I challenged you. Quote me.Feel free to quote where I “sided with Zimmerman” like “all cons” rather than just agreeing that due to the degree of the over-charge by the prosecution a Murder 2 conviction was rendered impossible.
I challenged you. Quote me.Feel free to quote where I “sided with Zimmerman” like “all cons” rather than just agreeing that due to the degree of the over-charge by the prosecution a Murder 2 conviction was rendered impossible.
You mindlessly generalized so I gave it back.I challenged you. Quote me.
No evidence that the jewelry was stolen has been provided.Let's see, a screwdriver in a bag with stolen jewelry in a 17 year old boy's locker at a school. Do they even allow kids to bring screw drivers to school? Not to mention a bag of pot and a pipe.
You’re the one disagreeing with the rest of the world.Yes, go with that theory. Whatever convinces you that you have it right and the rest of the world has it wrong.
“No real murder” because there was no conviction? The kid is still dead.Who was found guilty by a court of law for the death of Trayvon Martin?
So no real murder here.
Courts just ruled that Seth Rich's parent can sue...Someone might sue you. I'd ask the mods for a thread deletion.
The Klan, of course, does not support Antifa, a multi-racial and anti-racist leftist group. They hate all leftists which is why they get along with the Nazis who do the same.They are Democrats...Of course they are, and they support socialists like the Nazi groups and other white racist groups like Antifa.
No one was proven innocent. A not guilty verdict is not a legal finding of innocence."Murderer"? Looks like we have another BS, lying thread title from Nina.
GUILTY...........even after being proven innocent.
Why? If Zimmerman had left him alone he would have gone home and eaten his candy.The whole case was an example of two losers meeting at the right place at the right time. One of them had to go....this time it was Trayvon Martin. It could just as easily have been Zimmerman.
Trying to make a case that Martin was just an innocent "kid" with a bag of candy is ridiculous.
The racist right doesn’t care that Martin had every legal right to use any force, up to and including deadly force, to defend himself against an attack that put his life in danger.But Trayvon was black, which makes him special and above any wrong doing. The racist left doesn't care that Zimmerman's life was in danger, or that Martin was trying to get his gun. All that matters to the racist left is that Trayvon was black and George was a "white Hispanic"
How about that he admitted wrongdoing in the recorded call with police, that he lied several times, and that witnesses contradicted his story many times?Idiots have nothing but time on their hands. Easy to do when the welfare check is in the box once a month.
Regardless of the fact that there was ZERO evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of Zimmerman, regardless of the fact that EYEWITNESS accounts support his version of what happened, the idiots will continue their own false version of what happened.
Black people are not “animals” any more than any other humans are. Being Black does not mean that you will “live a violent lifestyle in the drug trade.” Being Black does not negate your right to self-defense.Thanks for the update on what the deplorable, despicable, dirt-bag Zimmerman has been doing. He's clearly been doing nothing worthy of note or commendable.
Zimmerman defended himself against an animal. He probably saved countless lives in the process, since it's obvious that animal Trayvon was going to live a violent lifestyle in the drug trade. Maybe his critics are dirt bags, but he seems like a stand up guy. Just don't make the mistake of trying to crack his head when he's armed.
He was in some eating establishment awhile back and was bragging to a group of guys sitting at a table, telling them who he was and describing himself as the person who killed Trayvon Martin. One of the men got out of his chair and punched him and then walked out and left. (I have a feeling that guy probably owns a gun or 2 himself, but doesn't believe in using them to stalk and kill teenagers.)
Nobody stalked a teenager. That animal attacked Zimmerman and got what's coming to him.
He's kind of like Trump. Not one redeeming quality.
Zimmerman is probably not like Trump. He is not the greatest president in history, and Trump is. Z didn't create the highest number of good jobs in the shortest period of time. Z did not completely solve our crisis in the Middle East. He's not on the level with Trump. Still, he did put down an animal that was attacking him. Some future lives were likely saved.
No, he tried to defend himself against an armed attacker who ended up killing him.Would it make any difference if that animal were Asian? American Indian?
I would care if that animal was a Kalihari Bushman. He tried to murder an armed man and got what was coming to him. And he proved beyond the shadow of a doubt the value of the Second Amendment.
Zimmerman is alive today because of the Second Amendment. And a future drug dealer and murderer is room temperature.
