Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

 

[jon_mx]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

 

[timschochet]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

I'm shocked we disagree on this.

 

[Christo]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

I'm shocked we disagree on this.

Are you actually claiming Martin didn't strike Zimmerman in any manner whatsoever?

 

[timschochet]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

I'm shocked we disagree on this.

Are you actually claiming Martin didn't strike Zimmerman in any manner whatsoever?

No. Let's not get into this again, though. How long until the trial?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

someone sees something which is not there

One guy thought he saw a gun when there was none, one guy thought he saw a dangerous thug when all there was a kid walking home from the Sev. Both guys initiated a confrontation based on their misperceptions and two people are dead.Seems pretty similar to me.

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

I'm shocked we disagree on this.

Are you actually claiming Martin didn't strike Zimmerman in any manner whatsoever?

No. Let's not get into this again, though. How long until the trial?

Seriously? You come back in here rehashing things with your comment and than act surprised someone called you out on it?

 

[jon_mx]

someone sees something which is not there

One guy thought he saw a gun when there was none, one guy thought he saw a dangerous thug when all there was a kid walking home from the Sev. Both guys initiated a confrontation based on their misperceptions and two people are dead.Seems pretty similar to me.

You wish to ignore the part where the 'kid' had him on the ground and was beating on him. That is nice.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Bloody nose

Looks pretty swollen too, probably broken

 

[Clifford]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

 

[glock]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

I could cite multiple cases of the same right here on The Isle of Long.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

 

[Clifford]

Given that is still illegal to kill people in cold blood, perhaps these businessmen should think long and hard about how badly they want to man up and impress their wives. This guy is going to jail for murder and will spend the rest of his life getting brutally raped by gangs of men.

Who won?

 

[Clifford]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

So apparently youths are allowed to beat the #### out of 45 y.o. businessmen if you get your way, see how easy it is to refute your ridiculous p.o.v.?

 

[Clifford]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

So apparently youths are allowed to beat the #### out of 45 y.o. businessmen if you get your way, see how easy it is to refute your ridiculous p.o.v.?

All you've shown me is how easy it is for you to completely twist something in your mind and respond to the strawman you created rather than what someone actually said. Are you worth talking to or is this the best I can expect?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Bloody nose

Looks pretty swollen too, probably broken

Clifford, keep ignoring the truth, and twist this picture into the victim being too aggressive to defend himself because he had the means to, since you have made it clear that you are not someone worth talking to.

 

[Clifford]

Bloody nose

Looks pretty swollen too, probably broken

Clifford, keep ignoring the truth, and twist this picture into the victim being too aggressive to defend himself because he had the means to, since you have made it clear that you are not someone worth talking to.

Did this even make sense to you when you wrote it?

 

[glock]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

So apparently youths are allowed to beat the #### out of 45 y.o. businessmen if you get your way, see how easy it is to refute your ridiculous p.o.v.?

Um, did you actually read the article?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

So apparently youths are allowed to beat the #### out of 45 y.o. businessmen if you get your way, see how easy it is to refute your ridiculous p.o.v.?

All you've shown me is how easy it is for you to completely twist something in your mind and respond to the strawman you created rather than what someone actually said. Are you worth talking to or is this the best I can expect?

What strawman? I am talking about what this thread is about not the tangent that was introduced.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

Given that it is legal to carry a gun, perhaps these youths should assume if a 45 y.o. businessman approaches him at night that they should not see it as an invitation to be "so aggressive", as you put it, to force the businessman to shoot him.

Also, your gun does not give you the right to attempt to reshape society into behavior that you find acceptable. Sorry but that really needs to be said. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else has to live according to your rules or you have the right to shoot them.SYG is going to be struck down soon, and it can't come soon enough since this is obviously how many people interpret this law.

So apparently youths are allowed to beat the #### out of 45 y.o. businessmen if you get your way, see how easy it is to refute your ridiculous p.o.v.?

Um, did you actually read the article?

No I didn't, I'm talking about Zimmerman/Martin - I thought that much was clear.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Bloody nose

Looks pretty swollen too, probably broken

Clifford, keep ignoring the truth. Twist this picture into blaming the victim for being "too aggressive" and deserving this punishment and ignoring his right to defend himself because you don't agree that he should be able if has the means to. You have made it clear that you are not someone worth talking to.

Did this even make sense to you when you wrote it?

Fixed that for you, typed it originally on my phone.

 

[[icon]]

Who posted in: Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch

Member name Posts

Carolina Hustler 1639

Christo 1583

timschochet 1056

BustedKnuckles 1037

jon_mx 702



Jesus....

 

[kface]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

The evidence more than backs up his claim. Only the degree to which he was being beaten is debatable.

Similarity is this:In both cases, shooter is emboldened to confont victim because he is carrying a gun. If Zimm wasn't packing, damn good chance he never leaves his car. In this case, I would bet all the money I have this 45-y-o businessman does not approach the young black teen had he not been packing heat.

