Mooninites wrote:
DISCLAIMER: IF YOU DON'T HAVE A ****ING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, DON'T BOTHER POSTING BECAUSE I WILL ****ING TEAR YOU A NEW ONE
You know, you being you(read: the whiny person about how other people in the forum behave) and that disclaimer just invites people to actually troll you without running into the risk of getting a warning.
And to be 100% on topic: You could at least have provide a small summarization of what this is about in the first place. Because it gives people the chance to get interested in this and LOOK UP MORE OF IT THEMSELVES instead of that behaviour you are showing.
My only issue with this is the fact that Zimmerman effectively caused the situation that resulted in Martin attacking him. Had he listened to the authorities and not attempted to pursue Martin on his own this probably wouldn't have happened. That being said, however, he was definitely within his rights to defend himself.
SkidmarkD wrote:
So anyways, Trayvon is 17, he's black, means he can run. Zimmerman is a 30 yo fat latino, I doubt he can run very fast/far.
Hey now, being black doesn't automatically mean that one can run. That's a false generalization, a stereotype.
He was however athletic and probably a pretty good runner, so your conclusion is still very much correct.
And I do agree with everything else you said. Well 'spoken'.
IShouldGetALife wrote:
well ok murder can be justified, so you are saying if I killed a man because he threatened me that would be ok that it would be fine and noone would care, the family would go on and life would just continue
How is this relevant?
I'm pretty sure this isn't a result of a threat:
Quoted:
you are saying that this was a justified murder and that this Zimmerman man was fully within his rights to take the life of another man, well who is he to play god? who is he to say whether someone lives or dies? and no murder is justified because people are affected, the family of Trayvon Martin, how do you think they feel? Do they deserve to have their son taken away? there is no such thing as justified murder you see people that have been suspected of drug dealing kill a cops and get time for it and everyone agrees they should, but what if they were innocent and the cops assaulted them and they turn around and defend themselves, not even with a weapon but say trying to get the cops to drop their guns or even just yelling at them are you telling me that an innocent person can be killed with no repercussions on the killer? If you honestly think that you really need to go to a psychiatrist coz the inner sociopath might not be so inner for much longer.
Who are you to say he can't 'play god'? Who are you to say that others can't decide whether people live or die?
You see, these questions go both ways. Use actual logic instead of stupid rhetorical questions.
This is all very much irrelevant to the case. Stop the idiocy.
He was not deliberating on whether to kill or let Treyvon live, he was just scared for his own life and did something quite reasonable in the moment of panic he was probably experiencing as his face was smashed against the pavement.
Quoted:
the fact that you can kill someone even for suspicion of them attacking you is ********.
That may be, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED HERE. Don't try to twist the facts.
If you do not understand you should eat healthier and train your brain so that you might actually understand the situation.
Quoted:
I think guilty until proven innocent would be the right thing to go by here because if Zimmeman was inncent he would have nothing to be worried about and innocence is ensured. but nope let the jury be swayed by that graph great going America let adults murder kids.
... are you even sure you understand what it is you're writing?
Quoted:
This is not the head of a man who's skull was slammed into the ground multiple times
He has two obvious cuts on the back of his head. That indicates that his head was smashed against the pavement at least two times. Two = plural, which means that his head was in fact smashed against the pavement multiple times.
Quoted:
how do you get your gun out and shoot someone in the chest accurately without swaying and making the shot move to the sides? if you had your head slammed into the ground I can tell you you would either 1. be knocked out cold or 2. be extremely disoriented and not be able to grab your gun out of your pocket or wherever you store it, while underneath someone else being assaulted let alone shoot him while he is moving on top of you?
Another ******ed statement.
Quoted:
if Zimmerman was in such danger that he could justify it as being scared for his life why did the doctor that examined him say that his "injuries" were not life threatening and very insignificant? I pity all you poor bastards that live in a country with drooling mouth-breathers that think getting hit once or twice is enough reason to kill someone.
How the **** can you be this stupid? Like seriously, how do you do it? I'm amazed.
This is far beyond the **** that Cuddles usually musters and everybody hates on that guy for being stupid.
The moment a religious person unknowingly calls his own ways stupid: "And lol. I highly doubt you have magic powers. If you proved it I would believe you, but since you 'refuse to', I choose not to."
IShouldGetALife
<Member>
<Member>
I am not stupid and they are all legitimate questions and statements, you are the ignorant one, now I know I said I wouldn't dignify this thread with another answer but if you are too ignorant to actually read what I have written I will politely ask you to read again and stop being ignorant. You don't even provide reason for why my answers are 'stupid' please refrain from being one of those hopeless trolls that just likes to argue. I have already stated what I think about this thread and how I have acted, also if you want to call me stupid maybe actually don't unless you know me personally because if I was stupid how did I get into a national maths and science specialist school?
If I have helped in anyway at all a +rep will be appreciated lots
Thanks to LaCorpse, Hogopogo and JhoiJhoi for the amazing sigs
IShouldGetALife wrote:
because if I was stupid how did I get into a national maths and science specialist school?
Are you really doing this? What are we now, a bunch of 10 years old or what? Dude, that's not how you defend a point.
If you're being called stupid, and feel the urge to prove them wrong by bringing to the table how majestic the school you attend to is, then you need to step your game up.
The "I am superior to you, peasant" way of arguing is pathetic. I'm sorry if I came off rude, but someone had to tell you.
One advice I could give you is to keep in mind that when you express an opinion, don't expect everyone to agree with you. That's just how life is. It all comes up to whether you convince them that the point you made is valid, or you admit that they have proven you wrong.
You need to log in before commenting.
You said;
'tell me what reasonable place considers killing an unarmed person a legitimate self defence action.'
You asked for a hypothetical, I provided it. If you get assaulted to no fault of your own and you feel your life is in danger, you should have the right to defend yourself, even if you have to use deadly force.
If you come back at me with 'how can someone kill someone with their fists' i'm going to ****ing write you off.