The concept is simple. Right now (the statistics been shown already) There are numerous crimes committed by young black teens in particular young black male teens, like there was in this particular area where Zimmerman lived.bad people killing bad people..... should we care
Dumb racist cop-wannabee killed UNARMED teen due to racial profiling.... nothing to care about
Can conservatives be more stupid in trying to link certain events to other events
In that case, hey at least in America blacks slaves were fed, in other places they would have straved... Heck they even had it better then the Israelites...
You are either trolling or handicapped... I guess either way I should keep my distance.The concept is simple. Right now (the statistics been shown already) There are numerous crimes committed by young black teens in particular young black male teens, like there was in this particular area where Zimmerman lived.
Now in America's jails are many young black teens or early 20's. Some are in there for a very long time. Some have committed horrible crimes to people, this miniority given 12% of America is black lets say 6% are male and then under 25 and over 14 lets say 2%. This 2% is committing almost 50% of the crimes.
Now maybe the concept for liberals is a person commits a crime gets caught goes to jail - justice.
Well what if some of this 2% wanted to rob you, and you didn't feel like being robbed that day so you fought back and ended up beaten so bad you couldn't walk again. Is it right that they're inside for 10 years and you cant walk again? In the liberal world perhaps it is.
Well the concept is what if you had a gun, or you could protect yourself. Now after this confrontation you can still walk.
The concept that we gloss over the 2% for whatever agenda, racial barrier or nonsense is not applicable. There's been babies shot in the head, old people beaten for 'fun' veterans killed by this 2% who usually get caught and go to jail. Yet where's the outcry? Oh there cant be none cos they got arrested and sentenced? That's ok then?
It's not ok. So this is where the liberal media's witchhunt falls flat, because it's lack of contempt and focus on these things indicates they think that's fine, rather than focus on how the heck 2% of the population can be responsible for all these things and trying to tackle it.
The woman who Zimmerman helped in his neighborhood. She was upstairs looking out her window as two young black males were looking for ways in, shaking and scared with her two year old in her hand. She called cops who told her to get a weapon and lock herself in the room. They eventually forced entry. All she had was a scissors. They ransacked her house stealing multiple things, apparently tried to get in her sons room which she was in, obviously she had locked it and they ended up nto getting inside this room.
Now this young woman in her own home, was scared shitless and these were young minors or at least one of them was, if they were older maybe burglary would not just be on their mind, maybe even rape, not like gangrape with people in this 2% is too uncommon now is it? So in the end, they maybe get insurance money for the stolen goods if they had insurance. And at some point these two were arrested... but if she had a gun and shot them could you blame her? And if everyone in her position shot people each time could you blame them? Cos many times they just out to burgle, but sometimes they might be out to hurt the person or assault sexually or whatever....but the person isn't able to know what their intention is, are they?
So now lets focus on Zimmerman, people are too caught up in their hate and trashing to step back from that.
Forget Zimmerman as what you view him. Just focus on this 2%. There are numerous stories some i mentioned of this 2% beating people seriously, causing crazy injuries, killing people over sometimes minor disputes like a small insult, or tiny amount of money.
Now if somebody in this 2% is on top of you and beating you, and you have an option to defend yourself, you may take it, especially after your calls for help go unanswered for a sustained period of time in the context of such a situation.
This is why it is foolish to attack Zimmerman. Cos while he made a mistake of not making clear who he was to this kid, he probably genuinly feared for his own life and being just another victim of the 2% while the person becomes just another statistic in a jail, isn't an appealing thought.
Freaking conservatives. Their policies led to 911, world hunger and global warming. I wish we could throw them all into concentration camps just like FDR did with the Japs. Stupid ninjas.bad people killing bad people..... should we care
Dumb racist cop-wannabee killed UNARMED teen due to racial profiling.... nothing to care about
Can conservatives be more stupid in trying to link certain events to other events
In that case, hey at least in America blacks slaves were fed, in other places they would have straved... Heck they even had it better then the Israelites...
