Black Jurist Claims On ABC That Zimmerman Got Away With Murder. Despicable.

[SuMar]

[

If you're wondering why this case became so public it's because of the details of the case. From the git-go the media lied to the public about the details. Turns out this is exactly why people should be allowed to carry a weapon. Simply to prevent getting your head bashed in.

Zimmerman showed a light on the truth but you and others like you refuse to open your eyes. All you care about is the lie that Trayvan was a baby and the lie that it is criminal even to own a gun much less carry one on your person.

Guy, I would have a lot more respect for your understanding of this case if you didn't consistantly misspell Trayvon's name.

If Zimmerman didn't have a gun, he wouldn't have gone stalking this kid. And you know this how? If he hadn't stalked this kid, this kid would not have reacted to a potential threat.

This case shows exactly why guns should be limited. Limited how? Cops and military? Folks should not be able to defend themselves? A guy like Zimmerman, who once assaulted a cop, who once broke a woman's leg at a party after manhandlinger her as a bouncer, was the last guy you ever wanted out there with a gun, because eventually, he was going to do exactly what he did. And why did he have to manhandle her? Bouncers just don't manhandle folks randomly unless they are a threat to patrons of the establishment.

 

[jon_berzerk]

"...The feds are going to indict Zimmerman. And this time, they won't **** it up. Your boy is going down. Deal with it."

What is your basis for your belief that the Federal Government is going to indict Zimmerman?

more importantly

how will they not "**** up this time"

same ol evidence gets used

and more lax rules on what the jury sees

in the victims past

--LOL

 

[JoeB131]

[

Once again, the media lied about this case. Everything they say comes under question if you're a ration person. Obviously you aren't.

Fact is you don't know what Zimmerman would have done. That's pure speculation. What is important is what actually happened and what was the result. All of these could-haves and should-haves is irrelevant.

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

 

[JoeB131]

"...The feds are going to indict Zimmerman. And this time, they won't **** it up. Your boy is going down. Deal with it."

What is your basis for your belief that the Federal Government is going to indict Zimmerman?

more importantly

how will they not "**** up this time"

same ol evidence gets used

and more lax rules on what the jury sees

in the victims past

--LOL

And in the accused. They'll get to hear about that cop he took a swing at and that lady whose leg he broke and the ex-girlfriend who got a restraining order against him because he slapped her around.

But the way they won't **** it up, they will make sure that the witnesses are prepped properly, and they will get jurors with brains, as opposed to the two who have spoken out so far.

 

[dilloduck]

[

Once again, the media lied about this case. Everything they say comes under question if you're a ration person. Obviously you aren't.

Fact is you don't know what Zimmerman would have done. That's pure speculation. What is important is what actually happened and what was the result. All of these could-haves and should-haves is irrelevant.

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

He killed a 17 year old. That's even MORE factual. Why don't you go with it instead of being misleading?

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

SHe should have stood her ground, but she didn't. What she stated was the judges instructions, the ones you whined about, didn't give them much of a choice.

Why should she have stood her ground? She was supposed to only give a verdict based on evidence. We're lucky she ended up doing the right thing.

The evidence was that Zimmerman was an armed adult and Trayvon was an unarmed child.

Trayvon was not unarmed. He had his fists.

Calling him a child over and over doesn't make it true.

He was a young man.

 

[JoeB131]

[

This case shows exactly why guns should be limited. Limited how? Cops and military? Folks should not be able to defend themselves?

Works for me. Most of you rednecks don't need guns, because you are a danger to yourselves and others.

[
A guy like Zimmerman, who once assaulted a cop, who once broke a woman's leg at a party after manhandlinger her as a bouncer, was the last guy you ever wanted out there with a gun, because eventually, he was going to do exactly what he did. And why did he have to manhandle her? Bouncers just don't manhandle folks randomly unless they are a threat to patrons of the establishment.

Most bouncers are able to do this without breaking bones or sending the patrons to the hospital or getting fired from their jobs. All of which Zimmerman did.

Well, good thing that lady couldn't fight back that well. She might have ended up getting shot in the chest.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Once again, the media lied about this case. Everything they say comes under question if you're a ration person. Obviously you aren't.

