This Person is a Member of the US House of Representatives

They way everything shook out, you couldn't convict him. I'm much more inclined to believe the defense and the body compared to Trayvons girlfriend (please watch the testimony). I do think Zimmerman is on a power trip and bit off more than he could chew but that's not illegal. I feel the same way about Joe Horn (American Hero). It's mindboggling that he's seen as a champion of the right, I suppose that's just sensationalism but cheering on a dumbass who follows 17 year old kids around at night is setting the bar pretty low. Of course, then again, so is asking "when is darkie going to riot?" The post ciotus bliss out of the "established" right is something I can't wrap my head around.

It's sad this is getting co opted to represent the institutional failings that plague the justice system when they deal with black men. This is a terrible "show" case and there are real failings. Zimmerman is not guilty under Florida law. Talk about the 0000s of black men in the south whom have been exoneratied with DNA testing or the massive disparty in sentencing. Don't martyr some 17 year old kid who left trouble and then went back looking for it. The only place I see his race having an issue is with his moral failings, moral failings that many other boys have. There is nothing on Trayvons "rap" sheet that moves my meter, he would've grown out of that petty stuff.

Black kids die in droves everyday, they just happen to do it to eacthother.

Go to Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, Or Memphis. You can camp out in some neighborhoods of Chicago and see people get shoot nearly ever night. Where is the mobilzation then? Where is the outrage?

Zimmerman is suing NBC. Good.

If you remember, NBC was the outlet responsible for the indefensible editing of Zimmerman's call to the police. They edited this:

Quote:

---

Zimmerman: "We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about."

911 Dispatcher: “Okay. And this guy, is he white black or Hispanic?”

Zimmerman: “He looks black.”

---

To this:

Quote:

---

“This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

---

They should be held to account. :yes:

There is no outrage when one black person kills another by the media. They might air it as a gun crime but they are not too concerned. Black on Black or even Black on White crime is not big for ratings.

Race on the other hand can be used to incite and generate more news. They will keep this going and milk the hate as long as they can. It shows that Rich Liberal White people care deeply for the black community. It takes away peoples minds and puts them into Group Think.

They have been fooling people a long time and it is not yet time to give it up. They don’t care about the poor, black or white, they just want to be seen to care.

The media and talking heads still seem to be distorting the facts of the case and even though an FBI investigation found no evidence of racial motives the DOJ is still considering bringing a Civil Rights case. Just as many in the media are hoping for a wrongful death suite.

It is racially charged because the media is making it racially charged.


What makes them think it is only them who care about equality and rights?

There are the ignorant and hateful on both sides and it needs to be stamped out!

The media portrait of them as the only friends of ethnic groups is hogwash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Black kids die in droves everyday, they just happen to do it to eacthother.

Go to Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, Or Memphis. You can camp out in some neighborhoods of Chicago and see people get shoot nearly ever night. Where is the mobilzation then? Where is the outrage?

---

Black on black violence is so common here in Memphis that it does not even make the headlines. It's just what they do, and it is best to leave them to it as long as they keep it among themselves. I won't speculate on the nature versus nurture argument as to why that is. That's what makes the faux-outrage about this topic coming from the self-declared black community so disingenuous. It's easier to create a common enemy than look within.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Really? After I agree with your last post, you gotta go make me look like an idiot? White kids get killed by white kids every day too. People of all colors get profiled by the police based on class, clothing, or other distinctive signs of non-conformity. What is your point? It seems like you, Panzer, and some others are going out of their way to say something along the lines of "Eh, he was black, quit being outraged."

---

I cannot speak for Strike, and I am sure that we do not share the same views on race and its role in American society.

I tire of the black outrage and victimhood. This was a single case involving the actions of two individuals. To suggest that this case is about the system and not the standard of reasonable doubt is farcical. Elevating this case into an indictment of American society and expecting reasonable adults to buy into that narrative is insulting to our collective intelligence. And quite frankly, the constant whinging about the "system" should be called out for the BS that it is. There is a reason that a disproportionate number of blacks are incarcerated, and it has nothing to do with institutional racism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Really? After I agree with your last post, you gotta go make me look like an idiot? White kids get killed by white kids every day too. People of all colors get profiled by the police based on class, clothing, or other distinctive signs of non-conformity. What is your point? It seems like you, Panzer, and some others are going out of their way to say something along the lines of "Eh, he was black, quit being outraged."

