George Zimmerman's Going to End Up Just Like O.J.

[LAGC]

Because while the trolls on here claim to defend and protect the 2nd amendment and the right to self defense, they're chuckie schumers

That's not true. Legitimate self-defense is justified, using whatever tool available. But what happened that night with Trayvon Martin wasn't a case of George Zimmerman minding his own business and trouble "just happening" to find him, but rather him going out of his way looking for trouble. And he found it that night. He should have just stayed in his car and waited for police instead of trying to play vigilante hero. It's that very repeated behavior (and evidenced in the OP) which is going to eventually end up with him either dead or in prison for a very long time.

And if you really believe people are trolls, why even post in and bump their threads? Just put them on ignore and abstain from posting. Geesh.

[Oswald Bastable]

Neither I or "my job" are the topic of this thread. You can start a thread of your own if you want to discuss your feelings about a particular subject.

I see...

I also see there are two points to the OP...

One, points out that George is in the news again...whether legitimately, or based on unsubstantiated claims, we don't know.

Two, points out that the OP compares a man attacked who defended himself, with one who was accused of cold blooded murder, and attempts to say their trails lead to the same end...a point heavy with innuendo and implications...one that might make some question the motivation of the entire post altogether...

There also appear to be two possible reactions to this thread...one approved, and one not.

The approved one addresses the first point, and derides, deflects and protects against any discussion of the second...or motivations involved.

And one must also note that the OP author has remained quiescent since that OP, leaving it to certain namby-pamby's to do his work for him...

What a tangled web we weave...

[Richard Simmons]

I see...

I also see there are two points to the OP...

One, points out that George is in the news again...whether legitimately, or based on unsubstantiated claims, we don't know.

Two, points out that the OP compares a man attacked who defended himself, with one who was accused of cold blooded murder, and attempts to say their trails lead to the same end...a point heavy with innuendo and implications...one that might make some question the motivation of the entire post altogether...

There also appear to be two possible reactions to this thread...one approved, and one not.

The approved one addresses the first point, and derides, deflects and protects against any discussion of the second...or motivations involved.

And one must also note that the OP author has remained quiescent since that OP, leaving it to certain namby-pamby's to do his work for him...

What a tangled web we weave...

You can "see" as you like but if the thread gets off topic, as I see it, it will be closed. If someone is trolling another member, as I see it, then actions will be taken.

[raxar]

You can "see" as you like but if the thread gets off topic, as I see it, it will be closed. If someone is trolling another member, as I see it, then actions will be taken.

But your definition of trolling seems to be quoteing what someone else posted and responding to it. Is there a rule that says a thread has to remain on the original topic?

[Richard Simmons]

IF you have concerns then PM me or other staff members or contact the owner of the site. This thread is not the place for it.

[ltorlo64]

That's not true. Legitimate self-defense is justified, using whatever tool available. But what happened that night with Trayvon Martin wasn't a case of George Zimmerman minding his own business and trouble "just happening" to find him, but rather him going out of his way looking for trouble. And he found it that night. He should have just stayed in his car and waited for police instead of trying to play vigilante hero. It's that very repeated behavior (and evidenced in the OP) which is going to eventually end up with him either dead or in prison for a very long time.

The problem with that point of view is that the facts did not bear it out. Here is a quote from one of the jurists who felt as you did, and actually still feels as you do.

When they started looking at the law, the person who initially wanted second-degree murder changed her vote to manslaughter, the juror said. Then they asked for clarification from the judge and went over it again and again. B37 said some jurors wanted to find Zimmerman guilty of something, but there was just no place to go based on the law.

She knew Zimmerman was guilty of something the state just did not prove it. As is becoming the case with anything Zimmerman is accused of, we know he is guilty of something, we just can't prove it. This kind of thinking is called prejudice. The liberals have decided that Zimmerman has to be guilty because he is white, well actually Hispanic, but for their purposes he is close enough to white to be white. There is no way that Martin could have been acting in any way that could have lead to suspicion, he is just a poor black man walking off the sidewalk, next to peoples houses, at night, in the shadows, looking as if he is trying not to be seen. There is no way that Martin would have ever attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose, beating his head into the pavement, had he not been provoked (disregard the recent reports of the knockout game). Zimmerman was hunting and it is the states fault for not proving it. It is the states fault that first his wife, and then his girlfriend have charged Zimmerman with threatening them with firearms which were never found and the police concluded could not have been there. It seems the only one doing anything wrong is Zimmerman, except it can never be proved. I am beginning the think Zimmerman is the ultimate bad guy.

