I hope this has not already been posted. I find it very disturbing

[Bigerik]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Bullshit, if a seventeen YO defended himself from a potential mugger, who was stalking him, while walking through HIS gated community, then it gives him full rights to beat the crap out of the attacker under Florida's "stand your ground " laws.

There are some problems though. Zimmerman had a hundred pounds on the boy, Zimmerman is a wanna be cop who self appointed himself as the neighborhood guard. Zimmerman had a gun which he showed no restraint in using it to kill a high school kid armed with skittles and Iced tea.

This is fucking pathetic in my book and I am as white as the wind driven snow, and you defenders of Zimmerman are...end of post.

Good post!

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Bullshit, if a seventeen YO defended himself from a potential mugger, who was stalking him, while walking through HIS gated community, then it gives him full rights to beat the crap out of the attacker under Florida's "stand your ground " laws.

The "stand your ground" law is not applicable in this case.

There are some problems though. Zimmerman had a hundred pounds on the boy, Zimmerman is a wanna be cop who self appointed himself as the neighborhood guard. Zimmerman had a gun which he showed no restraint in using it to kill a high school kid armed with skittles and Iced tea.

So you believe the initial media driven narrative?

This is fucking pathetic in my book and I am as white as the wind driven snow, and you defenders of Zimmerman are...end of post.

What's pathetic is people quick to convict someone before knowing all the facts and the media's overt complicity in the matter.

[Wasillaguy]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Bullshit, if a seventeen YO defended himself from a potential mugger, who was stalking him, while walking through HIS gated community, then it gives him full rights to beat the crap out of the attacker under Florida's "stand your ground " laws.

There are some problems though. Zimmerman had a hundred pounds on the boy, Zimmerman is a wanna be cop who self appointed himself as the neighborhood guard. Zimmerman had a gun which he showed no restraint in using it to kill a high school kid armed with skittles and Iced tea.

This is fucking pathetic in my book and I am as white as the wind driven snow, and you defenders of Zimmerman are...end of post.

It is pathetic, the way people make assumptions without checking their facts.
The kid did not live in this gated community, he was from Miami, visiting someone here while suspended from school.
And no, sorry, it's not justified to attack someone because they are following you. It IS justified to shoot someone if they have punched you in the face and are on top of you using your head for a jackhammer.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Is there anything at all incorrect about my sentence? I think it speaks volumes that lots of people are trying to rationalize this tragic event in order to provide cover for our ridiculous gun laws and the unspeakably stupid Stand Your Ground law.

Only by omission.

And I would like to counter that this speaks volumes about the people who are using this tragic event as not only the catalyst to deny law abiding citizens of the most effective means to defend themselves, but the legal standing to do so.

And the only ridiculous and unspeakably stupid aspects of this situation is that we've allowed our divisive nature to overcome rational thought.

Shall we start again on an even keel? I already have enough enemies to suit me.

Chas

[barbara]

Originally Posted by Bigerik

Ok. I got one thing wrong. He was part of the neighborhood watch. Sorry!

Actually, you are right. His neighborhood watch group' never formalized itself by registering.
Thin line between neighborhood watch and neighborhood vigilante in this particular case.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by wgrr

...you defenders of Zimmerman are...

Objective?

Frankly, I have no issues with Zimmerman being -- in my opinion -- a loser wannabe or, possibly, the kid a self-righteous "you lookin' at me because I'm black?," pseudo thug. This problem exists everywhere in Amerikka.

The issue here is the gun.

If nobody has a gun, nobody dies.

Edit for clarification: if the guy who had already proven he shouldn't have a gun didn't have a legally obtained gun, nobody would be dead.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by barbara

Actually, you are right. His neighborhood watch group' never formalized itself by registering.
Thin line between neighborhood watch and neighborhood vigilante in this particular case.

Don't you think that there is a SLIGHT difference between a neighborhood watch committee which hasn't "registered" and a group of vigilantes?

To tell the truth, I didn't realize a neighborhood watch committee had to be registered.

But I'm from Bugtussell, and big city ways are foreign to us. The whole community is a neighborhood watch committee, and no one wants to make an ass of themselves by pestering the cops.

Perhaps you don't understand, being from a great city and all, but we're still pretty close to "Andy of Mayberry" around here.

I still don't lock my doors, although a lot of people do. Times as changing.

Besides, everyone is armed to the teeth, and the police don't have a problem with that, unless you're a derelict. Actually, they consider it to be a positive thing. And we haven't "lynched" anyone for close to 100 yrs.

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Objective?

Frankly, I have no issues with Zimmerman being -- in my opinion -- a loser wannabe or, possibly, the kid a self-righteous "you lookin' at me because I'm black?," pseudo thug. This problem exists everywhere in Amerikka.

The issue here is the gun.

If nobody has a gun, nobody dies.

I didn't realize that you could kill some one without a gun.

I'll guarantee you, that's news to the boys in the joint. And I'll guarantee you something else, after working for two years at MSP, and starting with the notion that prisons are full of good old boys who just made a mistake, there are people out there who will kill you out of boredom.

And that IS a fact, and one which I consider beyond debate.

It's not a "gun" problem, it's a "criminal" problem.

Now I am open to the topic of perhaps we should quit creating criminals, at least any more than absolutely necessary.

Chas

[BlueStreak]

Here is the article on the Kansas boy who was set on fire;

http://www.bangstyle.com/2012/03/boy-13-set-on-fire/

And, yes it does appear to be racially motivated and under consideration as a hate crime.

Dave

[Charles]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Here is the article on the Kansas boy who was set on fire;

http://www.bangstyle.com/2012/03/boy-13-set-on-fire/

And, yes it does appear to be racially motivated and under consideration as a hate crime.

Dave

World's fulla assholes, ain't it Blue.

I'll never understand how some people can do the things they do. I may be a dirty sonofabitch, and I've done plenty of things that I'm not too proud of, but I've never understood brutality.

It's not right, or wrong, but sad that some have to be removed from society, if we wish to continue as a society.

That's the cold, hard facts of life. And a judgement I won't make unless forced to.

And I'm speaking more of setting on a jury as opposed as to just shooting someone.

I ain't God, and I don't really want the job.

Chas