---

It's true, white kids do kill white kids everyday. It's also true that some white kids grow up with out fathers. Neither of those rates are anywhere near those of black kids. There are real problems with the justice system, there are real problems with the black community and there are real problems with hoity toidy white liberals who like the idea of black people but have never actually seen one. These things all feed off each other. In no community in the world is a 72% absentee father rate a good thing.

Trayvon Martin is the worst outlet for a real grievance. He is not what people talk about when they say the justice system is stacked against blacks. You could possibly shoehorn something about police indifference in there, but going by the facts of the case, there wasn't much to arrest him with in the first place. Now, if that upsets you please be my guest and elect a rep. whom will change the law. The court is for the law, not for someones feelings. To find Zimmerman guilty in this case would be the same legislating from the bench that gives guys like Xiahou and CR heart palpation's

I believe Zimmermans story. When Martin doubled backed and started a fight, Zimmerman is (and should be) justified in shooting him. In the beginning I didn't, if only because the butchered NBC "911" call makes it seem like Zimmerman got out of his car and ran down Martin (absolute shit by NBC). This doesn't make Zimmerman a hero or Trayvon a thug. Zimmerman is a busybody HOA lackey and Trayvon was a 17 year old kid who did what 17 year old kids do.


Me and Panzer could go back and forth on the numbers all day and as much as I love a good roll in the mud, I just don't have the energy for it. I think we could both agree that the sense of frustrated hopelessness in these communities is palpable, depressing, and infectious. It's even more depressing that the only time the "black community" or their out of touch white friends can mobilize is when a "white" man shoots a black kid (how that whole narrative fell apart is another story)

http://wearenottrayvonmartin.tumblr.com/ depraved populism. Sasaki once commented on the obsession with being on the "right" side of history. Right in the sense of progress. I labeled him as a misanthrope, I am beginning to wonder if he was right. I shook the majority my whigishness long ago, I guess the last of it is being extinguished.

He should have been charged, that's what happens in a civil society when unarmed people are killed and there are legitimate points being made by both sides. I'm glad, however, that he was acquitted. If he was assaulted in the way suggested, he had a right to use deadly force. Should he have been in that situation, following someone in the dark? I don't believe so. Should the victim have opted to assault him instead of attempting to de-escalate? Absolutely not.

Civil case likely sought by the victims family, they will likely get a settlement or take it to trial and get some compensation. The DOJ line of inquiry is baseless double jeopardy abuse of the justice system.

In reality, this will show people that following someone whom you believe to be dangerous is a terrible idea. It will also show people that if you look like a thug, are walking around in the middle of the night and pre-emptively assault someone rather than use your words, you can be killed for it. Will anyone learn anything? I have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

http://wearenottrayvonmartin.tumblr.com/ depraved populism. Sasaki once commented on the obsession with being on the "right" side of history. Right in the sense of progress. I labeled him as a misanthrope, I am beginning to wonder if he was right. I shook the majority my whigishness long ago, I guess the last of it is being extinguished.

---

Progress is a meaningless word. Young, white liberals think that they are the future because they are the youth, thus their personal struggles and the struggles of their buddies are the battles which progress is to be measured by.

I'm glad he got off. No real case against him, and the race card had no part to play in this. It is appalling that it went to a national level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

He should have been charged, that's what happens in a civil society when unarmed people are killed and there are legitimate points being made by both sides. I'm glad, however, that he was acquitted. If he was assaulted in the way suggested, he had a right to use deadly force. Should he have been in that situation, following someone in the dark? I don't believe so. Should the victim have opted to assault him instead of attempting to de-escalate? Absolutely not.

Civil case likely sought by the victims family, they will likely get a settlement or take it to trial and get some compensation. The DOJ line of inquiry is baseless double jeopardy abuse of the justice system.

In reality, this will show people that following someone whom you believe to be dangerous is a terrible idea. It will also show people that if you look like a thug, are walking around in the middle of the night and pre-emptively assault someone rather than use your words, you can be killed for it. Will anyone learn anything? I have.

---

From what I understood, the Martin family had no intent to pursue a civil case. Whether they can be convinced by the Media or lawyers to do so is up for speculation.

Suing Zimmerman is not going to make anyone rich. He is not OJ Simpson and doesn’t have millions in the bank.

