The George Zimmerman the Press Doesnt Want You to Know

[Dr Grump]

don't do wikipedia.

Particularly when it conflicts with the CDC.

"Results of studies of firearms and ammunition bans were inconsistent: certain studies indicated decreases in violence associated with bans, and [d]others indicated increases[/COLOR]."

"
In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence[/CE] References and key findings are listed ([C])."

First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws

The stats from Wiki are from the FBI...

From your own link:
"Bans on specified firearms or ammunition. Results of studies of firearms and ammunition bans were inconsistent: certain studies indicated decreases in violence associated with bans, and others indicated increases."

Maybe you should read your link before posting it...

Thanks, I'll take the CDC reports over the FBI.

Not that I trust that they really are from the FBI, but I don't do wiki. It's not a reliable source, and people who use it, particularly when they never use anything else, are pathetic. You are now officially on the level of Dragon.

Though admittedly, you are doing better than rightwinger at this point in time, who claims any supporting evidence is to be dismissed as verification that the person who provides it doesn't know what they're talking about. That's right! Verify your statements with supporting evidence, use citations and references, and it's proof you don't know what you're talking about!

Sorry, that floors me. Anyway, the cdc stats are better. If you want to post the fbi stats I bet they don't even come close to proving what you said. Because I do believe they get their numbers from the CDC. Almost everybody does.

What is wrong with Wiki as a source? They cite sources. For example, the Washington DC crimes stats that show from 1995 until 2010 that violence was trending down (except for the year after the ban was lifted when it went up), the reference is given as this: FBI — Uniform Crime Reports

What is truly pathetic is how you arbitrarily dismiss a source because you don't like it.

Thank you for your opinion of CDC stats - but note they are just your opinion, nothing else..

 

[Peach]

Police liaison?
Seriously?


Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. By all accounts, he was walking away. ALL ACCOUNTS.

911 operators aren't cops. They aren't cop liaisons. They're 911 operators. There's a difference. Perhaps you should refrain from commenting until you know what the FUCK you're talking about? hmmmmmmm?

Walking away as he shot the victim in the chest? he was FOUND standing over the victim, no CPR, just straddling him.

Yeah, poor widdle Zimmerman. He was so scared, he stalked the guy, got out of his vehicle and confronted the guy. He musta been really scared...

The police found him standing over the victim; the killer darn sure didn't drive away when he feared the kid walking to his father's home.

 

[koshergrl]

The stats aren't my opinion. CDC says the stats don't support your statement that strict gun laws decrease gun death. And they don't.

Wiki is okay for anything that's not in dispute...biographical information, information about a particular geographic locale, that sort of thing.

History, nope.
Any sort of issue, nope.

Because it is just mob information. The information is controlled by whomever wants to take the time to type it in. College professors will not accept wiki as a source for scholarly endeavors, and I don't accept it as support for any controversial opinion.

 

[koshergrl]

The problem with wiki, PER WIKI:

"

• Anyone can change an article in Wikipedia. Because of this, some articles in Wikipedia may not be entirely true and accurate, instead displaying a hoax or a false information.
• There is the problem of vandalism. Some vandalism is obvious, other vandalism may be difficult to see.
• Sometimes, people have a strong opinion about a subject, so they will try to control the articles about that subject.
• Things stated in articles need to have reliable sources, especially if there is controversy about them. Often there are controversial claims in articles, without a proper source.
• Some editors do not like each other; they will do things that do not make the Wikipedia better (like edit wars)

Only a certain group of people edit Wikipedia. For this reason, the opinions of that group, and their interests may be covered more in Wikipedia. This is usually called a system bias, and can be very misleading, since it only shows one side of a dispute. There are also certain forms of group dynamics that are present. This means that the group of editors as a whole is more occupied to please itself than to edit articles)."

Problems of Wikipedia - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dr Grump]

The stats aren't my opinion. CDC says the stats don't support your statement that strict gun laws decrease gun death. And they don't.

Wiki is okay for anything that's not in dispute...biographical information, information about a particular geographic locale, that sort of thing.

History, nope.
Any sort of issue, nope.

Because it is just mob information. The information is controlled by whomever wants to take the time to type it in. College professors will not accept wiki as a source for scholarly endeavors, and I don't accept it as support for any controversial opinion.

So now FBI stats are not to be believed.

That aside, CDC stats don't back up your assertion either...

 

[Amelia]

Actually I do not think he was self appointed I think he was part of a group supported by the Sanford PD.

City of Sanford Florida Police Department

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

Police liaison?
Seriously?

Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. By all accounts, he was walking away. ALL ACCOUNTS.

911 operators aren't cops. They aren't cop liaisons. They're 911 operators. There's a difference. Perhaps you should refrain from commenting until you know what the FUCK you're talking about? hmmmmmmm?

It was not a 911 operator who helped them set up their neighborhood watch.

Perhaps you could take your own advice and refrain from commenting until you understand what was said.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh well, I thought you were still carping that he didn't do what the 911 operator told him to do.

The bottom line is, you don't know what he did. You don't know if he did what he was supposed to or not. You just want to pile on the white guy cuz he killed a druggie black guy, who was CASING RESIDENCES in a neighborhood that has had a recent run of BURGLARIES.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Zimmerman is probably a nice guy.