In both cases, men acted in a manner that is more aggressive than they would have without a firearm, and in both cases these men ended up shooting and killing someone. In both cases they created situations that ended up with an unarmed teen getting killed.

The primary difference being that Martin appears to much more of a co-agressor in his case than Jordan does in his.

Both men created situations that had no need to be created and shot and killed unarmed victims. Both should serve serious time for doing so, no matter what the laws say. If you want to try and be some badass but you're such a ##### that the only way you can get yourself out of the situation you created is by shooting someone, then you do not value human life and are a threat to society which society should not tolerate, and you should have your freedom removed. My opinion.

I could cite multiple cases of the same right here on The Isle of Long.

This! I don't understand how there is any defense for initiating a situation then having to kill someone to get out of it. Its absolutely ridiculous and both these guys should be put away for a long time.

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

 

[mad sweeney]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

 

[timschochet]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

Nope. I've stated repeatedly that, from what I know of this case, if I'm on the jury I vote to acquit George Zimmerman, because I have a small amount of reasonable doubt. But do I think he was beaten the crap out of and forced to kill Martin in order to save his own life? I absolutely do not. I think George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin.

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

Nope. I've stated repeatedly that, from what I know of this case, if I'm on the jury I vote to acquit George Zimmerman, because I have a small amount of reasonable doubt. But do I think he was beaten the crap out of and forced to kill Martin in order to save his own life? I absolutely do not. I think George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin.

What would constitute getting the crap beat out of you? An eye hanging out of it's socket? Exposed brain?If your child came home in that condition, would you tuffle his hair and go - "So I see you got yourself into a little scuffle uh? Go wash up for dinner."?

 

[pantherclub]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

Nope. I've stated repeatedly that, from what I know of this case, if I'm on the jury I vote to acquit George Zimmerman, because I have a small amount of reasonable doubt. But do I think he was beaten the crap out of and forced to kill Martin in order to save his own life? I absolutely do not. I think George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin.

What would constitute getting the crap beat out of you? An eye hanging out of it's socket? Exposed brain?

If your child came home in that condition, would you tuffle his hair and go - "So I see you got yourself into a little scuffle uh? Go wash up for dinner."?

would you shoot the other kid that did it?

 

[Da Guru]

You can tell in the picture that T-Mart Busted his Knuckles on Zs nose.

 

[mad sweeney]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

You don't seem to know my accusation, so your words are so much fluff.

 

[mad sweeney]

You can tell in the picture that T-Mart Busted his Knuckles on Zs nose.

I think that conclusion should trump the coroner's report on all the non-injuries Martin had on his hands. This photo is the coffin nail, the game changer, the missing link!

 

[Neofight]

Zimmerman still has the Little Mary Sunshine set pointing out how brutal his beating was?

 

[BustedKnuckles]

You can tell in the picture that T-Mart Busted his Knuckles on Zs nose.

I think that conclusion should trump the coroner's report on all the non-injuries Martin had on his hands. This photo is the coffin nail, the game changer, the missing link!

i for 1 am glad trey got a good shot in before HE got shot....went down swinging.

 

[mad sweeney]

Zimmerman still has the Little Mary Sunshine set pointing out how brutal his beating was?

That guy was brutalized. I was completely wrong about the whole situation. A beating like that? I'd support him even if he went home to get a machine gun and killed Martin's whole family. Worst beating I've ever seen. Dude's lucky to be alive.

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

Nope. I've stated repeatedly that, from what I know of this case, if I'm on the jury I vote to acquit George Zimmerman, because I have a small amount of reasonable doubt. But do I think he was beaten the crap out of and forced to kill Martin in order to save his own life? I absolutely do not. I think George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin.

What would constitute getting the crap beat out of you? An eye hanging out of it's socket? Exposed brain?

If your child came home in that condition, would you tuffle his hair and go - "So I see you got yourself into a little scuffle uh? Go wash up for dinner."?

would you shoot the other kid that did it?

We're talking apples here - the discussion on oranges is over there.

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

You don't seem to know my accusation, so your words are so much fluff.

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! Fluff!

 

[mad sweeney]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

You don't seem to know my accusation, so your words are so much fluff.

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! Fluff!

Well your statement had zero whatsoever to do with anything I'ver ever said in this thread so, yeah, fluff. So you know how off you were, my premise is that Martin had the right to defend himself against someone who was doggedly following him around in the rain and never identified himself as a benign (though unofficial) neighborhood watchmen who was just checking up on someone he was unfamiliar with.

Oh, sorry, here you go...

 

[BustedKnuckles]

George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/28/3117444/george-zimmerman-to-sell-autographs.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Witz]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

You don't seem to know my accusation, so your words are so much fluff.

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! Fluff!

Well your statement had zero whatsoever to do with anything I'ver ever said in this thread so, yeah, fluff. So you know how off you were, my premise is that Martin had the right to defend himself against someone who was doggedly following him around in the rain and never identified himself as a benign (though unofficial) neighborhood watchmen who was just checking up on someone he was unfamiliar with.