Only factual thing i see it says his older brother sent the message about swinging at a bus driver. I believe it was his cousin. But it's well put together. And the lie detector test is interesting, as well as the fact he said on a previous call he didn't want to approach the guy(some other dude suspicious)http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/
These survey questions should be mandatory for anyone weighing in on the subject. If anyone sees any factual problems in it, please let me know.
I hope this doesn't come across as rude. But you're too dumb to troll.You know, all these righties conservatives complain how "liberals" attack Zimmerman..
Well the truth of the matter is there have been plenty of who we consider LIBERALS actuall defend Zimmerman
However 99.9% of those who would defend Zimmerman and are happy a unarmed black kid was murdered are always conservative, right wing, and/or republicans
Why is that?
The problem with O'Reilly's commentary is that he's talking to his almost entirely white audience, and the function of his remarks is to give reasons against remedies that might require sacrifices from white people. He's saying that the problem isn't anything his audience can help solve; only black people can solve it. So his audience shouldn't be sympathetic to arguments that they ought to be doing more, and should feel free to be critical of black people who aren't doing enough.Not always a fan of Bill but he pretty much nailed it
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2560422134001/president-obama-and-the-race-problem-/?playlist_id=2114913880001
No? Haven't heard of this story before.Hey remember that story from awhile back about the mother who claimed that two black teenagers shot her infant dead in an attempted robbery? Remember how all the usual suspects here on CAG and most of right-wing media were claiming that this wasn't getting nearly enough media attention as the TM/GZ shooting and that the story was being covered up by the "liberal media"? Remember how everyone was calling for the heads of the two teenagers who carried out this heinous crime? Weeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllll:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/24/new-evidence-in-georgia-infants-death-points-to-parents-not-two-black-teens/
Its only trolling to your kind when it is fact.I hope this doesn't come across as rude. But you're too dumb to troll.
Now now, you do not want people to start bringing facts into this cause that would make you look foolish. Instead stay on topic.Its only trolling to your kind when it is fact.
Facts have no place in the conservative mindset
This shows how people, white, black, whatever, believe what the media tells them and jumps to judgement without all, or ANY, evidence.Hey remember that story from awhile back about the mother who claimed that two black teenagers shot her infant dead in an attempted robbery? Remember how all the usual suspects here on CAG and most of right-wing media were claiming that this wasn't getting nearly enough media attention as the TM/GZ shooting and that the story was being covered up by the "liberal media"? Remember how everyone was calling for the heads of the two teenagers who carried out this heinous crime? Weeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllll:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/24/new-evidence-in-georgia-infants-death-points-to-parents-not-two-black-teens/
You don't have mirrors in your house do you?What these idiots do is bring up irrelevant comparisons to backup their falsified view that there is an undercurrent of the slavery mindset alive in America today. Lets ignore the comparisons that completely wipe out this view, and use ones that make little sense and try to draw something from them.
People rushed to Zimmerman's defense...who exactly? From what i saw people rushed to destroy him. Hell MSNBC employ Al Sharpton. They pay this guy. A clear racist, proven racist, a guy who profits from perceived racism, a guy who's whole angle is racial anger. Same guy who incited riots that led to a jewish man being killed. And they employ him, they edit convo's to make another guy look a huge racist, spend hours trying to destroy him and create a racial angle. Then release polls showing race relations have gone down, and keep repeating the poll like it vindicates them, gee eh i wonder why race relations have gone down?
They've worked up a bunch of uneducated people into a barrage of ill feeling, joined by the PC brigade who care little for the truth, and this in turn has led to people who see things for what they are, getting further annoyed by all this, and oh race relations are down, ya think?
In what parallel world do people come out and say people rushed to defend Zimmerman because he was white, when people tried to make him white just so they could rush to destroy him. How do you spin the fact that because the kid was black people decided to make it racial and create this old whitey getting away with killing black boys despite no evidence of such a thing, and claim it was the other way around? People made it racial by defending Zimmerman? WTF Are these people for real.