If you want to know who is the cause of the black massacre then blame well intended and misinformed Government programs and ignorant white do-gooders.

The destruction of the black family and an education system that can not deal with the problems, is the root.

Sure there is the matter of racist views but they are minor in comparison.

Jim Crow was dismantled 49 years ago this month. A great victory for individual rights, not just black. But that is also about the time the real problem began. But rather than recognizing and attempting to reverse the problem we have just normalized it.

I'm not saying that they should file suit, but I am saying that the civil bar is much lower. There is no "reasonable doubt" threshold for the plaintiff. The fact that nearly everyone suggests that Zimmermans actions were not usual in that he got out of his vehicle to watch or follow can place some contribution on him. It sucks, but the victim was unarmed and killed. In a liability breakdown, I would place 80% on the plaintiff and 20% on the defendant.

A Civil Rights case would be even harder to prove. The standard is even higher than the second degree murder one.

It would be stupid to try and the only way to get the verdict is through jury nullification IMO. There are places that could happen, however. And it is hard to say to what lengths this justice department would go to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

A Civil Rights case would be even harder to prove. The standard is even higher than the second degree murder one.

It would be stupid to try and the only way to get the verdict is through jury nullification IMO. There are places that could happen, however. And it is hard to say to what lengths this justice department would go to.

---

I agree. I'm talking about a negligence case. The civil rights case would be abusive and a waste of resources in this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

I agree. I'm talking about a negligence case. The civil rights case would be abusive and a waste of resources in this situation.

---

Pretty sure that no case can go forward; under Florida law, you cannot initiate a civil case when a killing has been found to be self-defense (which is the net result of the verdict—once self-defense was invoked, it put the burden on the prosecution to prove that the killing was not self-defense, and they failed). So Martin's family has no avenue for further litigation in the great state of Florida.

Likewise, I cannot see a civil rights case being brought. Several reasons why that dog won't hunt.

For good or ill, this case is over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

For good or ill, this case is over.

---

now to wait for the heat to die down.....

Attachment 10418

A strong reminder of how everything you think you know about being a tough guy can result in the loss of the only life that you get. It is important to know that violence can and often will result in unnecessary death. America needs to grow up and use words to solve conflict. When words fail and danger persists, it can destroy everything. Every law abiding American has a "nuclear" deterent.

I havent been in fight since I was 16. Fighting is for kids. Adults are polite and courteous or they are shooting to stop conflict. There is no middle ground. If your laws allow you to be armed, arm. If not, fight the unjust law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

If your laws allow you to be armed, arm. If not, fight the unjust law.

---

wow, never have I seen such a strange breed of logic. "Everyone here doesn't know how to sort disputes out with non violent means and the use of firearms is the absolute last resort and should never be used in anger". Putting that together you somehow get: "I think we should fight for the right to give all these people who can't deal with disputes without violence these dangerous last resort weapons. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

wow, never have I seen such a strange breed of logic. "Everyone here doesn't know how to sort disputes out with non violent means and the use of firearms is the absolute last resort and should never be used in anger". Putting that together you somehow get: "I think we should fight for the right to give all these people who can't deal with disputes without violence these dangerous last resort weapons. "

---

People who assault others should be barred from firearm ownership until they have shown themselves able to avoid that activity.

'Still lets everyone get one free rampage, not exactly an improvement and ultimately it would still not prevent near as many gun deaths as an all out ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

'Still lets everyone get one free rampage, not exactly an improvement and ultimately it would still not prevent near as many gun deaths as an all out ban.

---

All out ban. Give me a break. Come and take them. We are expanding gun rights in this country.

Ok then, you want to wallow in your astronomical murder, suicide and fatal accident rates for the chance to pretend to be a man for 5 minutes at a firing range, be my guest.

I've never handled a gun thinking it made me more manly

They were just there.....Not all of us are New York City boys like Tuffstuff.

Meh just my compulsion to use stereotypes and preconceptions leaking through instead of reasoned argument.

Regardless, the only proven method to put a serious and meaningful decline in those rates is abolition among civillians, and I have yet to find a reason to keep them that is not only relevant (second amendment might as well be a shopping list for all it's relevance today) and not a symptom of how screwed up society is.

