George Zimmerman: Standing his ground again... this time with his new girlfriend

[HappyHapyJoyJoy]

The militia is the people. Not the state, national guard, or the federal government.

Actually a "militia" is an organized fighting ***** composed of citizens that can be called upon to defend the nation. So unless you're in an organized unit, and have a method to be called upon (some type of pipeline to the proper authorities allowing you to heed a call to arms) than you're not a militia. One man buying guns does not a militia make.

You're suggesting that there shouldn't be regulation when the amendment clearly states "A well REGULATED militia..." or did you miss that part? Probably why you omitted it, huh? Because it's inconvenient and you don't give a **** about the Constitution when it's not exactly working in your favor. Seems like the 2nd Amendment is perfectly fine with regulation... it even says that regulation is required for the "security of a free state".

 

[Johan]

The militia is the people. Not the state, national guard, or the federal government.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

[sean miguel]

I remember one of the major arguments during his trial was whether he had gone out "looking for trouble." He claimed he hadn't. And yet since his acquittal, his actions have definitely brought into question his credibility. Unfortunately, we'll never know Martin's real reason for being out there at that time of night...if it even ever really mattered.

If you were a neighborhood watch wouldn't "looking for trouble" be part of your job description?

And you can be a douche and be not guilty of ****** at the same time.

 

[Lacey Black]

Johan and Happy.. You both are good posters, why are you taking his bait and debating the second amendment? The topic is about how a crazy person does not have the right to point a deadly weapon at a person and threaten them. You both are arguing with someone that literally has some sort of mental imbalance, stop wasting your time.

 

[maildude]

If you were a neighborhood watch wouldn't "looking for trouble" be part of your job description?

I think the point they were making, was that he had gone out with an agenda...to use his ***. Period. Whether he went out specifically looking for a black teen is another argument.

 

[Jagger69]

i'm pretty sure he's enjoy hell :thumbsup:

I'm pretty sure he's running the place!

If you were a neighborhood watch wouldn't "looking for trouble" be part of your job description?

Not likely, no. It's a English figure of speech commonly used both verbally and in written form that ordinarily connotes the seeking of a confrontation. See this description from Cambridge's dictionary.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/british/be-looking-for-trouble

Not to pretend to speak for Maildude but, from the context of his post, I'm pretty sure that's what he meant.

And you can be a douche and be not guilty of ****** at the same time.

You can also be a douche and be guilty of ****** at the same time so I'm not really seeing the correlation. I get your point however.

 

[sean miguel]

Regardless of what you think Zimmerman's agenda was, that still doesn't give a person the right to beat the **** out of someone including smashing their head repeatedly into the pavement because they think that someone is following them and is a creepy ass cracker. And in that instance that someone has a right to defend themselves, with deadly ***** if necessary. The district attorney saw it that way until public pressure mounted but more importantly a jury saw it that way.

 

[xfire]

Regardless of what you think Zimmerman's agenda was, that still doesn't give a person the right to beat the **** out of someone including smashing their head repeatedly into the pavement because they think that someone is following them and is a creepy ass cracker. And in that instance that someone has a right to defend themselves, with deadly ***** if necessary. The district attorney saw it that way until public pressure mounted but more importantly a jury saw it that way.

It's not surprising that the jury saw it the way they did considering the only other eye witness was dead.

 

[Jagger69]

It's not surprising that the jury saw it the way they did considering the only other eye witness was dead.

That expresses my sentiments exactly. OJ was acquitted too so just because someone was found "not guilty" doesn't mean that they actually are innocent. It only means that the prosecution was unable to prove its case beyond the preponderance of any reasonable doubt. Wouldn't it have been interesting to hear Nicole or Ron Goldman's version of what took place the night they were ********? Same thing with Trayvon Martin. The fact that Zimmerman was acquitted cannot be changed regardless of what may or may not have transpired so he remains not guilty no matter what. We'll never know Trayvon's side of the story.

Anyway, Zimmerman certainly has done nothing to polish his image in the aftermath of the incident. A *** in his hands consistently ends up presenting a scary proposition for whomever happens to be unfortunate enough to be in his immediate vicinity for some reason.

 

[sean miguel]

It's not surprising that the jury saw it the way they did considering the only other eye witness was dead.

A prosecution witness testified he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and that he was throwing downward strikes in what looked like an MMA "ground and pound" move and that the person on the bottom was yelling for help. When examined, Zimmerman was found to have a broken nose and lacerations on the back of his head consistent with his claim and the eyewitness' testimony.

I said this in the other thread - lets say Zimmerman did racially profile Martin or even provoked him. At what point are you justified in using deadly ***** if you're on the bottom of a pile getting pummeled in the face with your nose broken and having your head slammed into the pavement repeatedly? Was he suppose to take it until he lost consciousness or have Martin grab his ***?

