Babbling

[FussyMcFusserson]

More details:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/nra-dreams-come-true.html

[The_Pirate-King]

That's fuuuuuudgeed up...

Thank god for the NRA, right?

[alucardsexyghost]

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

it was astro

[The_Pirate-King]

---

alucardsexyghost wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

it was astro

---

Of course... and then I got warned by Raijin for saying that he was trolling.

[scoobdog]

That may be more than enough to get charges brought up.

[_Star_Wolf_]

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:

---

alucardsexyghost wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

it was astro

---

Of course... and then I got warned by Raijin for saying that he was trolling.

---

Which is crap. Saying someone is trolling isn't an insult and never has been. It's an observation I don't know how it's so hard for them to understand this.

[FussyMcFusserson]

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
That's fuuuuuudgeed up...

Thank god for the NRA, right?

---

Yup.

[The_Pirate-King]

---

_Star_Wolf_ wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:

---

alucardsexyghost wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

it was astro

---

Of course... and then I got warned by Raijin for saying that he was trolling.

---

Which is crap. Saying someone is trolling isn't an insult and never has been. It's an observation I don't know how it's so hard for them to understand this.

---

I agree completely, but that's the way they want to do things. Like how he locked that thread where everyone was talking about Revanchist... but this isn't really the place for this discussion because if you talk about things mods do outside of the mod thread, things get locked.

[_Star_Wolf_]

Anyway, back on topic.
The guy ignored orders not to pursue the kid. On top of that, he took a gun with him to confront the kid.
It's insane that this fatass wannabe cop is still on the streets.

[Mjöllnir]

---

FussyMcFusserson wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

*coughastrocough*

---

Don't be a pussy.  Call Astro by name.

Fuk this passive aggresive sh!t.

[_Star_Wolf_]

yeah, I won't really get into that.
I just think it's ridiculous that's considered flaming is all

[FussyMcFusserson]

---

_Star_Wolf_ wrote:
Anyway, back on topic.
The guy ignored orders not to pursue the kid. On top of that, he took a gun with him to confront the kid.
It's insane that this fatass wannabe cop is still on the streets.

---

They've bee talking about this on The Young Turks, and on one of the 9-1-1 tapes, you can hear Zimmerman spit out a nasty racial slur . . . . .

[FussyMcFusserson]

---

Mjöllnir wrote:

---

FussyMcFusserson wrote:

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:
Was it Jingai? Or maybe packard? I do remember one of them arguing against hate crime laws and the like.

---

*coughastrocough*

---

Don't be a pussy.  Call Astro by name.

Fuk this passive aggresive sh!t.

---

Oh yeah, then I get permabanned for a shout-out. Oh well, in for a penny, in for a pound.

Did you know Astro's been here every day since he got the miscarrage thread locked, yet for some reason, he doesn't feel the need to offer his opinion here . . . . .

[Eklo]

"Police didn't arrest George Zimmerman. They didn't arrest him after he got off his car, shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was unarmed and on his way back from the store after buying some snacks. They didn't arrest him after 9-11 calls emerged in which police advise Zimmerman, who was on Neighborhood Watch patrol, not to follow Martin.

Sanford, Fla. police said Zimmerman has claimed self defense, so they've handed the case over to the state attorney.

But, as NPR's Joel Rose reported this morning, Florida law may mean prosecuting Zimmerman could prove difficult.

"As long as you are somewhere you have a lawful right to be, if someone attacks you, the words of the statute are you can meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe that that is necessary," Jeffrey Bellin, who teaches law at Southern Methodist University, told Joel.

That law is known as the "Stand Your Ground," or "Shoot First" law and it's been controversial since it was passed in 2005. Basically, The Christian Science Monitor reports, the law gets rid of the English Law concept of "duty to retreat" from a situation that is dangerous outside your home."

Full link: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/03/19/148937626/trayvon-
martin-killing-puts-stand-your-grou...

[FussyMcFusserson]

So it turns out that Treyvan Martin was talking to a friend while being followed by the neighborhood watch guy:

The pair's phone logs, obtained by ABC News, show they spoke just five minutes before police responded to reports of a shooting at the gated community in Sanford, Fla.

Recounting her conversation with Martin, the teen girl said, "He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man."

"I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run but he said he was not going to run," she said.