As for the repeated behavior, I have now shown twice that the behavior is mostly wishful thinking and when investigated does not exist. Again, this goes to the prejudice that liberal and the MSM have against him.

[ltorlo64]

And now troll #3 comes into play.... What's with this site RS? Admin protecting trolls over long time members. Zimmerman was acquitted of Murder. no matter how much the leftists you are protecting scream. So much for those douchebags standing behind the 2nd and the right of self defense.

While he was acquitted, the MSM and liberals are trying to forget that fact. The MSM and liberals are also trying to reconvict him using a "pattern of misconduct" as we say in the military. They do this by repeating allegations against him, even if they were found to be false. You cannot fight this be saying he was acquitted of murder, you have to provide them the evidence of how later accusations were false. And since the MSM only reports on the initial accusation and not the results of the investigation you have to dig. This has nothing to do with protecting anyone but about proving, over and over again, that they are wrong. And you can't do that by just saying they are wrong.

[LAGC]

I'm not saying Zimmy should have been convicted of murder -- the jury made the right call, based on the wording of the law.

But I do think he was culpable in the kid's death -- that his actions of profiling, stalking, and ultimately cornering him that night, causing a "fight or flight" response, did culminate in a needless loss of life.

It's that conceited "I am the law" attitude that is going to catch up to him, eventually. Bank on it.

[ltorlo64]

I'm not saying Zimmy should have been convicted of murder -- the jury made the right call, based on the wording of the law.

But I do think he was culpable in the kid's death -- that his actions of profiling, stalking, and ultimately cornering him that night, causing a "fight or flight" response, did culminate in a needless loss of life.

It's that conceited "I am the law" attitude that is going to catch up to him, eventually. Bank on it.

Exactly how was he profiling? Racially? Here is what the jury had to say about that.

Juror B37 also claimed that the jury did not believe race played a factor in the situation, something Ford said could have wider implications for Zimmerman.

The only profiling being done was of a young man, walking in the shadows, off the sidewalk, next to the houses, looking like he was trying to avoid being seen. In other words, he was acting suspicious. The fight or flight response was activated in Zimmerman, when he turned around and headed for his truck and was attacked.

I am interested in the evidence of this "conceited 'I am above the law' attitude" you mention. Can you provide evidence of this? Or are you talking about all neighborhood watch people who call the police when they see something suspicious. Or are you just referring to the ones that are attacked from behind, fear for their lives, call (actually scream) for help and have to protect themselves.

[Sherman]

But I do think he was culpable in the Zimmerman's death -- that his actions of profiling, stalking, and ultimately cornering him that night, causing a "fight or flight" response. Did culminate in a needless loss of life.

I am glad the little worthless thug is DEAD! Live like a thug gangster.........die like one. Many need to go out like he did.......super cheap bullet express.

[El Jefe]

Feel free to explain what you meant by "Now we return to our regular scheduled trolling"
Were you suggesting you were going back to your trolling of LAGC like you do in every thread he posts in, or did you somehow believe he was trolling?

BTW..to the ones who cant wait to run across the street and claim LAGC is being protected by a post such as mine. Please just FOAD...and I mean that in the nicest way.

You and the rest would be afforded the same if someone followed your ass around the forum making asinine comments everytime you shared a thought.

Oh certainly. To anyone who actually read all of the various threads we had on here during the long Zimmerman debacle, they know beyond a shadow that LAQC wanted Zimmerman tried for murder. If one read those many threads you would have noticed that the OP followed lock step with Al Sharpton and his ilk and ridiculed the reaction most whites had to the incident. It used the term racist on more than a few occasions.

Since, every time he can paint Zimmerman and/or those who felt he was innocent in a negative light he does so. He knows no one else on here wants to hear that BS and that's exactly why he posts it here.

If LAQC isn't a troll, then there is no such thing.

[LAGC]

Exactly how was he profiling? Racially? Here is what the jury had to say about that.

