African-American claims "stand your ground"; convicted anyway

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
Darla said:
You're full of shit. He sure did.

Why don't you go to the link I provided and explain his (AGAIN) insistence that Zimmerman is innocent, and more importantly explain his celebration of the Martin shooting target.

Let me know what you come up with.
Click to expand...

1) He is being sarcastic on the 'he is innocent'

2) the lol at the target was pathetic

3) By going after murder charges instead of manslaughter, they are going to have a much harder time with conviction. Manslaughter would have been a slam dunk. Murder 2 is another story. Beyond a reasonable doubt...
 
Darla said:
I think that anyone who knee-jerked Zimmerman is innocent, which Grind absolutely did, and knee-jerked this woman is guilty, has something going on. Yep. No doubt about that. Not too many explanations either.
Click to expand...


Think a verdict in 12 minutes is "knee-jerk" ????
 
Darla said:
Your reactions to each of these cases IMO can only be explained by two possible scenarios:

-racism, either conscious or unconscious.

-such a deep hatred of liberals that anything that upsets them gives you pleasure, even if the cost of that pleasure is someone's life.
Click to expand...

darla, sorry, they are completely different cases, different circumstances. Just because they both involve a shooting doesn't mean they are the same. Intentionally putting yourself in a situation and shooting someone, you can't apply stand your ground. And there is no evidence that zimmerman continued following trayvon, and plenty of evidence he was in fear for his life, given he was on his back and head was bloody. Trayvon could easily have come back to attack him in which case zimmerman was fully within his rights.

I actually find it rather sad (in a very disappointing way) that your mind is so barricaded that anything that goes against what you believe MUST be racist, MUST be hateful, because you wouldn't be able to stand that rational people come away with different conclusions for PERFECTLY valid reasons.

The second part of what you said though, is undoubtedly true ;)
 
Darla said:
I think that anyone who knee-jerked Zimmerman is innocent, which Grind absolutely did, and knee-jerked this woman is guilty, has something going on. Yep. No doubt about that. Not too many explanations either.
Click to expand...

i actually kneejerked neither. When I first heard of zimmerman, I was thinking he should get manslaughter, than when I heard of all the murkiness of the case and decided he shouldn't be convicted. When I heard about this woman, I said openly in a thread that she had the right to do what she did, before reading more on the case and seeing she ran away from her house only to return.
 
KingofOwls said:
darla, sorry, they are completely different cases, different circumstances. Just because they both involve a shooting doesn't mean they are the same. Intentionally putting yourself in a situation and shooting someone, you can't apply stand your ground. And there is no evidence that zimmerman continued following trayvon, and plenty of evidence he was in fear for his life, given he was on his back and head was bloody. Trayvon could easily have come back to attack him in which case zimmerman was fully within his rights.

I actually find it rather sad (in a very disappointing way) that your mind is so barricaded that anything that goes against what you believe MUST be racist, MUST be hateful, because you wouldn't be able to stand that rational people come away with different conclusions for PERFECTLY valid reasons.

The second part of what you said though, is undoubtedly true ;)
Click to expand...

um... you need to be careful using all caps... it freaks the liberals out.
 
Superfreak said:
1) He is being sarcastic on the 'he is innocent'
Click to expand...

it's not so much sarcastic as fighting fire with fire. Detractors will say definitively that zimmerman kept following trayvon after being told not to (with zero evidence to support this), I say in return that trayvon 100% returned to zimmerman and initiated the conflict. etc

And of course my line of thought will end up being more relevant, as the burden is on the prosecution, so I feel that my statements are just as valid, if not more so, than theirs.
 
also I think I've already literally said 3 times today that if new evidence comes to light regarding zimmerman, I will change my mind. I don't have a team in this fight. I base my opinions on facts and evidence.
 
KingofOwls said:
it's not so much sarcastic as fighting fire with fire. Detractors will say definitively that zimmerman kept following trayvon after being told not to (with zero evidence to support this), I say in return that trayvon 100% returned to zimmerman and initiated the conflict. etc

And of course my line of thought will end up being more relevant, as the burden is on the prosecution, so I feel that my statements are just as valid, if not more so, than theirs.
Click to expand...

lol... yeah, sarcastic as in mocking those who make the opposite proclamation.
 
KingofOwls said:
also I think I've already literally said 3 times today that if new evidence comes to light regarding zimmerman, I will change my mind. I don't have a team in this fight. I base my opinions on facts and evidence.
Click to expand...

Not all the facts though, and I thought you were an, the facts, kind of guy. You haven't even seen an autopsy report.
 
Rana said:
Not all the facts though, and I thought you were an, the facts, kind of guy. You haven't even seen an autopsy report.
Click to expand...

he stated that based on all the facts he does know and that he was open to changing his position if new facts came to light.
 
KingofOwls said:
come on darla, you know how I am on this site. I say inflammatory things a lot. If you actually look further on in that thread, you will see that I did in fact think it was in bad taste.
Click to expand...

No I missed that part. I know you say inflammatory things Grind, but some of the stuff you have said about this case...sometimes we need to check ourselves. Unconscious racism is not uncommon. I don't know why you would be so defensive about my bringing it up.
 
Darla said:
No I missed that part. I know you say inflammatory things Grind, but some of the stuff you have said about this case...sometimes we need to check ourselves. Unconscious racism is not uncommon. I don't know why you would be so defensive about my bringing it up.
Click to expand...

Just to be even more clear - I feel that before I read a lot of the black history from both black intellectuals and black feminist intellectuals, that I definitely had some unconscious racism. No doubt about it.
 
The term White Hispanic was not created for the George Zimmerman case, it has been used in other instances.
 
Superfreak said:
That is such nonsense.

1) While he was indeed an abusive asshole and deserved to be shot, it was his home too.

2) She fired in the direction of two kids. Fuck the two adults. You shoot at kids and you go to jail.

3) That said, that prick deserves to be in jail too.
Click to expand...

it was not in the direct direction of the two kids. when you read more facts, you will see the huge leap of imagination the DA used to pull off that trick of the hat theory.
 
Darla said:
Just to be even more clear - I feel that before I read a lot of the black history from both black intellectuals and black feminist intellectuals, that I definitely had some unconscious racism. No doubt about it.
Click to expand...

you are free to think what you will, I know where my head is at. If this woman was on patrol and shot a white kid and I wanted her in jail, you would have a point. I don't feel the cases are comparable. They are completely different circumstances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top