Fact is you don't know what Zimmerman would have done. That's pure speculation. What is important is what actually happened and what was the result. All of these could-haves and should-haves is irrelevant.

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

He killed a 17 year old. That's even MORE factual. Why don't you go with it instead of being misleading?

The law says a 17 year old is a child. Sorry.

 

[thereisnospoon]

[

No, sorry Joey, 'they' can't....
The discussion on gun violence and race has been open for quite some time.
The conclusion is that until those in charge of cities where fun violence is more prevalent decide to get off their collective asses and crack down on the killing, nothing will change.
Of course, that is the discussion that the liberal political establishment, especially the white liberal faction, has kept closed.
The moment Martin began slamming Zimmerman's head into the concrete, a fight became a criminal assault and battery. It was at that point Zimmerman had the right to use any means necessary to preserve his life.
You can stand down. Unless there is such a groundswell of protest that federal prosecutors will be forced to get very creative in conjuring up some kind of criminal Civil Rights indictment, there will be no federal charges.
Had there been sufficient evidence that a federal indictment been warranted, there would have been one already.
Remember, a prosecutor/DA/solicitor can indict a ham sandwich if he or she can find enough evidence to get the case to a grand jury.
You can thank me for making so much sense.

The only thing you are making is a doo-doo in your pants showing your fear.

The feds are going to indict Zimmerman. And this time, they won't **** it up. Your boy is going down. Deal with it.

Fear?..What the **** are you talking about.
I stated the facts. If anyone is fearful, it is you.
You are afraid you will not get your way, so you lash out at the one telling you how it is.
Facts are facts. You'll just have to live with it.
Hey genius..Zimmerman is not 'my boy' I have no dog in this fight other than I want the right to protect myself and my family against a predator by any reasonable means necessary.
Above you stated "we don't need guns"...First, speak only for yourself.
Second, guns are the great equalizer. Figure it out.
Third, if a person for example broke into my house I would bury a nine iron in their skull.
So a gun would not even enter the equation. Shall we ban golf clubs?
If the feds had a case, they would have moved forward already.

 

[dilloduck]

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

He killed a 17 year old. That's even MORE factual. Why don't you go with it instead of being misleading?

The law says a 17 year old is a child. Sorry.

a 15 year old is too. Got a problem with details?

 

[SuMar]

[

Once again, the media lied about this case. Everything they say comes under question if you're a ration person. Obviously you aren't.

Fact is you don't know what Zimmerman would have done. That's pure speculation. What is important is what actually happened and what was the result. All of these could-haves and should-haves is irrelevant.

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

What business did Trayvon Martin have wondering around in a gated community? Especially since his family didn't live there? Anyone with the social status to live in a gated community has a right to have privacy and be safe. So what if it's racial profiling, I'm sure that there is no black folks that live in that community.

 

[thereisnospoon]

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

He killed a 17 year old. That's even MORE factual. Why don't you go with it instead of being misleading?

The law says a 17 year old is a child. Sorry.

That's true but no accurate.
Many states have passed laws which all persons under the age of 18 to be tried as adults where certain criteria have been met.
18 is merely the 'age of majority'. Or where one legally assumes all the rights and responsibilities of an adult.
Once again, you never tire of being wrong.

 

[mudwhistle]

[

Once again, the media lied about this case. Everything they say comes under question if you're a ration person. Obviously you aren't.

Fact is you don't know what Zimmerman would have done. That's pure speculation. What is important is what actually happened and what was the result. All of these could-haves and should-haves is irrelevant.

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

Again, you keep repeating your narrow view of the case, and it reveals your opinion as totally biased and renders it totally irrelevant. I doubt that anyone here buys your phony bull shit. You should be an Obama spokesperson, if you aren't already.

I see you're from Chicago. It's clear that you're privy to news about kids killing each other or killing adults more-so than most. One would think you'd be more understanding of the reality of the situation, but instead you come off as some sort of government asshole pushing an agenda.

 

[dilloduck]

What is your basis for your belief that the Federal Government is going to indict Zimmerman?

more importantly

how will they not "**** up this time"

same ol evidence gets used

and more lax rules on what the jury sees

in the victims past

--LOL

And in the accused. They'll get to hear about that cop he took a swing at and that lady whose leg he broke and the ex-girlfriend who got a restraining order against him because he slapped her around.