You mean the all-white jury, except for the one Puerto Rican (Juror B29) who wanted to cause a hung verdict, but only reluctantly relented in the end?

In other words, he was acting suspicious. The fight or flight response was activated in Zimmerman, when he turned around and headed for his truck and was attacked.

No, he got out of his car and started following him, trying to track him down, as caught on 911 tape. Remember the dispatcher saying: "We don't need you to do that." ??

I am interested in the evidence of this "conceited 'I am above the law' attitude" you mention. Can you provide evidence of this? Or are you talking about all neighborhood watch people who call the police when they see something suspicious. Or are you just referring to the ones that are attacked from behind, fear for their lives, call (actually scream) for help and have to protect themselves.

I'm talking about the ones who leave the safety of their car, don't wait for police, and instead try to make a "collar" all by themselves, as if they were the law. The ones who say shit like: "These assholes, they always get away."

Whatever happened between the kid and Zimmerman at that point was irrelevant. When you're a teenager being stalked by some strange older guy in the middle of the night, you can't blame the teenager for acting out of desperation and choosing "fight" instead of "flight."

[Krupski]

You mean the all-white jury, except for the one Puerto Rican (Juror B29) who wanted to cause a hung verdict, but only reluctantly relented in the end?

I can't speak for others, but I can tell you that when I did jury duty (attempted murder - perp was a black guy) I was worried that I might be biased against him and make a wrong call.

When it came time to do the jury duty, I found myself listening intently and praying to God that I made the right decision. His color wasn't a factor to me (and you know I'm a racist).

In the end, it was so clear that he was guilty that I was spared the worry that I may have made a wrong decision, but I was concerned.

The point I'm making is that I think when it comes to a jury, people KNOW what's on the line and do everything they can to make a CORRECT decision, regardless of personal bias.

Therefore, the "all white jury" you complain about is a non-factor.

And besides, Zimmerman isn't white, he's a "white hispanic"......

[ltorlo64]

You mean the all-white jury, except for the one Puerto Rican (Juror B29) who wanted to cause a hung verdict, but only reluctantly relented in the end?

You are trying to change the subject from Zimmerman being the profiler to the jury, and I am not quite sure how the two connect. Please explain how Zimmerman profiled. As for the jury, the prosecution and the defense agree on the makeup of the jury that will work best for their respective cases. Are you saying the prosecutor, who I have already pointed out is under indictment for falsifying arrest documents on Zimmerman, was trying not to win?

No, he got out of his car and started following him, trying to track him down, as caught on 911 tape. Remember the dispatcher saying: "We don't need you to do that." ??

Remember, Martin was not on the sidewalk where he was easily seen from a car on the road. Remember, Martin was walking in the shadow, under the eaves of houses, in people's yards, not something normal, law abiding people would do. Zimmerman got out of his truck, not to approach Martin, but so that he would not lose Martin as he continued to walk where it was hard to see. Exactly what a Neighborhood Watch person is supposed to do. Not approach, unless to due to safety of another person it is absolutely necessary, but also to not lose sight of the person being suspicious.

Also, remember that Zimmerman was attacked as he went back to his vehicle. It was Martin who made contact with Zimmerman, not the other way around.

I'm talking about the ones who leave the safety of their car, don't wait for police, and instead try to make a "collar" all by themselves, as if they were the law. The ones who say shit like: "These assholes, they always get away."

From the testimony Zimmerman never intended to make contact with Martin, only ensure that when the police got there Zimmerman knew where he was. As I have pointed out numerous times but you fail to take into account, Martin was walking where it was hard to see and he was acting as if he did not want to be seen. It does no good for a Neighborhood Watch person to call the police only to not know where the suspicious person is.

By the way, you know that many Neighborhood Watch people walk their streets, they are not in cars to begin with. Are they looking for trouble, looking to make the "collar", or are they trying to keep their streets safe from crime.

Whatever happened between the kid and Zimmerman at that point was irrelevant. When you're a teenager being stalked by some strange older guy in the middle of the night, you can't blame the teenager for acting out of desperation and choosing "fight" instead of "flight."