After a few minutes, the girl said, Martin thought he was safe. But eventually the man appeared again.

"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for?'" the girl said. "And the man said, 'What are you doing here?' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the [phone’s\] headset just fell."

The line went dead, the girl said.

"I called him again and he didn't answer the phone," she said.

So it would seem that the teen-ager was the one who was afraid. And rightly so as it turns out.

He didn't run, and for good reason. If he had, he would have been considered a "fleeing suspect" and could have gotten shot. Of course, under Florida's lunatic gun laws, if he stood his ground, he could still get shot. Indeed, under these laws, the only person who has any rights is the one with the gun. And that person is evidently entitled to stalk, chase and shoot unarmed strangers and call it self defense.

[dposse]

http://gawker.com/5894647/how-to-get-away-with-murder-and-other-t
hings-the-killing-of-unarmed-black-...

a really scathing piece, in my opinion.

[_Star_Wolf_]

It's pretty clear that it was racially motivated

[Jingai]

  This is a sad case, but I don't think prosecuting Mr. Zimmerman is going to be easy.Mr. Zimmerman

did show evidence of injury, and Florida law has a provision commonly called, "Stand your ground", where

retreating is not required before asserting a self defense claim. Even a Federal case from the civil rights division

is going to be difficult, they would have to prove that the act was deliberately motivated with the purpose of

denying, by killing, Mr. Martin's civil rights, in other words, they would have to prove some form of racial

motivation was involved as the primary motivating factor. That is a difficult standard in the sense that

there are police reports and other evidence which indicates it was an altercation and possibly self defense.

  Essentially Mr. Zimmerman is going to end up bankrupt from this, the legal fees alone will likely put

him out of his home and ruined financially. The media is already attempting to publicly convicting him

without trial, as several blog sites already have done, and by extension making him the larger issue for

gun control law expansion. Personally, I think Mr. Zimmerman should have left well enough alone by

simply calling the police, and heeding their advice to not follow Mr. Martin. Mr. Zimmerman should not

have gotten out of his car, should not have followed Mr. Martin and absolutely should not have shot him,

however, this is a matter for courts to settle, as there is conflicting evidence and reports. Obtaining a

conviction in a court is going to be difficult, however Mr. Zimmerman's life as he previously knew it is now gone,

he will face financial hardships and infamy as a result of the growing media focus on this case.

[The_Pirate-King]

---

Jingai wrote:

  This is a sad case, but I don't think prosecuting Mr. Zimmerman is going to be easy.Mr. Zimmerman

did show evidence of injury, and Florida law has a provision commonly called, "Stand your ground", where

retreating is not required before asserting a self defense claim. Even a Federal case from the civil rights division

is going to be difficult, they would have to prove that the act was deliberately motivated with the purpose of

denying, by killing, Mr. Martin's civil rights, in other words, they would have to prove some form of racial

motivation was involved as the primary motivating factor. That is a difficult standard in the sense that

there are police reports and other evidence which indicates it was an altercation and possibly self defense.

  Essentially Mr. Zimmerman is going to end up bankrupt from this, the legal fees alone will likely put

him out of his home and ruined financially. The media is already attempting to publicly convicting him

without trial, as several blog sites already have done, and by extension making him the larger issue for

gun control law expansion. Personally, I think Mr. Zimmerman should have left well enough alone by

simply calling the police, and heeding their advice to not follow Mr. Martin. Mr. Zimmerman should not

have gotten out of his car, should not have followed Mr. Martin and absolutely should not have shot him,

however, this is a matter for courts to settle, as there is conflicting evidence and reports. Obtaining a

conviction in a court is going to be difficult, however Mr. Zimmerman's life as he previously knew it is now gone,

he will face financial hardships and infamy as a result of the growing media focus on this case.

---

One can only hope he will be convicted. I heard someone say that you can hear a racial slur in one of the 911 calls, so that could possibly provide the concrete evidence needed to prove racism was a factor.

I think that "stand your ground" #### is just as fuuuuuudgeed up as when someone gets sentenced for legitimately defending themself. It seems extremely likely that Zimmerman did something to provoke, or represented a legitimate threat, to Trayvon Martin; is it Martin's fault if he "stood his ground"?

[scoobdog]

The friend's testimony about the call is pretty damning. If he isn't convicted, he'll still likely be bankrupt by the wrongful death suit.