 

[darkwarrior3007]

A prosecution witness testified he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and that he was throwing downward strikes in what looked like an MMA "ground and pound" move and that the person on the bottom was yelling for help. When examined, Zimmerman was found to have a broken nose and lacerations on the back of his head consistent with his claim and the eyewitness' testimony.

I said this in the other thread - lets say Zimmerman did racially profile Martin or even provoked him. At what point are you justified in using deadly ***** if you're on the bottom of a pile getting pummeled in the face with your nose broken and having your head slammed into the pavement repeatedly? Was he suppose to take it until he lost consciousness or have Martin grab his ***?

That's one way of looking at it but I can also reverse it and put myself in Trayvon's shoes. You have somebody that you don't know following you. You might have seen the *** and are now in defense mode. It's either him or you. What do you do? Back off and give him the opportunity to get his *** back? Fuck no! You try and take him out, your life is on the line. Didn't Trayvon have the right to defend himself?

 

[xfire]

A prosecution witness testified he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and that he was throwing downward strikes in what looked like an MMA "ground and pound" move and that the person on the bottom was yelling for help. When examined, Zimmerman was found to have a broken nose and lacerations on the back of his head consistent with his claim and the eyewitness' testimony.

I said this in the other thread - lets say Zimmerman did racially profile Martin or even provoked him. At what point are you justified in using deadly ***** if you're on the bottom of a pile getting pummeled in the face with your nose broken and having your head slammed into the pavement repeatedly? Was he suppose to take it until he lost consciousness or have Martin grab his ***?

Zimmerman has proven what a truly aggressive douchebag he is since his acquittal. You can continue to see him as a poor victim if you like, but he's making his aggressive personality crystal clear. To quote HappyHapyJoyJoy's post from earlier in this thread- "He's a violent dickbag with a *** fetish. He's the exact guy you should be AGAINST because he's the exact REASON people get antsy about guns."

 

[sean miguel]

That's one way of looking at it but I can also reverse it and put myself in Trayvon's shoes. You have somebody that you don't know following you. You Might have seen the *** and are now in defense mode. It's either him or you. What do you do? Back off and give him the opportunity to get his *** back? Fuck no! You try and take him out, your life is on the line. Didn't Trayvon have the right to defend himself?

But again, in the moments right before the shooting when Zimmerman is being bludgeoned as he's screaming for help and no one is coming to his aid and he has every reason to fear for his life was he justified to use deadly *****? The law says he was. if he or she reasonably believes that such ***** is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a ******** felony or to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another. Even if the worst motives are assigned to Zimmerman and Trayvon himself feared for his own life it doesn't change that fact. As you said, it's either him or you.

 

[sean miguel]

Zimmerman has proven what a truly aggressive douchebag he is since his acquittal. You can continue to see him as a poor victim if you like, but he's making his aggressive personality crystal clear. To quote HappyHapyJoyJoy's post from earlier in this thread- "He's a violent dickbag with a *** fetish. He's the exact guy you should be AGAINST because he's the exact REASON people get antsy about guns."

I don't see him as a poor victim, just not guilty of ******. And whether I think he's a douchebag (he certainly appears that way) or not is irrelevant.

 

[xfire]

I don't see him as a poor victim, just not guilty of ******. And whether I think he's a douchebag (he certainly appears that way) or not is irrelevant.

A jury found him not guilty of ******, but that's not the same as innocent. Pulling the trigger made sure his side of the story would be the only one heard.

 

[sean miguel]

A jury found him not guilty of ******, but that's not the same as innocent. Pulling the trigger made sure his side of the story would be the only one heard.

If it had to be one or the other, I'd rather tell my side of the story than the other guy tell his.

 

[xfire]

If it had to be one or the other, I'd rather tell my side of the story than the other guy tell his.

That's a false dichotomy, ever hear of a warning shot? How about shooting to wound instead of ****? Nah, fuck that, shoot the *** pointblank center mass, the dead tell no tales.

 

[sean miguel]

That's a false dichotomy, ever hear of a warning shot? How about shooting to wound instead of ****? Nah, fuck that, shoot the *** pointblank center mass, the dead tell no tales.

I'll just let that sit there.

 

[xfire]

I'll just let that sit there.

Sure, you want me to repeat it? Nothing there to contest, but perhaps you think it's foolish. What's really foolish is to put yourself in an avoidable position. I hope Zimmerman gets jammed up on this newest charge and loses his 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[sean miguel]

I hope Zimmerman gets jammed up on this newest charge and loses his 2nd Amendment rights.

That we agree on. If he's pointing his *** at his girlfriend's face he shouldn't have one.