Post: #101

(07-10-2013 09:48 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  'these punks' would be the young black men who had committed 8 burglaries in the last 15 months in his neighborhood. but hey, its all whiteys fault.

It's funny how no one else was making a racial argument but you and then you turn it around and try to make it look like people are ganging up on "whitey."

Post: #102

Saint Trayvon The Martyred (Peace Be Upon Him) was merely taking righteous umbrage at the vile and wicked sin of Profiling (Noticing Patterns, in layman's terms) being inflicted upon his Holy personage by the diabolical creepy-ass cracker Zimmerman.

Post: #103

i never made it a racial argument. i'd be making the same argument if a white kid dressed in a NASCAR tshirt attacked a black neighborhood watchman for no reason and got shot. a punk is a punk, regardless of what color he is.

Post: #104

(07-10-2013 10:05 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  i never made it a racial argument. i'd be making the same argument if a white kid dressed in a NASCAR tshirt attacked a black neighborhood watchman for no reason and got shot. a punk is a punk, regardless of what color he is.

I'm not sure how you don't see this, but your entire argument is racial.

Post: #105

The problem is that some of you are giving Zimmerman some kind of authority that he simply doesn't have. You know what the primary duty of a security guard, be he armed or unarmed, is? To observe and report. And security guards are licensed by the state. Their duty is to protect persons or property, and they are to only use force when either their lives, or the lives of others are in jeopardy. That is also the duty of a neighborhood watchman, and Zimmerman actually did that. He observed (though his observations were exaggerated), and reported. He was instructed to not engage. The fact that he has a gun permit is beside the point. From the observations he radioed in, we know he was playing cop. If you want to believe he was polite, and within the "law" to question Martin, that simply isn't true. If Martin had been presenting a threat to persons or property, it would have been okay for Zimmerman to engage. But simply spotting a black male walking along doesn't constitute a threat to persons or property. If Zimmerman had simply continued to follow, it wouldn't have been so bad. But he didn't have the legal right to act as a police officer. Ordinary citizens that happen to have carry permits aren't automatically deputized as peace officers, free to go around confronting people. ONLY police have the authority to stop and question someone without probable cause or suspicion that a crime has been, or may be committed. It was a multi-ethnic community, so the assumption of guilt just because he was black doesn't hold either because blacks live in the community. Martin was visiting another black family, and it wasn't the first time he was in the community.

Post: #106

(07-10-2013 10:18 PM)j r Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 10:05 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  i never made it a racial argument. i'd be making the same argument if a white kid dressed in a NASCAR tshirt attacked a black neighborhood watchman for no reason and got shot. a punk is a punk, regardless of what color he is.

I'm not sure how you don't see this, but your entire argument is racial.

No, its not. Its right and wrong, and defining the law. For actually calling a kid who was kicked out of school, kicked out of his moms house, caught with burgularly tools, stolen property, sold drugs based on his facebook posts, and had a propensity for fighting a punk you will claim its racial. its not racial, the kid is a punk, white or black. and those same people who are quick to throw around the racist tag will go out of their way to defend that punk and his behavior because he is of the same race as they are.

Post: #107

The bottom line is that nobody here has seriously disputed that the prosecution's case for second-degree murder is extremely weak. There's no way you can convict Zimmerman on the basis of the evidence they've provided, replete as it is with prosecution witnesses like the lead detective practically testifying on the accused's behalf.

Today the judge is going to consider the prosecution's request for the jury to also consider lesser charges of manslaughter and aggravated assault. I don't believe that Zimmerman will be or should be convicted of second-degree murder. He's not spending the rest of his days behind bars. But depending upon how the judge rules, he could be convicted on these lesser charges.

The wild card in all this is the all-female jury. Whoever pulls on their heartstrings could pull off a coup here.

Post: #108

(07-10-2013 10:30 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  The problem is that some of you are giving Zimmerman some kind of authority that he simply doesn't have. You know what the primary duty of a security guard, be he armed or unarmed, is? To observe and report. And security guards are licensed by the state. Their duty is to protect persons or property, and they are to only use force when either their lives, or the lives of others are in jeopardy. That is also the duty of a neighborhood watchman, and Zimmerman actually did that. He observed (though his observations were exaggerated), and reported. He was instructed to not engage. The fact that he has a gun permit is beside the point. From the observations he radioed in, we know he was playing cop. If you want to believe he was polite, and within the "law" to question Martin, that simply isn't true. If Martin had been presenting a threat to persons or property, it would have been okay for Zimmerman to engage. But simply spotting a black male walking along doesn't constitute a threat to persons or property. If Zimmerman had simply continued to follow, it wouldn't have been so bad. But he didn't have the legal right to act as a police officer. Ordinary citizens that happen to have carry permits aren't automatically deputized as peace officers, free to go around confronting people. ONLY police have the authority to stop and question someone without probable cause or suspicion that a crime has been, or may be committed. It was a multi-ethnic community, so the assumption of guilt just because he was black doesn't hold either because blacks live in the community. Martin was visiting another black family, and it wasn't the first time he was in the community.