Oh, sorry, here you go...

You have now practiced your emoticons (very good by the way). I know exactly what your premise was as it has been stated many times in this thread (along with others like you). I was commenting on the pro-Martin sect that likes to deflect every new piece of information that validates Zimmermans story that comes to light to on the altercation that night.

"He didn't have any injuries whatsoever" - actually he did according to the medical report

"He doesn't appear to be injured in the police video" - actually he is shown with the scrapes/cuts on the back of his head

"I don't see any blood in that video so how bad could it be" - actually, he was bleeding from the back of his head

"If he broke his nose, why wasn't there blood all over his face" - look at that, a color photo taken by police which clearly shows his nose and face bloody and swollen

"ZOMG!!! A Bloody Nose! Hey at least he got a shot in on Zimmerman!"

 

[Witz]

George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/28/3117444/george-zimmerman-to-sell-autographs.html#storylink=cpy

Since we're posting links tonight:Cell Phone Analysis

Why is Trayvon's father refusing to provide the PIN information for Trayvon's phone so it can be analyzed?

 

[FootballDummy]

George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/28/3117444/george-zimmerman-to-sell-autographs.html#storylink=cpy

Since we're posting links tonight:Cell Phone Analysis

Why is Trayvon's father refusing to provide the PIN information for Trayvon's phone so it can be analyzed?

Does your father know your pin number? Mine doesn't.

 

[mad sweeney]

It's happened again:

http://www.news.com....v-1226525359103

And this guy's lawyer says he will use the "Stand Your Ground" defense. The lawyer says the killer thought he saw a gun in the car, felt threatened, and that's why he fired his own weapon.

Not even close to the same situation. One case where a guy is beat the crap out of someone and another where someone sees something which is not there. Just because they are using the same defense does not mean their cases are even remotely similar.

There are those of us who don't buy that George Zimmerman was "beaten the crap out of" and never have. IMO, these cases are strikingly similar as they involve lame excuses for racially based murder.

Care to change your statement? New Color Photo Released

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! A bloody nose! He should've shot that little felon-to-be 9 times!

If the facts don't support your accusation, change your accusation or better yet, deflect, deflect, deflect!!!

You don't seem to know my accusation, so your words are so much fluff.

ZOMG!!11!!111!!!! Fluff!

Well your statement had zero whatsoever to do with anything I'ver ever said in this thread so, yeah, fluff. So you know how off you were, my premise is that Martin had the right to defend himself against someone who was doggedly following him around in the rain and never identified himself as a benign (though unofficial) neighborhood watchmen who was just checking up on someone he was unfamiliar with.

Oh, sorry, here you go...

You have now practiced your emoticons (very good by the way). I know exactly what your premise was as it has been stated many times in this thread (along with others like you). I was commenting on the pro-Martin sect that likes to deflect every new piece of information that validates Zimmermans story that comes to light to on the altercation that night.

"He didn't have any injuries whatsoever" - actually he did according to the medical report

"He doesn't appear to be injured in the police video" - actually he is shown with the scrapes/cuts on the back of his head

"I don't see any blood in that video so how bad could it be" - actually, he was bleeding from the back of his head

"If he broke his nose, why wasn't there blood all over his face" - look at that, a color photo taken by police which clearly shows his nose and face bloody and swollen

"ZOMG!!! A Bloody Nose! Hey at least he got a shot in on Zimmerman!"

Interesting then that you chose to reply like that to my post when it doesn't seem to apply.

 

[Charlie Frown]

Bloody nose

Looks pretty swollen too, probably broken

'shopped. Obviously.

Given that is still illegal to kill people in cold blood, perhaps these businessmen should think long and hard about how badly they want to man up and impress their wives. This guy is going to jail for murder and will spend the rest of his life getting brutally raped by gangs of men.

Who won?

Are you going to be one of the people out collecting free TVs when he walks?

 

[timschochet]

Are you going to be one of the people out collecting free TVs when he walks?

There should be a bad taste icon for ugly comments like these.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

If Zimmerman is found not guilty there will mass rioting throughout parts of Florida and I imagine other parts of the country.

 

[Neofight]

George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/28/3117444/george-zimmerman-to-sell-autographs.html#storylink=cpy

Christo might throw in extra for signed pics of the missus.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/28/3117444/george-zimmerman-to-sell-autographs.html#storylink=cpy

Since we're posting links tonight:Cell Phone Analysis

Why is Trayvon's father refusing to provide the PIN information for Trayvon's phone so it can be analyzed?

who said he had the pin # to begin with? And if he did who cares...all that matters is the phone records show he was on the phone 4 minutes before he was shot to death. All the defense is looking for is something they could use to destroy treys character...another witch hunt to deflect the attention off of the killer.

 

[jon_mx]

If Zimmerman is found not guilty there will mass rioting throughout parts of Florida and I imagine other parts of the country.

So the threat of violence should influence our justice system?