When you are a teenager, used to behaving in a criminal way, acting in a criminal way, you should expect someone to watch you and follow you to ensure you don't act in a criminal way again. As for Zimmerman, he saw someone acting suspiciously, and followed them, as a Neighborhood Watch person is supposed to do, he did not make contact, he did not try to detain. Your prejudices are getting in the way of fair treatment of someone who was trying to prevent crime before it happens.

[LAGC]

You are trying to change the subject from Zimmerman being the profiler to the jury, and I am not quite sure how the two connect. Please explain how Zimmerman profiled. As for the jury, the prosecution and the defense agree on the makeup of the jury that will work best for their respective cases.

You were the one who brought the jury's opinion in on this, using one of their statements to suggest he wasn't profiling. Yet in your very same post you admit that Zimmy thought the kid was up to no good and ought to be followed. So which is it?

Are you saying the prosecutor, who I have already pointed out is under indictment for falsifying arrest documents on Zimmerman, was trying not to win?

That has been suggested by more than a few. Just like this current case with the Ferguson cop -- I'm sure there will be a fancy show-trial just to appease the community, that will end in a not-guilty verdict as well, by design. "At least we tried."

Remember, Martin was not on the sidewalk where he was easily seen from a car on the road. Remember, Martin was walking in the shadow, under the eaves of houses, in people's yards, not something normal, law abiding people would do. Zimmerman got out of his truck, not to approach Martin, but so that he would not lose Martin as he continued to walk where it was hard to see.

Also, remember that Zimmerman was attacked as he went back to his vehicle. It was Martin who made contact with Zimmerman, not the other way around.

Again, all of this the one-sided testimony of the only person who came out alive that night. After all, "dead men tell no tales."

When you are a teenager, used to behaving in a criminal way, acting in a criminal way,

You mean having a picture of a marijuana plant on his cell phone? Or making some obscene gestures? Or perhaps using the Skittles and flavored tea in his pocket as some sort of mix to get high? That justifies being shot to death while walking back home from the store at night?

[LAGC]

If this is way too hard to comprehend, one can always go across the street where you can laugh and join D@#$$l in his nigger and spic talk. Where only one side is allowed to speak in the "open and free politically incorrect forum"

That's the biggest irony of it all. I'm sure I'd be banned from over there in a New York Minute just for daring to register over there. "Free and open forum" my ass. "Politically incorrect" = "Only racist views allowed" over there apparently.

I can't really blame Diesel for harboring racist views, him being a product of the California prison system and all, but I can't imagine why anyone else would want to associate with that kind of criminal mentality.

People wonder why gun owners sometimes get painted with the racist brush, well... you don't have to wade very far into that forum to figure out why.

[ltorlo64]

You were the one who brought the jury's opinion in on this, using one of their statements to suggest he wasn't profiling. Yet in your very same post you admit that Zimmy thought the kid was up to no good and ought to be followed. So which is it?

Profiling as regards this case has always been about race. The contention being that Martin was only noticed because he was black, it had nothing to do with his actions. Now that this contention has been shown to be false, many times and in many ways, you try to change the definition being used to include actions, the very thing you, and all liberals for that matter, have been saying didn’t matter. It is you who needs to decide how you are using the term profiling. I am other conservatives have been consistent in our pointing out that Martin was noticed because of his acting suspiciously, not because of his skin color.

That has been suggested by more than a few. Just like this current case with the Ferguson cop -- I'm sure there will be a fancy show-trial just to appease the community, that will end in a not-guilty verdict as well, by design. "At least we tried."

Well, as long as you ignore the facts and prejudge based on spotty evidence you can pretty much believe anything. It is harder to look at facts, have the patience for facts to be made known and verified, so you come to a logical conclusion. This has not happened in Ferguson and it definitely has not happened with Zimmerman. If it had you would not have even bothered posting this thread.

And as long as you are postulating that the prosecutor tried to lose, you might want to consider why she hid exculpatory evidence that would help the defense, part of the reason she is in trouble. I would not risk my reputation or my career if I was not trying to win. (Actually, I think integrity is more important that winning, but there is no reason to act without integrity if you are trying to lose.)

Again, all of this the one-sided testimony of the only person who came out alive that night. After all, "dead men tell no tales."

Actually, there is enough evidence to back up the testimony, which is why it stood. It was not just Zimmerman’s testimony, it was the phone call to the police, the phone call from Martin to that girl, the eye-witness seeing Martin beating up Zimmerman. This is called context, and it works against the idea that Zimmerman was out hunting or acting maliciously.

