shes not aging wellMacbeth wrote:
I have such a crush on michelle Malkin
Tu Stultus Es
65 kg
inane little opines
treyvon martin looks like roc18
Tu Stultus Es
rip Roc18/masterstyle/mystline
Do they ever?eleven bravo wrote:
shes not aging wellMacbeth wrote:
I have such a crush on michelle Malkin
Whatever. She will always be as she was in my memories
Hell if I know... but there apparently was a witness that observed Z laying on his back with TM straddling over him. I'm reserving any opinion until more facts are revealed.-Whiteroom- wrote:
Jaekus wrote:
How is it proven it was self defence, when he himself admitted to approaching Martin, at night, in what is known as a fairly high-crime neighbourhood?13rin wrote:
I'm just trying to understand when you find the use of deadly force acceptable during self defense, if at all. But nice dodge, now can you dodge a wrench?
For all we know Martin was the one acting in self defence. After all he was the one approached by a guy who had been following him. In a car. At night. In the rain. He was 17 and approached by a bigger guy who is older than him. Maybe he thought he was being followed and about to be attacked, so he freaked.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
... then Zimmerman may have a glass jaw?Poseidon wrote:
Although I will say the one thing I don't buy is that Martin overpowered Zimmerman because of his height. Anyone seen a picture of him? He was lanky as hell and Zimmerman looks like a pretty big dude. If he got overpowered by a 17 year old kid who probably weighed 160 soaking wet, well...
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Well we already do know it shouldn't have even gotten to the point where it was possible for contact to happen. Z made sure it did and now a kid is dead.
Okay, fine. Lets assume Trayvon Martin didnt attack George Zimmerman. Does that make him any less black?
Tu Stultus Es
Wat
It's not the police who determine guilt or innocence and it never has been. They arrest on suspicion.Jay wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty is a fucking awful precedent, innit? Just because a gun is involved, does not make the shooter worthy of automatic jail time, sorry.AussieReaper wrote:
The stand your ground law is the reason he wasn't arrested on the scene immediately.jsnipy wrote:
Astonished at why this guy has not been charged yet.
Equally astonished at how "they" try to blame his actions on a law that allows you to stand your ground.
Also - shifty you should have made this a poll you goose.
If you can't even understand the most basic separation of legal authority then you have zero right to argue anything to do with this case.
When have the police ever been able to judge guilt or innocence? Are you even aware why the law fails if they cannot arrest on the suspicion of guilt as with this case?
I think of Zimmer when I see the title
Umm, yes, the police are the ones responsible for judging if a person needs to be arrested on the spot. They saw no cause and released him. The DA can still file charges, and probably will because of all the hoopla. Now kindly shut the fuck up.AussieReaper wrote:
It's not the police who determine guilt or innocence and it never has been. They arrest on suspicion.Jay wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty is a fucking awful precedent, innit? Just because a gun is involved, does not make the shooter worthy of automatic jail time, sorry.AussieReaper wrote:
The stand your ground law is the reason he wasn't arrested on the scene immediately.
Also - shifty you should have made this a poll you goose.
If you can't even understand the most basic separation of legal authority then you have zero right to argue anything to do with this case.
When have the police ever been able to judge guilt or innocence? Are you even aware why the law fails if they cannot arrest on the suspicion of guilt as with this case?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
If this was a white guy killed by a black guy no one would be having this conversation. THis is total BS!
how about 2 brits ............. white onescdailey2142 wrote:
If this was a white guy killed by a black guy no one would be having this conversation. THis is total BS!
Actually as I pointed out in my well cited and beautifully formatted post, the police did in fact want to arrest and charge him.Jay wrote:
Umm, yes, the police are the ones responsible for judging if a person needs to be arrested on the spot. They saw no cause and released him. The DA can still file charges, and probably will because of all the hoopla. Now kindly shut the fuck up.AussieReaper wrote:
It's not the police who determine guilt or innocence and it never has been. They arrest on suspicion.Jay wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty is a fucking awful precedent, innit? Just because a gun is involved, does not make the shooter worthy of automatic jail time, sorry.