Acting as a police officer? Did he try and arrest Trayvon? Read him his rights? Why was Trayvon running away from him? And none of what he did gave Trayvon the right to hit him once, let alone beat the living hell out of him.

Post: #109

(07-10-2013 10:30 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  The bottom line is that nobody here has seriously disputed that the prosecution's case for second-degree murder is extremely weak. There's no way you can convict Zimmerman on the basis of the evidence they've provided, replete as it is with prosecution witnesses like the lead detective practically testifying on the accused's behalf.

Today the judge is going to consider the prosecution's request for the jury to also consider lesser charges of manslaughter and aggravated assault. I don't believe that Zimmerman will be or should be convicted of second-degree murder. He's not spending the rest of his days behind bars. But depending upon how the judge rules, he could be convicted on these lesser charges.

The wild card in all this is the all-female jury. Whoever pulls on their heartstrings could pull off a coup here.

Actually he if gets popped for manslaughter he's looking at 20 mandatory I believe, I think its mandatory 10 each for firearm and underage kid

Post: #110

(07-10-2013 10:30 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  The problem is that some of you are giving Zimmerman some kind of authority that he simply doesn't have. You know what the primary duty of a security guard, be he armed or unarmed, is? To observe and report. And security guards are licensed by the state. Their duty is to protect persons or property, and they are to only use force when either their lives, or the lives of others are in jeopardy. That is also the duty of a neighborhood watchman, and Zimmerman actually did that. He observed (though his observations were exaggerated), and reported. He was instructed to not engage. The fact that he has a gun permit is beside the point. From the observations he radioed in, we know he was playing cop. If you want to believe he was polite, and within the "law" to question Martin, that simply isn't true. If Martin had been presenting a threat to persons or property, it would have been okay for Zimmerman to engage. But simply spotting a black male walking along doesn't constitute a threat to persons or property. If Zimmerman had simply continued to follow, it wouldn't have been so bad. But he didn't have the legal right to act as a police officer. Ordinary citizens that happen to have carry permits aren't automatically deputized as peace officers, free to go around confronting people. ONLY police have the authority to stop and question someone without probable cause or suspicion that a crime has been, or may be committed. It was a multi-ethnic community, so the assumption of guilt just because he was black doesn't hold either because blacks live in the community. Martin was visiting another black family, and it wasn't the first time he was in the community.

False. Nothing is illegal about stopping to ask someone a question. I get stopped by bums all the time and asked for change. Trayvon didn't have the right to pop off and start to fight.

Post: #111

Based on your illogical thinking, every time Roosh or any other member of this forum stopped a girl in the street to ask her where a pet store was she would have the right to be irritated and punch him. heck, based on your logic it would be the expected response. What if a girl stopped you and asked her a question? Wouldnt punch her, would you? But when its a white guy or half white Peruvian Jew its ok to punch him for asking you questions.

Post: #112

(07-10-2013 10:30 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 10:18 PM)j r Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 10:05 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  i never made it a racial argument. i'd be making the same argument if a white kid dressed in a NASCAR tshirt attacked a black neighborhood watchman for no reason and got shot. a punk is a punk, regardless of what color he is.

I'm not sure how you don't see this, but your entire argument is racial.

No, its not. Its right and wrong, and defining the law. For actually calling a kid who was kicked out of school, kicked out of his moms house, caught with burgularly tools, stolen property, sold drugs based on his facebook posts, and had a propensity for fighting a punk you will claim its racial. its not racial, the kid is a punk, white or black. and those same people who are quick to throw around the racist tag will go out of their way to defend that punk and his behavior because he is of the same race as they are.

I don't know what people you're referring to, but I haven't seen anyone doing that on this board. What I have seen is you arguing from the presumption that everything happened exactly the way Zimmerman said is indisputable fact and that Martin most certainly was to blame. I've also seen you bring up burglaries by other black men and make some comment about blaming whitey.