But the way they won't **** it up, they will make sure that the witnesses are prepped properly, and they will get jurors with brains, as opposed to the two who have spoken out so far.

 

[mudwhistle]

They pretty much called the cops every time he saw a black kid. Only a matter of time before he shot one, which is what he did.

Zimmerman killed a child. This is pretty much the only salient fact in this case. Everything else is white folks and gun nuts trying to protect their little dung hills of fear.

He killed a 17 year old. That's even MORE factual. Why don't you go with it instead of being misleading?

The law says a 17 year old is a child. Sorry.

Not in every case.

The law says he's a minor. Look up the difference.

 

[Kondor3]

This is not the fault of the firearms industry.

This is the fault of inadequate and inconsistent licensing and enforcement, from one jurisdiction to another.

Which again, is the fault of the firearms industry, that fights licensing and enforcement at every turn.

No. They merely throw money at the situation in order to maintain the status quo.

It is important to remember that they did not invent the status quo.

They merely seek to preserve it in pursuit of profits.

But they do no more than ride piggyback upon Public Opinion which, in the main, favors better licensing and enforcement, but which does not favor seizure or reduction of rights and entitlements in the process.

The responsibility for the Status Quo falls directly upon We-the-People rather than Gun-Makers.

"...How's this. If you get killed with a gun, the gun maker and gun seller are civilally liable if they didn't take measures to keep that gun out of the wrong hands..."

The trouble with that is that "Today's Sane Rational Gun-Buyer" can become "Tomorrow's Mad-Dog Killer", with zero indication at the time of the Sale that any such thing might unfold in future.

How do you hold either a Gun-Maker or a Gun-Seller accountable for human behavior, post-sale?

How do you go about proving that a Gun-Buyer was unfit to own a gun, if you, as the Gun-Maker or Gun-Seller, have abided by existing law related to such sales, and the Buyer passes muster or inspection at-law?

Also, how does a Gun-Maker interject itself into the Sale Process?

Virtually all guns are sold through Distributorships, just like any other product under the sun, and it is impossible for a Gun-Maker to know who it is being sold to in advance.

It is practical to hold Gun-Sellers to a modicum of Due-Process or Procedure and Standards when conducting any such sale.

But it is entirely impractical in the Real World to hold a Gun-Maker to that same standard.

"...Works for me."

Understood; however, in the Real World, it won't work for others, in large part, and certainly with respect to Gun-Makers, for reasons already outlined.

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

What is your basis for your belief that the Federal Government is going to indict Zimmerman?

more importantly

how will they not "**** up this time"

same ol evidence gets used

and more lax rules on what the jury sees

in the victims past

--LOL

And in the accused. They'll get to hear about that cop he took a swing at and that lady whose leg he broke and the ex-girlfriend who got a restraining order against him because he slapped her around.

But the way they won't **** it up, they will make sure that the witnesses are prepped properly, and they will get jurors with brains, as opposed to the two who have spoken out so far.

You live in a dream world.

There will be no Civil Rights case brought.

There is absolutely no evidence Martin's Civil Rights were violated.

 

[jon_berzerk]

What is your basis for your belief that the Federal Government is going to indict Zimmerman?

more importantly

how will they not "**** up this time"

same ol evidence gets used

and more lax rules on what the jury sees

in the victims past

--LOL

And in the accused. They'll get to hear about that cop he took a swing at and that lady whose leg he broke and the ex-girlfriend who got a restraining order against him because he slapped her around.

But the way they won't **** it up, they will make sure that the witnesses are prepped properly, and they will get jurors with brains, as opposed to the two who have spoken out so far.

the cop he took a swing at -haha

a college kid appointed for a sting operation

--LOL

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

they will make sure that the witnesses are prepped properly

So, it is your belief that witnesses should be properly prepped? In what way? According to your world view?

 

[SuMar]

[

This case shows exactly why guns should be limited. Limited how? Cops and military? Folks should not be able to defend themselves?

Works for me. Most of you rednecks don't need guns, because you are a danger to yourselves and others.

So, by your messed up logic, if folks were not allowed to own guns to defend themselves, crime would go up. It would be open season for break-ins.