If you can't even understand the most basic separation of legal authority then you have zero right to argue anything to do with this case.
When have the police ever been able to judge guilt or innocence? Are you even aware why the law fails if they cannot arrest on the suspicion of guilt as with this case?
Judging if they should be arrested isn't a determination of guilt. The police did see cause to arrest him.Jay wrote:
Umm, yes, the police are the ones responsible for judging if a person needs to be arrested on the spot. They saw no cause and released him. The DA can still file charges, and probably will because of all the hoopla. Now kindly shut the fuck up.AussieReaper wrote:
It's not the police who determine guilt or innocence and it never has been. They arrest on suspicion.Jay wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty is a fucking awful precedent, innit? Just because a gun is involved, does not make the shooter worthy of automatic jail time, sorry.
If you can't even understand the most basic separation of legal authority then you have zero right to argue anything to do with this case.
When have the police ever been able to judge guilt or innocence? Are you even aware why the law fails if they cannot arrest on the suspicion of guilt as with this case?
The stand your ground law is the reason he wasn't arrested. Macbeth covered this pretty well on page 1. The law is at fault here in Florida. He should have been arrested.
And just cause it seems like I'll need to repeat this, since you have suh a hard time following, an arrest isn't a determination of guilt.
That's also what I heard. They said that on the scene Z had a broken nose and cuts behind his head. This is consistent with the story of the witness. Now, there's a video where he was being brought wherever and he didn't have any blood so they claim it's not true. However, when you have a freaking broken nose you stop the bleeding and the bleeding behind your head. He had plenty of time between meeting with the cops to being dropped off wherever to clean it up. I've broken my nose twice from accidents and both times I stopped the bleeding in about 3 minutes even though there was a lot.13rin wrote:
Hell if I know... but there apparently was a witness that observed Z laying on his back with TM straddling over him. I'm reserving any opinion until more facts are revealed.-Whiteroom- wrote:
Jaekus wrote:
How is it proven it was self defence, when he himself admitted to approaching Martin, at night, in what is known as a fairly high-crime neighbourhood?
For all we know Martin was the one acting in self defence. After all he was the one approached by a guy who had been following him. In a car. At night. In the rain. He was 17 and approached by a bigger guy who is older than him. Maybe he thought he was being followed and about to be attacked, so he freaked.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
I'll read it after I read ATG's zombie storyMacbeth wrote:
Actually as I pointed out in my well cited and beautifully formatted post, the police did in fact want to arrest and charge him.Jay wrote:
Umm, yes, the police are the ones responsible for judging if a person needs to be arrested on the spot. They saw no cause and released him. The DA can still file charges, and probably will because of all the hoopla. Now kindly shut the fuck up.AussieReaper wrote:
It's not the police who determine guilt or innocence and it never has been. They arrest on suspicion.
If you can't even understand the most basic separation of legal authority then you have zero right to argue anything to do with this case.
When have the police ever been able to judge guilt or innocence? Are you even aware why the law fails if they cannot arrest on the suspicion of guilt as with this case?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Well that's too bad. It's the best post in this thread. It really cuts through the whole topic and gets right down to the facts. Sorta like superpostion.
Here, I'll even provide you with a link.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 5#p3784125
My, god that is the best post made here in at least a month.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 5#p3784125
My, god that is the best post made here in at least a month.
great layout and organisation of thoughtsMacbeth wrote:
Here, I'll even provide you with a link.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 5#p3784125
My, god that is the best post made here in at least a month.
Poor content.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Still a wuss for needing a gun to stop getting a beat-down from a stick.
I used to think people were harsh on you Shifty.
I wiss George shot your skinny ass.
I wiss George shot your skinny ass.