Maybe I'm wrong, but here's my question: why is it that you assume the absolute best of Zimmerman, but the absolute worst of Martin?

Post: #113

(07-10-2013 09:24 PM)Thatdude Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 08:30 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  He actually was on drugs, the toxicology tests proved that. He was also buying skittles and watermelon flavored arizona, used to make 'lean.' he was in Orlando because his Mom kicked him out of the house. He had a record at school because he was caught with stolen merchandise and burgulary tools. Just a harmless, innocent sweet little boy. Right.

Are you serious or just trolling? You never smoked weed as a teenager? He was on "drugs?" You're making it sound like he was on meth, it's just weed. He was buying skittles & arizona to make lean? Are you kidding me? How out of touch with reality are you?

At the end of the day, Zimmerman couldn't mind his own business. I get that he was a neighborhood watch whatever the fuck. But he called the cops on Trayvon because he was a black kid with his hoodie up in a nice neighborhood. He then followed him around (when the dispatcher told him not to) and obviously said something to instigate the exchange. What he said, we'll never know, but I damn sure wouldn't take Zimmerman's word. Yeah they got into a fight, if I was Trayvon I'd be pissed too, he had every right to walk in that neighborhood. Why should someone ask him where he's going? Because he looked "sketchy?" Why did he look sketchy? Because he was a black teenager with a hoodie on? Why did Zimmerman leave his vehicle and take his gun with him? Because Trayvon looked that dangerous? What made Trayvon look dangerous? Because he was a black teenager with a hoodie on?

Why couldn't Zimmerman let the cops handle it? He had to take matters into his own hands? Cause this kid was clearly such a danger to everyone in that little neighborhood?

That and using unnecessary force on an UNARMED 17 year old is what this case is about.

Much has been made of the hoodie thing, but it was actually raining when this incident happened and that is the reason Martin had his hood pulled over.

Post: #114

Watching the trial today has my thinking Zimmerman was a white knight who has a crush on the blonde who was today's witness.

Zimmerman visited that blonde chics house twenty times! Twenty fucking times to question her about a break in she had. That is obsessed man.

Post: #115

(07-10-2013 10:46 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  Based on your illogical thinking, every time Roosh or any other member of this forum stopped a girl in the street to ask her where a pet store was she would have the right to be irritated and punch him. heck, based on your logic it would be the expected response. What if a girl stopped you and asked her a question? Wouldnt punch her, would you? But when its a white guy or half white Peruvian Jew its ok to punch him for asking you questions.

Martin's violence wasn't likely justified, but judging by both Zimmerman’s and Martin’s phone calls, I think we can all agree that Martin was right to assume that Zimmerman was following and approaching him in a hostile and possibly even confrontational manner.

It’s not exactly like Roosh asking a Romanian girl, “Are those Skittles good?”

Post: #116

(07-10-2013 11:20 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  Watching the trial today has my thinking Zimmerman was a white knight who has a crush on the blonde who was today's witness.

Zimmerman visited that blonde chics house twenty times! Twenty fucking times to question her about a break in she had. That is obsessed man.

Not hot.



Like a lot of the world's problems, comes down to a man not getting laid enough.

Post: #117

(07-10-2013 07:38 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  Well...Zimmerman didn't have the right to stop Martin and ask him anything. He isn't a peace officer, and was instructed by law enforcement to leave him alone. Martin didn't have to submit to being detained and questioned by someone that isn't a cop. I don't understand how it's so out of the realm of imagination that Martin himself felt threatened, and seeing the gun (on a guy that isn't a cop) made him all the more fearful for his life. Maybe he felt like he had to go for the gun before Zimmerman did. If you're saying that Zimmerman did nothing wrong, and basically had the right to stop anyone he wanted, then you are saying that it's cool for any black male to be confronted by anyone in anyplace other than his own neighborhood, and that it's justifiable to kill him if he objects.

This is something that for the most part keeps getting grossed over by Z's fan boyz. No matter how much they keep reframing the issue it still doesn't change that Z is not a cop; therefore he can not be given the same benefit of the doubt that a cop would have in such circumstances. Police officers are given wide latitudes when it comes to shootings because just hesitating for one minute will get them killed. In the odd case that they shoot an unarmed person all they have to say is "I thought I saw a gun" and they are good to go provided that the shooting happened in the official performance of their duties. Also, cops have strict protocols when engaging suspects when they are in plain clothes. There have been guys in NYC who have gotten into shoot outs with cops and gotten acquitted on self defense grounds because the cops failed to properly identified themselves when they approached the suspect.