Our suicide rates are not astronomical. You are making that up. In fact, as a limey, you are 4 countries away from us in rate. France is higher than the US, so is Japan, Belgium and many other modern, developed countries. You'd think that, since we own nearly 50% of all privately owned firearms and they are so much more effective for suicide, that it would be much higher, but you'd be completely wrong. Ironically, as much as minorities drive our high homicide rate, they also drive our lower suicide rate. Black Americans risk and use of suicide is dramatically lower than most other modern nations. Why? Who knows, maybe they are classed in the homicide rates as a sort of "death by cop"

I want every law abiding American to own at least 5 firearms. Black, White, etc. I take people to the range, we are doing quite well in reestablishing gun culture here in the suburbs of NYC, where Bloomberg is invited to eat complimentary turd sandwiches. The internet is amazing for it. Then, we are coming to Europe to spread their lawful use. Guns and self control make men and women free. Sound crazy? Good. Its a revolutionary idea. The old idea is that we should be coddled and protected from ourselves by our mommy, the State.

As an aside, I try not to carry during the day or around the house with a round chambered. It helps to reduce risk of fatal accident. At night, in an unusual area, you are probably better off carrying condition 1. greyblades, you should come to the US and I will take you to the range. It is a new world here and Americans who never really had the right are starting to grab it due to equal protections and stare decisis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Our suicide rates are not astronomical. You are making that up. In fact, as a limey, you are 4 countries away from us in rate. France is higher than the US, so is Japan, Belgium and many other modern, developed countries. You'd think that, since we own nearly 50% of all privately owned firearms and they are so much more effective for suicide, that it would be much higher, but you'd be completely wrong. Ironically, as much as minorities drive our high homicide rate, they also drive our lower suicide rate. Black Americans risk and use of suicide is dramatically lower than most other modern nations. Why? Who knows, maybe they are classed in the homicide rates as a sort of "death by cop"

---

Firstly, yes you caught me in a bit of hypebolye it is not astronomical and I need to realign my argument to the actual data: your prevalence of firearms is making suicide an easier proposition to act on as exhibited by harvard's study. I also argue that due the variation of gun restrictions throughout the USA along state and county lines that the USA's overall suicide rate is being equalized by those states with greater gun restrictions as exhibited here,(the table right at the bottom of the page under "U.S. Suicide Statistics (2005)"), in it I see the high suicide rate states are the ones with the most lax gun restrictions as exhibited here (montana , nevada, alaska etc) and the low rates in states with high gun restriction (like new york, new jersy, rhode island etc).

Quote:

---

I want every law abiding American to own at least 5 firearms. Black, White, etc. I take people to the range, we are doing quite well in reestablishing gun culture here in the suburbs of NYC, where Bloomberg is invited to eat complimentary turd sandwiches. The internet is amazing for it. Then, we are coming to Europe to spread their lawful use. Guns and self control make men and women free. Sound crazy? Good. Its a revolutionary idea. The old idea is that we should be coddled and protected from ourselves by our mommy, the State.
As an aside, I try not to carry during the day or around the house with a round chambered. It helps to reduce risk of fatal accident. At night, in an unusual area, you are probably better off carrying condition 1. greyblades, you should come to the US and I will take you to the range. It is a new world here and Americans who never really had the right are starting to grab it due to equal protections and stare decisis.

---

"Revolutionary" is one word for it, making an army of suicide squirrels is "revolutionary", it's just not a good idea. That idea might help with the accident rate as teaching everyone gun safety will help prevent it, but I see that definitely exacerbating the suicide and homicide rates, if someone wants to kill themselves a gun is the easiest solution and making suicide harder to do makes it more likely prospective suicides will reconsider.
As for murderers they aren't exactly going to be deterred by sessions at rifle ranges, its more likely to give them experience to make murderer's eventual exploits even more damaging.
As for the invite, I've been to america twice, I used a gun range once, I wasnt really enthused by the idea of a society where everyone having the capacity to do such easy damage to one another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

"Revolutionary" is one word for it, making an army of suicide squirrels is "revolutionary", it's just not a good idea.

---

On the contrary, it is a classic example of an excellent idea:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

The Bartix Kamikazix Squirrel unit, that stroms the enemy before being exploded by the Mind Rays from the Bartix King and thus splattering all over the enemy units making them all sticky and stuff and thus sabotaging their fighting effeciency!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

I've never handled a gun thinking it made me more manly

They were just there.....Not all of us are New York City boys like Tuffstuff.