Only a left wing MORON sees a down side to this.
According to Zimmerman, Martin first used violence after Zimmerman reached into his pocket ... which any reasonable person, after being chased and hunted by an assailant who refused to identify himself, would interpret as an imminent threat and defend themselves against it.Zimmerman would be dead if he didn't have that CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED firearm with him.
God made Man. But Sam Colt made men equal.
Oh, and that animal sucker punched Zimmerman from behind. Who knows? Perhaps if the little monster had faced Z in a standup fight, he might have just gotten his ass kicked and spent a night in prison. Thing is, when you're on your back and a criminal is trying to crack your skull on the pavement, your options are limited.
Zimmerman did the world a favor. He took out the trash.
Martin was defending himself. If a guy tries to pull a gun on me you bet I’ll slam his head into the sidewalk if I think that’s my safest option.Attacking someone and repeatedly slamming their head against a sidewalk has occupational hazards...........getting shot in the process is one of those hazards.
Link?Witnesses said he was sucker punched from behind, by an animal almost half his age.
How could that have happened unless Zimmerman had already pulled the gun when Martin “attacked” him?This creature then tried to crack his skull. The gun saved Z's life. And the thing is, Zimmerman didn't mean to kill this animal. There was a struggle for the gun, just like when that gorilla Michael Brown tried to take a police officer's gun.
Being Black doesn’t mean that you will grow up to “sell drugs, kill people, and maybe commit a few rapes.” There is no evidence Martin was “casing a house for a future burglary.” It is possible that if Martin had not tried to defend himself he would just have gotten a beating from the off-duty, high Neighborhood Watch volunteer who defied police instructions and violated Neighborhood Watch protocols to chase him down a dark street at night with a deadly weapon. All we know is that Zimmerman got the fight he was looking for.On the other hand, perhaps had Martin not been a punk thug and faced Zimmerman in a straight up fight, he would have merely got his ass kicked, spent a night in jail and lived to sell drugs, kill people and maybe commit a few rapes. Z was almost twice the punk's size.
Things worked out for the better. That animal is room temperature and his future victims are safe.
I started to saw we need a few more brave heroes like Zimmerman to help thin out the herd of violent criminals. I don't think he had intended to be one of those heroes, though. He was just on neighborhood watch and that animal was casing a house for a future burglary.
It all worked out in the end. Martin got what was coming to him.
My education of how people feel about the verdict starts with a lone British woman?You’re the one disagreeing with the rest of the world.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/20/world-aghast-over-trayvon-martin
Complete history inversion makes you correct, congrats!Martin was defending himself. If a guy tries to pull a gun on me you bet I’ll slam his head into the sidewalk if I think that’s my safest option.
The self-defense law says that you cannot claim self-defense when the occasion is a felony you are committing. The jury messed up.We “sided” with the legitimate side of the law? Yeah, that’s a real kneeslapper there.
It’s even more funny a properly adjudicated case is NOT agreed upon by the anti-gun, anti-police left.
I mean many Democrats agree with the verdict but then there’s you slim sliver of radical anarchists who disagree with facts, self-defense law and gun use of any kind.
Deplorable!
Zimmerman committed what felony?The self-defense law says that you cannot claim self-defense when the occasion is a felony you are committing. The jury messed up.
She was writing about international opinion on the case, which was the topic.My education of how people feel about the verdict starts with a lone British woman?
You're a joker I see. You found one person bewildered by a rightful verdict and that represents "the rest of the world"? Pretty crazy reasoning.
Of course, when we look at adult Americans of both sexes we see a split regarding the verdict. And I'm in the majority with whites and Republicans who, of course, agree with the verdict.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/22/americans-divided-over-zimmerman-verdict-poll-finds/comment-page-1/
Harris Poll has more Americans agreeing than disagreeing with it.
https://theharrispoll.com/new-york-n-y-july-23-2013-while-july-13s-not-guilty-verdict-for-george-zimmerman-may-have-brought-his-trial-to-a-close-the-court-of-public-opinion-is-far-from-done-with-the-subject-the-days/
Almost half (46%) of Americans indicate that they agree with the verdict and while almost the same number (45%) indicate that they disagree, with 10% not at all sure.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2013/48_agree_with_zimmerman_verdict_34_disagree
Rasmussen had it 48% agreeing with 34% disagreeing.
So once again, you're wrong.