And so it begins. 2 black teens in Sanford FL attacks and almost kills a 50 year old

[NYcarbineer]

White man.. This is just the beginning if the media keeps up Race rhetoric on the news

Two teens arrested for gruesome hammer attack near Sanford, FL - Charleston Charleston Conservative | Examiner.com

You are an ass.

I am an ass for pointing out that the MEDIA is fueling this fire. If you say they are not you would be a moron!

All of the media?

 

[Seawytch]

The law is clear...stand your ground doesn't apply to Zimmerman. He should be charged...just like the lead police officer recommended on the night he gunned down an innocent kid.

Quote the LAW that shows it does not apply to Zimmerman.

Your "article" doesn't explain it at all. Sure it quotes the law, but then the writer goes on to argue something that isn't even IN the law.

The writer does not address the actual LAW, rather he addresses something else not IN THE LAW.

Show us the LAW that exempts Zimmerman. THAT is what matters in the PROCESS.

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

 

[WillowTree]

They were arrested and will be tried for their crimes, as is proper. Zimmerman has not been, and may well not be. And you wingnuts are cheering for that injustice.

missing the point aren't you asswipe?

 

[WillowTree]

Without the media, Zimmerman would have gotten away with murder. He may well do that yet. But the whole nation will know about it and understand the reason.

BECAUSE of the retarded media Zimmerman has no chance at a fair trial.. and you are too damn stupid to see that.

 

[WillowTree]

an old man beaten almost to death with a hammer by two black thugs and not one post of outrage by the libtards in this thread. not one.

 

[Si modo]

The law is clear...stand your ground doesn't apply to Zimmerman. He should be charged...just like the lead police officer recommended on the night he gunned down an innocent kid.

Quote the LAW that shows it does not apply to Zimmerman.

Your "article" doesn't explain it at all. Sure it quotes the law, but then the writer goes on to argue something that isn't even IN the law.

The writer does not address the actual LAW, rather he addresses something else not IN THE LAW.

Show us the LAW that exempts Zimmerman. THAT is what matters in the PROCESS.

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Except the LAW does not exempt folks who follow someone. And, as it DOES list exemptions, an exemption not stated (following) is NOT an exemption.

When a LAW goes to the trouble to list exemptions, it is assumed that those are the only exemptions. It is a basic legal principle - Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. The expression of one thing [exemptions] is the exclusion of another [exemption].

The law does not mention imminent threat.

When rape is a lawful activity, then you are right - a rapist would be excluded.

 

[Nate]

What I don't understand is how some people can defend a vigilante killer. If Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle and not pursued Martin like the dispatcher told him to, Martin wouldn't be dead. If Zimmerman had simply been charged with the crime, there would be no national news. It really is THAT simple.

What I don't understand is how people are even trying to decipher this case! I mean all we have is what the media is telling us and the media has proven not to be a credible source! Simply amazing... Some of you must really have nothing better to do, none of you were there and not one of you personally know Zimmerman or Martin. Was Zimmerman a racist, who the fuck knows? Was Martin up to no good, who the fuck knows? All you all are doing is buying into this media frenzy!!! The only thing I really ponder on with this case is what the hell is a white hispanic!?!?

 

[Jarhead]

The law is clear...stand your ground doesn't apply to Zimmerman. He should be charged...just like the lead police officer recommended on the night he gunned down an innocent kid.

Quote the LAW that shows it does not apply to Zimmerman.

Your "article" doesn't explain it at all. Sure it quotes the law, but then the writer goes on to argue something that isn't even IN the law.

The writer does not address the actual LAW, rather he addresses something else not IN THE LAW.

Show us the LAW that exempts Zimmerman. THAT is what matters in the PROCESS.

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Without the media, Zimmerman would have gotten away with murder. He may well do that yet. But the whole nation will know about it and understand the reason.

What evidence is there to charge Zimmerman with murder???

There is no possible way an unbiased jury would find him guilty of anything.

As a matter of fact the new still images of the video show that Zimmerman had a huge gash on the back of his head supporting his story....

Go learn something about law dummy...

You just cant charge someone with a crime with no evidence....

 

[Jarhead]

How is it that ya'll don't get that no one would know who Zimmerman or Martin were if Zimmerman had simply been arrested...

and this wouldnt be a racial issue if NBC news did not edit out parts of the 911 call.

If anything, it would be a discussion of vigilanteism.

But who cares about that.

 

[Seawytch]

Quote the LAW that shows it does not apply to Zimmerman.

Your "article" doesn't explain it at all. Sure it quotes the law, but then the writer goes on to argue something that isn't even IN the law.

The writer does not address the actual LAW, rather he addresses something else not IN THE LAW.

Show us the LAW that exempts Zimmerman. THAT is what matters in the PROCESS.

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

Zimmerman's pursuit of an innocent kid wasn't lawful either. The kid wasn't doing anything wrong. Martin had no way of knowing whether or not Zimmerman was there to rape him so he had every right to fight back.