But he looked at himself as a self appointed protector of the neighborhood. You stepped on his turf and you were a suspect....especially if you were a black teen

Nothing wrong with that either, as long as he called the police and reported it. Where he crossed the line is when he left his truck with a pistol. At that point, he became a vigilante. He never should have gotten within a hundred feet of the kid.

At that point, it is Martin who has the right to stand his ground, it is Martin who has the right to be left alone and it is Martin who has the right to defend himself

Actually I do not think he was self appointed I think he was part of a group supported by the Sanford PD.

City of Sanford Florida Police Department

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

You seem like you're desperate to convict Zimmerman. Why is that? He was within his Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Hell if you want to say he wasn't supposed to carry a firearm doing a community watch it could be argued that he could never leave his home with his firearm. You are arguing to infringe upon his right to keep and bare arms.

 

[Peach]

Actually I do not think he was self appointed I think he was part of a group supported by the Sanford PD.

City of Sanford Florida Police Department

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

You seem like you're desperate to convict Zimmerman. Why is that? He was within his Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Hell if you want to say he wasn't supposed to carry a firearm doing a community watch it could be argued that he could never leave his home with his firearm. You are arguing to infringe upon his right to keep and bare arms.

Rights carry responsibilities.

 

[koshergrl]

And one of the rights we as Americans are supposed to uphold responsibly is the right to a fair trial, and to presume a person innocent until they are proven guilty in a court of law.

So kindly don't you pipe about the *responsibilities* that go along with our *rights* when you are perfectly willing to trample all over the rights of a man who has been ACCUSED of a crime by people who weren't there.

 

[Dr Grump]

He is allowed to be accused...being found guilty is another matter altogether..

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

You seem like you're desperate to convict Zimmerman. Why is that? He was within his Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Hell if you want to say he wasn't supposed to carry a firearm doing a community watch it could be argued that he could never leave his home with his firearm. You are arguing to infringe upon his right to keep and bare arms.

Rights carry responsibilities.

Yes it does and he was acting responsibly. Zimmerman notice someone he did not know in walking in the community he lived in. He reported it and followed the person got out and asked him who he was. Let's not mention that the area crime rate was pretty high. I posted earlier the information in one of these threads.

 

[koshergrl]

They're demanding he be thrown in jail. Jail in most cases takes place after conviction. Not before. Unless there's a reason to think you might be particularly dangerous, or a flight risk.

He's neither. They are calling for him to be incarcerated without due process.

 

[OODA_Loop]

He reported it and followed the person got out and asked him who he was. Let's not mention that the area crime rate was pretty high.

Tactically he stepped on his dick here.

Unassing the vehicle solo had no upside.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They're demanding he be thrown in jail. Jail in most cases takes place after conviction. Not before. Unless there's a reason to think you might be particularly dangerous, or a flight risk.

He's neither. They are calling for him to be incarcerated without due process.

All obama has to do is give the word.

 

[koshergrl]

Unassing the vehicle solo???

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He reported it and followed the person got out and asked him who he was. Let's not mention that the area crime rate was pretty high.

Tactically he stepped on his dick here.

Unassing the vehicle solo had no upside.

Why not I would have done the same thing I have seen people walking in my neighbor hood and asked them if they needed help just to find out who they were.

 

[Amelia]

Actually I do not think he was self appointed I think he was part of a group supported by the Sanford PD.

City of Sanford Florida Police Department

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

You seem like you're desperate to convict Zimmerman. Why is that? He was within his Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Hell if you want to say he wasn't supposed to carry a firearm doing a community watch it could be argued that he could never leave his home with his firearm. You are arguing to infringe upon his right to keep and bare arms.

Where have I suggested that I want to infringe on his right to wear short sleeve shirts?




If Zimmerman had followed common sense and approved practices, Trayvon would still be alive. Zimmerman made the choice to walk around with his gun and now he has to live with the consequences, which range from people passing judgment on him for not following good practices to people threatening to do to him what he did to Trayvon.

I hope that no one harms Zimmerman in any way which would be a violation of law, but if Zimmerman stays in Florida and someone feels threatened by him, what is he going to do?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Unassing the vehicle solo???

He sounds bitter to me? Would you agree?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Zimmerman went against the advice of the police liaison who helped his neighborhood set up their watch.

You seem like you're desperate to convict Zimmerman. Why is that? He was within his Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Hell if you want to say he wasn't supposed to carry a firearm doing a community watch it could be argued that he could never leave his home with his firearm. You are arguing to infringe upon his right to keep and bare arms.

Where have I suggested that I want to infringe on his right to wear short sleeve shirts?




If Zimmerman had followed common sense and approved practices, Trayvon would still be alive. Zimmerman made the choice to walk around with his gun and now he has to live with the consequences, which range from people passing judgment on him for not following good practices to people threatening to do to him what he did to Trayvon.

I hope that no one harms Zimmerman in any way which would be a violation of law, but if Zimmerman stays in Florida and someone feels threatened by him, what is he going to do?

Isn't your argument that he went against the community watch rules being armed?