Nope but I do remember when I brought up a more comparable story where the alleged "murderer" was not even touched when he defended himself and he was still acquitted.Hey remember that story from awhile back about the mother who claimed that two black teenagers shot her infant dead in an attempted robbery? Remember how all the usual suspects here on CAG and most of right-wing media were claiming that this wasn't getting nearly enough media attention as the TM/GZ shooting and that the story was being covered up by the "liberal media"? Remember how everyone was calling for the heads of the two teenagers who carried out this heinous crime? Weeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllll:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/24/new-evidence-in-georgia-infants-death-points-to-parents-not-two-black-teens/
http://www.decodedsc...of-murder/33569
New York: Tougher gun laws, tougher self defense laws. Still acquitted.
You mean our justice system is subjective? Wat!?This juror has come out and said Zimmerman got away with murder I found her comments both bizarre and interesting. She was the only non white juror.. Here's some of what she said
in our hearts we felt he was guilty . . But we had to . . look at the evidence." No kidding?
She went on to say he got away with murder, we just couldn't prove it. I'm not sure if she's genuine or some sort of angle here. She didn't hide her face i believe so since the hate mobs will agree with her i guess she's safe to do that. All in all she's entitled to her opinion, but if the evidence doesn't prove it, how can she be sure of it? Weird.
I'm sure if we took a look at the Florida prisoner records we'd find plenty of people convicted with more middling cases.People can play dumb all they want, but you know exactly what the juror means. Common sense and decency falls outside the sphere of what's legal sometimes.
It makes perfect sense, reasonable doubt.This juror has come out and said Zimmerman got away with murder I found her comments both bizarre and interesting. She was the only non white juror.. Here's some of what she said
in our hearts we felt he was guilty . . But we had to . . look at the evidence." No kidding?
She went on to say he got away with murder, we just couldn't prove it. I'm not sure if she's genuine or some sort of angle here. She didn't hide her face i believe so since the hate mobs will agree with her i guess she's safe to do that. All in all she's entitled to her opinion, but if the evidence doesn't prove it, how can she be sure of it? Weird.
What is the point of asking that question?Can I ask if anyone who defends themselves or love one and they take life are they still a murderer?
You may, but the difference between defending yourself and chasing someone down to murder them seems pretty obvious.Can I ask if anyone who defends themselves or love one and they take life are they still a murderer?
Lol and the difference between chasing someone and murdering them, and being attacked and defending yourself is quite large too.You may, but the difference between defending yourself and chasing someone down to murder them seems pretty obvious.
Just want a honest answer nothing more nothing less. Don't try to frame it a certain way before answering. Just answer it at face value.What is the point of asking that question?
Technically speaking, yes. By pleading self-defense you're making a justification defense which means you're effectively saying that you did kill the person but you were justified in doing so.Can I ask if anyone who defends themselves or love one and they take life are they still a murderer?
Technically speaking, yes. By pleading self-defense you're making a justification defense which means you're effectively saying that you did kill the person but you were justified in doing so.
But please, by all means, go on with whatever point you plan on making instead of beating around the bush.
I wasn't aware the courts used Webster's Dictionary for charging people with crimes. All these years of law school they taught me to rely on statutory and common law, are you telling me they were wrong?!?!mur·der
/ˈmərdər/
Noun
The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
Verb
Kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.
Technically no, especially when you are acquitted of all charges. He did not murder, he killed in self defense. Who needs words and their definitions though. Murderer sounds much worse!
But regardless all that is pointless, the people who think that Zimmerman started something with Martin all believe Zimmerman is a murderer, and the people who think that Martin attacked Zimmerman all believe that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
Did Zimmerman deserve to get jumped? Probably not. Did Martin deserve to be detained? Absolutely not. Could both have happened? Could neither have happened? With all the evidence the Prosecution presented, you still cannot possibly say you know what happened, which is why he was acquitted.
It is as simple as that. People need to start moving on.
So the Webster's Dictionary definition is wrong? All people should speak in terms as defined by statutory/common law? C'mon man, you know people are using the term murderer because of its negative connotation. Much like the term "stalk". The more I learn about him, the more I like Zimmerman. He was trying to help his community in an active way. In his video detailing of that night, when TM was on top of him , he said he cried for help, someone opened a door and said "I'll call 911". He screamed "NOOO!!!Help me now!" Is that how we want our community to help? Hold up in their houses waiting for many times overtaxed police/fire units to show up?I wasn't aware the courts used Webster's Dictionary for charging people with crimes. All these years of law school they taught me to rely on statutory and common law, are you telling me they were wrong?!?!
