about Florida Law, this is about paranoid fears of black planet. Every argument your side has made has been shot down in flames time and time again. You refuse to speak of or see Trayvon as a human being much less a citizen with a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

At this point, this is just a feeble and pathetic attempt to somehow be right in a sea of wrong, to make it okay to kill black people wholesale and have it be alright.

It ain't.

A black person come at you with a gun, you have right to defend yourself

A black person walks from the store, you don't have a right to put into motion and then carry out his murder.

Just like for white people. Shocking I know, to think a black kid should have the same right to do a snack run as a white kid, but it's the truth.

Deal with it.

Zimmerman is a bad man who does bad things and has been doing bad thing for some time. Trayvon was a kid with a soft drink and candy. Zimmerman is alive. Trayvon is dead, murdered and his murderer walks free. not a new thing in the history of America.

You want Zimmerman to be not the author of madness? Build a time machine, go back in time, and keep his ratchet ass IN THE GODDAMN TRUCK. other than that, this is ALL ON HIM.

Why does it have to be about sides and who is completely wrong or right Athena? Your assertions in that regard are just that; Some of my questions were never answered by "your side." Though sometimes it takes assuming "a side" to really try understanding their perspective, and that's okay. But I've noticed how little "your side" considers plausible alternatives that DON'T involve completely exonerating a dead person you hardly know. You can honor them without overlooking any facts or plausible alternatives. I've brought up such oversights on numerous occasions - case in point: the shooting of Jerame Reid in New Jersey. The blatant misinformation that was being spread by the OP tainted the entire discussion thereafter. We owe it to both the living and the dead to be fair.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why does it have to be about sides and who is completely wrong or right Athena? Your assertions in that regard are just that; Some of my questions were never answered by "your side." Though sometimes it takes assuming "a side" to really try understanding their perspective, and that's okay. But I've noticed how little "your side" considers plausible alternatives that DON'T involve completely exonerating a dead person you hardly know.

We know he didn't commit any offense that would have made him deserve the death penalty.

You can honor them without overlooking any facts or plausible alternatives.

Martin doesn't need to be honored. He could have been a jerk, a bully. He still shouldn't have died.

I've brought up such oversights on numerous occasions - case in point: the shooting of Jerame Reid in New Jersey. The blatant misinformation that was being spread by the OP tainted the entire discussion thereafter. We owe it to both the living and the dead to be fair.

And yet Charlie Brown keeps getting arrested and people keep defending him.

 

[laughing dog]

None of the posters in this thread can point to any reason why Zimmerman's subsequent behaviors should not cast less or the same doubt on his story concerning Zimmerman than more doubt. None.

 

[EPresence2]

Jimmy - you're off my ignore list because I see now how worthless that feature is... and your going to address my post anyway. This says a lot about you Jimmy.... and it's not good. Btw, I would take issue with most all your "points." You may also want to reconsider the possibility that Martin was a jerk/bully to maintain your party line. This will be the extent of my pissing match with you.

 

[Rhea]

Jimmy - you're off my ignore list because I see now how worthless that feature is... and your going to address my post anyway. This says a lot about you Jimmy.... and it's not good. Btw, I would take issue with most all your "points." You may also want to reconsider the possibility that Martin was a jerk/bully to maintain your party line. This will be the extent of my pissing match with you.

It's not clear what you mean here.

 

[laughing dog]

Jimmy - you're off my ignore list because I see now how worthless that feature is... and your going to address my post anyway. This says a lot about you Jimmy.... and it's not good. Btw, I would take issue with most all your "points." You may also want to reconsider the possibility that Martin was a jerk/bully to maintain your party line. This will be the extent of my pissing match with you.

What would be the possible relevance of Martin being a jerk/bully? Is that a death penalty offense in Florida?

BTW, if you go to General settings in your settings menu at the bottom, check the box the blocks the ignore message - you literally will not see any message from someone on your ignore list.