Stand your ground was not meant for people to chase down someone simply for walking while black in your neighborhood. Stand your ground doesn't apply.

 

[saveliberty]

We using the actions of one set of individuals to determine what another set did or was justified? Really?

 

[Nate]

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

Zimmerman's pursuit of an innocent kid wasn't lawful either. The kid wasn't doing anything wrong. Martin had no way of knowing whether or not Zimmerman was there to rape him so he had every right to fight back.

Stand your ground was not meant for people to chase down someone simply for walking while black in your neighborhood. Stand your ground doesn't apply.

And you know this how? From the tapes the media has released(and edited)?

 

[Mr.Nick]

I would love to know what Martin was doing in a gated community anyways....

If he knew someone who lived in that gated community that would be one thing but he obviously didn't.

Those communities have one exit and entrance and are "gated" - hence gated community...

 

[Seawytch]

How is it that ya'll don't get that no one would know who Zimmerman or Martin were if Zimmerman had simply been arrested...

and this wouldnt be a racial issue if NBC news did not edit out parts of the 911 call.

If anything, it would be a discussion of vigilanteism.

But who cares about that.

Nope, sorry, but it would still be a racial issue. Zimmerman's habit of calling 9/11 for people who were "walking while black" made it racial...that and his calling Martin a "fucking coon" pushed it over into the racial as well.

 

[Jarhead]

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

Zimmerman's pursuit of an innocent kid wasn't lawful either. The kid wasn't doing anything wrong. Martin had no way of knowing whether or not Zimmerman was there to rape him so he had every right to fight back.

Stand your ground was not meant for people to chase down someone simply for walking while black in your neighborhood. Stand your ground doesn't apply.

wow.....you seem to know so much about this incident. I mean...they say there were a few eye witnesses.....but none that know nearly as much as you do.

I am impressed.

Are you one of those mind readers that government agency hired for that conference?


How pathetic and bisaed are you? I mean....wow....you have no first hand information...very little second hand information....yet you have all of the details.

Quite impresive;. You should start a TV reality series.

 

[Si modo]

Zimmerman was exempted the second he pursued Martin. There was no imminent threat.

Using your logic, a rapist who pursues a woman and then shoots her when she fights back, shouldn't be arrested.

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

Zimmerman's pursuit of an innocent kid wasn't lawful either. ....

What law makes it illegal to follow someone?

 

[Jarhead]

How is it that ya'll don't get that no one would know who Zimmerman or Martin were if Zimmerman had simply been arrested...

and this wouldnt be a racial issue if NBC news did not edit out parts of the 911 call.

If anything, it would be a discussion of vigilanteism.

But who cares about that.

Nope, sorry, but it would still be a racial issue. Zimmerman's habit of calling 9/11 for people who were "walking while black" made it racial...that and his calling Martin a "fucking coon" pushed it over into the racial as well.

LMFAO....

you fall for it...
It was analyzed over and over and they do njot hear him saying "fucking coon"....they think it may be him saying "what the fuck ius he doing"....but they cant be sure....bvut they have pretty much eliminated "fucking coon"...but I guess you got the tape of the call and figured out what he said.

Secondly...he NEVER said he was black unprompted...the 911 operator asked:

Is he white, hispanic or black and he said he thinks he is black.

But that means he is a racist.

You truly are warped and EXACTLY what the media hopes for.

 

[Seawytch]

Compare apples to apples or dont compare at all.

Now...before I go on....I dont have nearly enough information to determine if the shooting was justified or not....I am not on either side of the fence ion this...and no one should be.

That being said...back to apples to apples...

What WOULD have been a proper analogy....and using YOUR quote....

"Using your logic, a person who pursues someone they beleive raped someone then shoots that person when that person fights back, shouldn't be arrested"

But for some reason you have opted to cvompare Zimmerman to a rapist.

That is immature and not the American way.

Zimmerman's pursuit of an innocent kid wasn't lawful either. The kid wasn't doing anything wrong. Martin had no way of knowing whether or not Zimmerman was there to rape him so he had every right to fight back.

Stand your ground was not meant for people to chase down someone simply for walking while black in your neighborhood. Stand your ground doesn't apply.

And you know this how? From the tapes the media has released(and edited)?

Oh please. The kid was walking home from buying skittles and tea. There is no evidence that he was doing anything that warranted being pursued by glorified mall cop that should never have had a gun in the first place. (because of his previous assault of a police officer)

 

[Si modo]

How is it that ya'll don't get that no one would know who Zimmerman or Martin were if Zimmerman had simply been arrested...

and this wouldnt be a racial issue if NBC news did not edit out parts of the 911 call.

If anything, it would be a discussion of vigilanteism.

But who cares about that.

Nope, sorry, but it would still be a racial issue. Zimmerman's habit of calling 9/11 for people who were "walking while black" made it racial...that and his calling Martin a "fucking coon" pushed it over into the racial as well.

Then it's the 911 operators who are the racists.

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

911: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.​

Fucking racist 911 operator.