It was the state attorney's office, not local authorities

Rune said:
Did it occur to you that the Martin child should have the freedom to walk to a store and back without being murdered? WTF, I am pretty sure this right alone fas supercedes any of Zim's rights, so how about you go fuck yourself?
Click to expand...

touchy touchy. lots of people should have the freedom to walk around without being murdered, but we don't always get what we want, do we? now why don't you explain to us why one persons rights should exceed anyone elses?
 
Rune said:
For someone so attuned to injustice I am very surprised to see you you assume that we are still presumen innocent until proven guilty. While this may be written somewhere, sadly that is far from the present case.

The murder of Al Alaki (spl?) proves this is no longer so.
Click to expand...

and if your alcohol soaked brain would remember, I condemned that as well, still condemn it, and am still fighting against that bullshit executive order.
 
Rune said:
Um, no, I actualy stated a fact, it is you that is speculating as to why the fact occured. Furthermore, how often is a police chief suspened without cause?
Click to expand...

I am saying you do not know why they did it... neither do I... that is the only FACT. Did they do it because of how he handled the case or because they were under a great deal of public pressure to do something?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
touchy touchy. lots of people should have the freedom to walk around without being murdered, but we don't always get what we want, do we? now why don't you explain to us why one persons rights should exceed anyone elses?
Click to expand...

One person's right to life suppercede's any other person's right which would end that life. That I need to explain this to you refutes the statement by you of whom you stand with.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
and if your alcohol soaked brain would remember, I condemned that as well, still condemn it, and am still fighting against that bullshit executive order.
Click to expand...

Since you mentioned it, I have not drunk alcohol for nearly 30 years. I am glad you condemn it, yet you still seem to think the presumption of innocense is valid.
 
Rune said:
One person's right to life suppercede's any other person's right which would end that life. That I need to explain this to you refutes the statement by you of whom you stand with.
Click to expand...
that you can't seem to grasp the concept that nobody has a right to end another persons life unless they are defending their own life shows your complete ignorance in what rights are, what rights you have, and pretty much anything else associated with that company I stand with, so how about you go fuck YOUR self.
 
Superfreak said:
I am saying you do not know why they did it... neither do I... that is the only FACT. Did they do it because of how he handled the case or because they were under a great deal of public pressure to do something?
Click to expand...

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Rune Furthermore, how often is a police chief suspened without cause?.
 
Rune said:
Since you mentioned it, I have not drunk alcohol for nearly 30 years. I am glad you condemn it, yet you still seem to think the presumption of innocense is valid.
Click to expand...
it's how our justice system operates, has operated, and began with the framers and founders of this country who thought it was better to let 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent man imprisoned. have you ever studied american history? because i'm thinking you didn't.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
that you can't seem to grasp the concept that nobody has a right to end another persons life unless they are defending their own life shows your complete ignorance in what rights are, what rights you have, and pretty much anything else associated with that company I stand with, so how about you go fuck YOUR self.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Smarter than Nobody, but one can't claim self defense after stalking the one they then killed.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
it's how our justice system operates, has operated, and began with the framers and founders of this country who thought it was better to let 10 guilty men go free than to have one innocent man imprisoned. have you ever studied american history? because i'm thinking you didn't.
Click to expand...

Yes I studied history, enough to know that many ideals the country was founded upon no longer exist. For a perfect example of the distortion of the Constitution, compare the Citizens United decision to the founders veiws on corporations you hypocritical moron.
 
Rune said:
Yes I studied history, enough to know that many ideals the country was founded upon no longer exist. For a perfect example of the distortion of the Constitution, compare the Citizens United decision to the founders veiws on corporations you hypocritical moron.
Click to expand...
and i'll ask this question again, since neither you or any other liberal on here couldn't seem to answer, WHY were corporations given any kind of rights in the first place???? and the last I checked, the ONLY way to change the ideals the country was founded upon was to AMEND the constitution, not willy nilly by majority emotions. so your notions of 'change' don't seem to jive with either the framers, a sacred legal document, or the rule of law. what other ideals do you think we should do away with?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
and i'll ask this question again, since neither you or any other liberal on here couldn't seem to answer, WHY were corporations given any kind of rights in the first place???? and the last I checked, the ONLY way to change the ideals the country was founded upon was to AMEND the constitution, not willy nilly by majority emotions. so your notions of 'change' don't seem to jive with either the framers, a sacred legal document, or the rule of law. what other ideals do you think we should do away with?
Click to expand...

Listen you simple fuck, I am not in favor of restricting ANY rights whatsoever, so don't shoot the messanger.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
so the cops are lying?
Click to expand...


Interesting question...have you yourself NEVER question the honesty of the police?


Suddenly you decide to side with the cops...after DOZENS of posts detailing criminal acts committed by the police all across this nation you believe they are guilty of...
 
SmarterThanYou said:
and the fucktard makes more stupid assed assumptions. what universe defines 'followed' as 'stalked and chased'? other than yours.
Click to expand...

There are two and only two known facts in this case.

1. Zimmerman followed and then acosted Martin.
2. Zimmerman Killed Martin.

If Zimmerman feared Martin, he had many oportunities to avoid him, but since he CHOSE to confront him, their is NO self defense claim possible.
 
Rune said:
Listen you simple fuck, I am not in favor of restricting ANY rights whatsoever, so don't shoot the messanger.
Click to expand...
you said, and I'll quote it again for you, "One person's right to life suppercede's any other person's right which would end that life."

so, just to make it clear that you're full of shit and a hypocritical asshole, that you don't believe the right to self defense using lethal force is as great as another persons 'right to life', meaning you are in favor of restricting the right to self defense. any other excuse from you is pure unadulterated bullshit and we all know it now.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Interesting question...have you yourself NEVER question the honesty of the police?


Suddenly you decide to side with the cops...after DOZENS of posts detailing criminal acts committed by the police all across this nation you believe they are guilty of...
Click to expand...

if you'd bother to follow the whole series of posts first, you'll see that I also am questioning the police reports (i always do anyway) and what I was really doing is questioning WHY most people who ALWAYS believe the police over a non cop would suddenly declare that the cops are lying on this one single incident.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
you said, and I'll quote it again for you, "One person's right to life suppercede's any other person's right which would end that life."

so, just to make it clear that you're full of shit and a hypocritical asshole, that you don't believe the right to self defense using lethal force is as great as another persons 'right to life', meaning you are in favor of restricting the right to self defense. any other excuse from you is pure unadulterated bullshit and we all know it now.
Click to expand...

See post 217 in this thread you narrowminded maniac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top