You mean having a picture of a marijuana plant on his cell phone? Or making some obscene gestures? Or perhaps using the Skittles and flavored tea in his pocket as some sort of mix to get high? That justifies being shot to death while walking back home from the store at night?

No, his violent tendencies, his enjoyment of fighting, his discussions of criminal activity, is trying to look like a criminal, these show his enjoyment of the criminal lifestyle. As stated multiple time, but you continue to ignore, his suspicious actions, staying off the sidewalk, walking in the shadow, walking through yards and staying close to homes, these got him noticed. But you are correct that none of that justifies him getting shot.

Of course, what does justify him getting shot, and again the most salient point that you and other liberals just outright ignore, is that he attacked Zimmerman when his back was turned and commenced to beat the snot out of him, for no reason. Zimmerman had not threatened or even contacted Martin. Martin has one wound, it was fatal, but no fight marks on him, at least not recent. Zimmerman, however, has a broken nose, multiple cuts to the back of his head and was heard screaming, a high pitched, terrified scream, for help. This, and only this, is what justifies Martin being shot. Even if Martin had just walked up and hit Zimmerman in the back of the head or face and then left he would still be alive. But, according to testimony from multiple people, Martin had to straddle Zimmerman trying to inflict multiple damage, it not kill, he was going to disable Zimmerman, this is what justifies Zimmerman shooting Martin.

[ltorlo64]

That has been suggested by more than a few. Just like this current case with the Ferguson cop -- I'm sure there will be a fancy show-trial just to appease the community, that will end in a not-guilty verdict as well, by design. "At least we tried."

I was just thinking about this and how this just exemplifies your prejudice. You have already decided that the cop is guilty so now it is just up to the courts to back you up. If they don't, it is just a show trial. So, why have a trial at all? Why have a court system at all? Why don't we just string up the cop now, I mean, you have decided he is guilty. Don't worry about things like opposing witnesses, the lack up fight trauma to the dead man and the extensive fight trauma to the cop, that the lead witness saying that Brown's hands were up has a history of lying to the police about simple things, like his name. I realize there is a new video showing Brown's hands up, but that does not stop Brown from deciding to charge the cop. See, all this will come out at trial. But there is not need for one as you have already determined the outcome and if the trial, or even the grand jury, outcome is not what you want it is not justice. The only justice is for the cop to be put in prison or, preferably, executed. Again, your prejudice is getting in the way of justice.

[LAGC]

I'm going to have to bow out of this conversation for now, not because I don't want to respond, but because I have a big exam tomorrow and really need to get back to studying.

Let me just leave you with this though: what makes you so sure Trayvon wasn't "acting suspiciously by walking through yards and staying close to homes" precisely because he noticed someone driving around, tailing him, taking an overly keen interest in him? Even eventually getting out of his car and pursuing on foot? All in the dead middle of the night?

The bottom line is that the whole incident was a tragic event, on so many levels. My only point is that neither side was completely blameless that night.

[mrkalashnikov]

That's the biggest irony of it all. I'm sure I'd be banned from over there in a New York Minute just for daring to register over there. "Free and open forum" my ass. "Politically incorrect" = "Only racist views allowed" over there apparently.

I can't really blame Diesel for harboring racist views, him being a product of the California prison system and all, but I can't imagine why anyone else would want to associate with that kind of criminal mentality.

People wonder why gun owners sometimes get painted with the racist brush, well... you don't have to wade very far into that forum to figure out why.

This has to be the most ironic/ignorant thing you have ever posted on this board.

A self-admitted convicted felon libels members of another pro-2nd Amendment board as being "criminal" because they dare to express views not in lock-step with the marxist pro-Democrat pro-Obama forces now destroying this country. It is obvious it's you & your ilk who are the real threat to the USA. The fact you haul out the racist label to demean Americans who are sick & tired of liberal progressive shitheads pissing down their backs at every turn & corner & telling them it's only raining, only serves to reinforce in most people's minds here where you actually stand in regards to our country & it's traditional values.

There are MANY members over at that forum...who have given more, sacrificed more, & in general contributed more, to our society than you ever will.