[Jingai]

---

The_Pirate-King wrote:

---

Jingai wrote:

  This is a sad case, but I don't think prosecuting Mr. Zimmerman is going to be easy.Mr. Zimmerman

did show evidence of injury, and Florida law has a provision commonly called, "Stand your ground", where

retreating is not required before asserting a self defense claim. Even a Federal case from the civil rights division

is going to be difficult, they would have to prove that the act was deliberately motivated with the purpose of

denying, by killing, Mr. Martin's civil rights, in other words, they would have to prove some form of racial

motivation was involved as the primary motivating factor. That is a difficult standard in the sense that

there are police reports and other evidence which indicates it was an altercation and possibly self defense.

  Essentially Mr. Zimmerman is going to end up bankrupt from this, the legal fees alone will likely put

him out of his home and ruined financially. The media is already attempting to publicly convicting him

without trial, as several blog sites already have done, and by extension making him the larger issue for

gun control law expansion. Personally, I think Mr. Zimmerman should have left well enough alone by

simply calling the police, and heeding their advice to not follow Mr. Martin. Mr. Zimmerman should not

have gotten out of his car, should not have followed Mr. Martin and absolutely should not have shot him,

however, this is a matter for courts to settle, as there is conflicting evidence and reports. Obtaining a

conviction in a court is going to be difficult, however Mr. Zimmerman's life as he previously knew it is now gone,

he will face financial hardships and infamy as a result of the growing media focus on this case.

---

One can only hope he will be convicted. I heard someone say that you can hear a racial slur in one of the 911 calls, so that could possibly provide the concrete evidence needed to prove racism was a factor.

I think that "stand your ground" #### is just as fuuuuuudgeed up as when someone gets sentenced for legitimately defending themself. It seems extremely likely that Zimmerman did something to provoke, or represented a legitimate threat, to Trayvon Martin; is it Martin's fault if he "stood his ground"?

---

  If there is a tape of Mr. Zimmerman using racial slurs then that could be a factor, but it would depend a great deal

on the circumstances of the language. If he used it to start a confrontation, then obviously a case could be made that

Mr. Zimmerman intended to assault and kill Mr. Martin, and he should be thrown in prison for the remainder of his life.

  The issue with the "stand your ground" law is that it is still self defense, you cannot shove or otherwise start an altercation,

and then hide behind the statute and claim self defense. If Mr. Zimmerman started the altercation, by pushing

Mr. Martin or otherwise starting the fight, then Mr. Zimmerman cannot claim self defense, and the "stand your ground"

protections do not apply. Mr. Zimmerman would then be subject to prosecution for either manslaughter or murder

under Florida law, and civil rights violations under Federal Law.

[The_Pirate-King]

The problem I think is that nobody saw how the fight started other than Zimmerman. They just saw Zimmerman and Martin struggling. So, under "Stand Your Ground", no matter how strongly all evidence points to racial motivations and harassment, he won't be charged. Because there is no other side of the story, anymore.

[Jingai]

  If this is the case, then you are probably correct. If the witnesses and evidence clearly show an altercation

took place, then chances are Mr. Zimmerman will not be prosecuted. A civil trial however could still result

in bankruptcy, but even then the chances are the family will never see any real money from it. This is really

an instance where everyone loses, and honestly Mr. Zimmerman could have prevented all of it by not

acting like a "John Wayne" wanna be. Regardless of the legal outcomes, I think that Mr. Zimmerman is

responsible for creating the situation where this tragedy occurred, and I think that at some point he

will be held to answer for it.

[Jingai]

A civil trial would be much easier to win a judgment against Mr. Zimmerman, the burden of proof is simple majority versus unanimous verdict. The problem is that there simply might not be anything left of Mr. Zimmerman's properties or future income after the criminal trials, if any, are conducted.

[Saddy]

i'm not real familiar with this "stand your ground" business, but even if he was "defending himself", doesn't it still have to be within reason? i mean, i've been on both sides of the fence here. i've gone to court as a plaintiff when i was attacked, and i've gone to court as a defendant for defending myself during an attack. the whole reason i was a defendant was because even though i was defending myself, my actions were "excessive". couldn't that apply here? i mean, zimmerman's actions were definitely excessive here.