Even someone with half a brain would realize there's a problem with your definition. PREMEDITATION is not the only element of the crime of murder. In most jurisdictions it's not even a required element for first degree murder provided that the murder occurred during the commission of a violent felony. The defining characteristic of 2nd degree murder in most jurisdictions is that it is a murder that occurs without the element of premeditation. So please, by all means regale us with your broad knowledge of copying and pasting dictionary definitions as a debate tactic instead of perhaps deferring to someone who has actual law training. Thanks for arguing for the sake of arguing.
No, but when I began my original post which Knoell replied to with "technically" then I was indicating that I was not discussing the everyday dictionary definition of murder but rather the technical use of the term as the court and criminal justice system would. I never said anything about everyone needing to speak with common law definitions in mind, rather I was indicating that under the eyes of the law self defense is an admission that you comitted the murder but that you had a justification for it.So the Webster's Dictionary definition is wrong? All people should speak in terms as defined by statutory/common law? C'mon man, you know people are using the term murderer because of its negative connotation. Much like the term "stalk". The more I learn about him, the more I like Zimmerman. He was trying to help his community in an active way. In his video detailing of that night, when TM was on top of him , he said he cried for help, someone opened a door and said "I'll call 911". He screamed "NOOO!!!Help me now!" Is that how we want our community to help? Hold up in their houses waiting for many times overtaxed police/fire units to show up?
So you, being someone with actual law training, believe he should have been found guilty?
OJ all things led to one person....it was guilty clear as day. Casey Anthony guilty clear as day. I don't see the cases as comparable. You certainly wont get Zimmerman writing a book ''how i got away with murder''No, but when I began my original post which Knoell replied to with "technically" then I was indicating that I was not discussing the everyday dictionary definition of murder but rather the technical use of the term as the court and criminal justice system would. I never said anything about everyone needing to speak with common law definitions in mind, rather I was indicating that under the eyes of the law self defense is an admission that you comitted the murder but that you had a justification for it.
Secondly, if you go even further back in my posts you will see that I feel as if even though I don't like the verdict, I respect it because there was just not enough to find that he had an intent to kill Trayvon when he got out of his car. His intent to kill Trayvon only arose after he (reasonably or unreasonably) feared for his life. I'm not entirely sure if Florida recognizes imperfect self-defense (which amounts to a charge of manslaughter) but if they do and he had been charged accordingly they may have been able to find him guilty under those circumstances.
Whether or not I think someone is a piece of shit racist (which I think Zimmerman is) has nothing to do with whether I think there was sufficient factual evidence to find them guilty of murder. Here, he had a justification for the murder and the jury found in his favor. Like I've said before, there was a reason they only brought charges after significant political pressure because even though George Zimmerman is a piece of trash, there aren't enough facts to find him guilty of murder.
That's the entire problem with this case and many of the highly publicized cases, people can't separate their emotions and political idealogies from the outcome they think the case should have. Do I think Casey Anthony killed her daughter? Probably, but there wasn't enough evidence to support the finding. Same with OJ. People think that just because someone "looks guilty" it's enough for them to actually be guilty of the crime, that's not the case.
I wasn't aware that the person you were responding to was even referring to court definitions in particular.I wasn't aware the courts used Webster's Dictionary for charging people with crimes. All these years of law school they taught me to rely on statutory and common law, are you telling me they were wrong?!?!
Even someone with half a brain would realize there's a problem with your definition. PREMEDITATION is not the only element of the crime of murder. In most jurisdictions it's not even a required element for first degree murder provided that the murder occurred during the commission of a violent felony. The defining characteristic of 2nd degree murder in most jurisdictions is that it is a murder that occurs without the element of premeditation. So please, by all means regale us with your broad knowledge of copying and pasting dictionary definitions as a debate tactic instead of perhaps deferring to someone who has actual law training. Thanks for arguing for the sake of arguing.