Of course it is not illegal for Joe Blow to do "Terry Stops" on young Black males in the dark but everything that comes after that interaction you are going to have to put your big girl panties on and eat it. Maybe he answers you questions even thought he doesn't have to or you get you head smashed into the concrete or anything in between. Only one person knows for a fact what was said on that day because the other is dead. Speakeasy nailed it, you can not try to AMOG someone and then shoot them when your mouth writes a check your body can't cash. The bottom line is that Z was wrong, Trayvon had permission and authority to be in that complex just like he did. I bet from now on he's going to let policing to be for real professionals.

I read somewhere online that this case is basically a reversed OJ trial. The facts doesn't really matter. The results of the verdict is going to depend solely on the racial make up of the jury. Everybody knows this. That's why they went out of their way to make sure they had all White jury. The fix is in. There is not going to be any riots neither.

Post: #118

(07-11-2013 03:07 AM)playa_with_a_passport Wrote:  This is something that for the most part keeps getting grossed over by Z's fan boyz.

Interesting that people who don't agree with you are automatically "fan boyz."

Quote:Of course it is not illegal for Joe Blow to do "Terry Stops" on young Black males in the dark but everything that comes after that interaction you are going to have to put your big girl panties on and eat it. Maybe he answers you questions even thought he doesn't have to or you get you head smashed into the concrete or anything in between. Only one person knows for a fact what was said on that day because the other is dead. Speakeasy nailed it, you can not try to AMOG someone and then shoot them when your mouth writes a check your body can't cash. The bottom line is that Z was wrong, Trayvon had permission and authority to be in that complex just like he did. I bet from now on he's going to let policing to be for real professionals.

I read somewhere online that this case is basically a reversed OJ trial. The facts doesn't really matter. The results of the verdict is going to depend solely on the racial make up of the jury. Everybody knows this. That's why they went out of their way to make sure they had all White jury. The fix is in. There is not going to be any riots neither.

Could it be that they aimed for a white jury because they knew African Americans would side with Travon rather than what you're implying? I'd be willing to bet money that the latter feels far more strongly about the racial components of this case than white America does and that a group of whites are far more likely to be divided about their opinion.

Hell, if Travon wasn't black this case would have been a blip on mainstream media's radar and nothing more.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #119

Forget about the black/white dimension for a second. Lets look at this from a redpill perspective: if Zimmerman shot and killed a girl, imagine how different this case would be.

To me this is just another example of how American society disregards male human lives. If a chick was killed like this the cops wouldn't just have shown up and tapped him on the ass.

You guys are all missing a trick here.

Post: #120

Separated at birth?

Post: #121

(07-11-2013 10:45 AM)space Wrote:  Forget about the black/white dimension for a second. Lets look at this from a redpill perspective: if Zimmerman shot and killed a girl, imagine how different this case would be.

To me this is just another example of how American society disregards male human lives. If a chick was killed like this the cops wouldn't just have shown up and tapped him on the ass.

You guys are all missing a trick here.

Yeah, because an unarmed girl would not have been even remotely a credible threat to his life, so he would have a very poor claim to self-defense. Unless perhaps the chick was a professional female bodybuilder pumped full of anabolic steroids and HGH.

Post: #122

(07-10-2013 11:20 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  Watching the trial today has my thinking Zimmerman was a white knight who has a crush on the blonde who was today's witness.

Zimmerman visited that blonde chics house twenty times! Twenty fucking times to question her about a break in she had. That is obsessed man.

^^^ Interesting he maybe caught up in a severe case of white knighting.

I would bet everything I have if the residents were all 65+ this wouldn't of happened.

I'm changing my verdict to guilty of white knighting, murder, obsession with white girls, race trolling.

Post: #123

(07-11-2013 11:01 AM)el mechanico Wrote:  I'm changing my verdict to guilty of white knighting, murder, obsession with white girls, race trolling.

My man u should have a twitter

Post: #124

why do you keep saying " But but but George isn't a cop!"
no fucking shit, he's not a cop, and he doesn't have to be. you keep bringing up this completely irrelevant point. He doesn't have to be a cop to approach a suspicious looking person and ask questions. and just asking questions does not give Martin the right to assault him. the kid got what he deserved.

Post: #125

Apparently Zimmerman was training in martial arts at the time? and a skinny teenager overpowered him.

A pussy w a gun is still a pussy