Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is that hard evidence that George was a racist, for calling the police on African Americans? That's not hard evidence, it's just selectively cherry picking data to support your claim. If it had been changed from black to white, would it still be "racist"?
The only racism in this case is Trayvon calling George a "cracker".
There is very little 'hard evidence' in this case for anything! Where is the hard evidence that Georgie was NOT profiling Trayvon based on race? Prove it to me.
Tell me - where is the hard evidence as to who threw the first punch? That might have turned this case completely around.
And he should certainly regret doing that very thing, but the fact that he got out of the car is no proof of guilt.
Obviously that is the way the jury saw it. However, as you and I have said, "not guilty" does not mean innocent. Zimmerman certainly has some culpability regarding this situation. Hopefully this entire episode, killing TM, going through this very public trial, will ultimately teach Zimmerman to be more careful in his judgements and to let law enforcement deal with anything which he "perceives" to be suspicious or a crime.
We completely understand the presumption of innocence. What people are seeing, now, is that people like Zimmerman see they can get off for profiling and killing a young man, there will be people who copy what he did and claim self defense. Who knows what Zimmerman will do if he gets his gun back. So, parents have to teach their children to protect themselves from people like Zimmerman. You guys are high-fiving, while parents are taking action so that their child will not be next.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow
For the Trayvonites, do yourself a favor and educate yourself.
There is very little 'hard evidence' in this case for anything! Where is the hard evidence that Georgie was NOT profiling Trayvon based on race? Prove it to me.
Tell me - where is the hard evidence as to who threw the first punch? That might have turned this case completely around.
Trayvon Martin is today's Rachel Corrie. A fool who was taken out by Darwin's Law.
You mistake respect for fear. Respect the other person's capabilities and their space. Also, the Golden Rule. It's been way too long since I have heard the Golden Rule taught to children.
I don't know, I've heard the golden rule frequently over the last few years as handed down by the "king on high".
Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have done unto you, unless you feel discriminated against,can scream racism or some other "ism".
Or, Golden Rule: He who has more gold is to be shunned and have his gold confiscated to be given to others because they're obviously discriminated against by those racists.
every black man in florida should get a gun after this.
if florida wants the wild west, then i see no problem with every eligible black being able to carry.
no white should challenge that either, although several in this thread have challenged that.
Every eligible black is able to carry if they go through the same processes everyone else does. In fact the word eligible would suggest to me that he can already carry.
every black man in florida should get a gun after this. if florida wants the wild west, then i see no problem with every eligible black being able to carry. no white should challenge that either, although several in this thread have challenged that.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckity
And if Trayvon would've stayed out of trouble and not been suspended, he wouldn't have been at his father's fiance's house and he'd still be alive. How far do you want to go with your "what ifs"?
So he shouldn't have been visiting his own father?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyFeast5000
What is sad is that people are maybe too indolent to do any legal research in order to understand principles underlying our legal system.....for example, the "Presumption of Innocence" is a legal principle that simply means that the burden of proof is upon the accuser and that the person accused does not have to prove anything. "Presumption of Innocence" applies to defendants in a court room at trial. It does not mean that anyone in the real, everyday world we all live in is literally "innocent."
You're wasting your time. In the minds of the dingbats he was "proven innocent".
Obviously that is the way the jury saw it. However, as you and I have said, "not guilty" does not mean innocent. Zimmerman certainly has some culpability regarding this situation.
He has no criminal culpability. Period.
The jury did not accept the left's ridiculous political arguments about "profiling." What we have here is a drugged up thug who make a really bad decision. Unfortunately for him the person he decided to beat on happened to be armed. Thank God Zimmerman had a gun or he'd be dead and we'd just be talking about another situation where a thug killed a decent person - a situation that happens all the time, yet the left and the NAACP don't give two poops about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