---

Thanks I was trying to figure out iCSD original handle based on posting pattern alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Firstly, yes you caught me in a bit of hypebolye it is not astronomical and I need to realign my argument to the actual data: your prevalence of firearms is making suicide an easier proposition to act on as exhibited by harvard's study. I also argue that due the variation of gun restrictions throughout the USA along state and county lines that the USA's overall suicide rate is being equalized by those states with greater gun restrictions as exhibited here,(the table right at the bottom of the page under "U.S. Suicide Statistics (2005)"), in it I see the high suicide rate states are the ones with the most lax gun restrictions as exhibited here (montana , nevada, alaska etc) and the low rates in states with high gun restriction (like new york, new jersy, rhode island etc).

"Revolutionary" is one word for it, making an army of suicide squirrels is "revolutionary", it's just not a good idea. That idea might help with the accident rate as teaching everyone gun safety will help prevent it, but I see that definitely exacerbating the suicide and homicide rates, if someone wants to kill themselves a gun is the easiest solution and making suicide harder to do makes it more likely prospective suicides will reconsider.
As for murderers they aren't exactly going to be deterred by sessions at rifle ranges, its more likely to give them experience to make murderer's eventual exploits even more damaging.
As for the invite, I've been to america twice, I used a gun range once, I wasnt really enthused by the idea of a society where everyone having the capacity to do such easy damage to one another.

---

Long story short, your assumption that suicide rates in America are driven by firearms as opposed to everywhere else do not play out. Accessibility of firearms, while providing a more effective way to commit suicide, does not drive our rate to be any higher than any other country. In fact, Western nations have the same or higher rate across the board with almost no access to firearms. Give me a break. What percentage of gun suicides are done with "assault weapons", where you tend to only need 1 bullet? Probably even fewer than gun murders. Stick to banning kitchen knives and over cooking your meat in your own day-care center masquerading as a nation.

Firearms are great, you guys are boring, Strike for the South wont know a good thing until it is gone. He effectively played the manliness card with me - I'm interested in guns for manly purposes whereas he is so manly that he doesn't even notice it. I play pokemon, hate beer and sports and look at pictures of cuddley puppies. I don't care about manliness. Trannies, women, nuns and cheerleaders should own firearms, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Long story short, your assumption that suicide rates in America are driven by firearms as opposed to everywhere else do not play out. Accessibility of firearms, while providing a more effective way to commit suicide, does not drive our rate to be any higher than any other country. In fact, Western nations have the same or higher rate across the board with almost no access to firearms.

---

Which I've already explained with my "states shoring up (or down) the overall suicide rate" theory

Quote:

---

Give me a break. What percentage of gun suicides are done with "assault weapons", where you tend to only need 1 bullet? Probably even fewer than gun murders

---

...assault weapons? Your argument sounds like you think I'm advocating only the removal of rifles.

Quote:

---

Stick to banning kitchen knives and over cooking your meat in your own day-care center masquerading as a nation.

---

Yes that is ridiculous because knives are a tool with many different uses and violence is a perversion of the maker's intended use. Banning guns isnt ridiculous because their only purpose is to kill, their only reason for being is to kill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Long story short, your assumption that suicide rates in America are driven by firearms as opposed to everywhere else do not play out. Accessibility of firearms, while providing a more effective way to commit suicide, does not drive our rate to be any higher than any other country. In fact, Western nations have the same or higher rate across the board with almost no access to firearms. Give me a break. What percentage of gun suicides are done with "assault weapons", where you tend to only need 1 bullet? Probably even fewer than gun murders. Stick to banning kitchen knives and over cooking your meat in your own day-care center masquerading as a nation.

Firearms are great, you guys are boring, Strike for the South wont know a good thing until it is gone. He effectively played the manliness card with me - I'm interested in guns for manly purposes whereas he is so manly that he doesn't even notice it. I play pokemon, hate beer and sports and look at pictures of cuddley puppies. I don't care about manliness. Trannies, women, nuns and cheerleaders should own firearms, too.

---

Your rate of murder and mass killings is much higher - part of that is access and glorification of firearms.

Oh - and we overcook the meat to make sure we don't get parasites that make us crazy, risk prone, and cause stillborns.