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.
My point was that Zimmerman is the stereotypical nut hiding behind a gun. I firmly believe that had he not been carrying that gun that he never would have pursued Martin. Zimmerman IMO is the one who escalated the situation.
For too many Americans, gun culture becomes a way to short-circuit actually thinking about the world and our response to it, which makes them especially dangerous.
Someday, if we lose our right to carry, it will be traced back to this case. Before Zimmerman gun people really didnt espouse killing kids because they cut school and smoked pot or what ever that was.
It's ironic because the pro gun lobby is always talking about "responsible gun use", and yet many reflexively supported Zimmerman despite the relative lack of evidence that his conduct was socially responsible. A significant opportunity was missed for Americans to come together and agree that racially-motivated vigilantism isn't acceptable.
It's ironic because the pro gun lobby is always talking about "responsible gun use", and yet many reflexively supported Zimmerman despite the relative lack of evidence that his conduct was socially responsible. A significant opportunity was missed for Americans to come together and agree that racially-motivated vigilantism isn't acceptable.
Really?
The evidence is strong that Zimmerman engaged in responsible gun use, which is why he was acquitted of the charges against him.
Let's review:
-Eye witness testimony supported that Trayvon was on top of George Zimmerman pummeling him "MMA" style and Trayvon's own parents said that the screams on the tape were not Trayvon, though they later retracted that statement (I don't buy the retraction).
-Trayvon had lacerations on his knuckles, consistent with pummeling George Zimmerman.
-Zimmerman's face was pounded in, nose broken, and had lacerations to the back of his head. The back of Zimmerman's shirt was also wet and stained with grass, supporting his narrative that he was on the ground being attacked by Trayvon.
-Rachel Jeantel stated that Trayvon referred to George Zimmerman as a "cracker," showing racial hostility and animosity on Trayvon's part. Note, this point is especially important as 911 audio tape initially made it seem like Zimmerman referred to Martin via a racial slur (though a cleaning of the tape showed this wasn't the case), and leftists' pounced on that to try to show Zimmerman acted out of racial hatred
-Trayvon's social media supports that he was not a good actor. He had recently "swung on a bus driver" and had stolen contraband in his possession as well as burglary tools. Note, none of this means that Trayvon deserved to die. I merely point this all out to show the kind of person that Zimmerman encountered.
smh @ all you left wing loony toons wanting to rewrite the actual events surrounding Zimmerman/Martin. The jury heard all the evidence from both sides in excruciating detail, and determined that Martin was the aggressor, and that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
I hope he gets every stinkin' penny he is demanding in the law suite, And all of you LWLT losers on here should all have to kick in a few bucks of your own for denigrating Zimmerman.
what about The Hill? did that source trigger you too?
You should have led with that article. Unlike the one you cited in the OP, it's not full of lies and mis-truths.
Read the part YOU DECIDED TO QUOTE in the OP. It's full of BS, and paints Zimmerman like a victim.
I don't think theHill rises to the level of WaPo, NYT or WSJ when it comes to journalistic integrity (the other three are widely known to be among the best), but they are a credible source.
To your point, the article in theHill was fair enough. You weren't asking me, but I'm not bothered by it. I would have paid more attention to your post if you led with that. Instead, the FIRST thing I saw was a bunch of BS, and I basically tuned it out, only read on for the following discussion.
That he is suing seems to be a fact. The rest of the OP seems to be overly biased propaganda.
You should have led with that article. Unlike the one you cited in the OP, it's not full of lies and mis-truths.
Read the part YOU DECIDED TO QUOTE in the OP. It's full of BS, and paints Zimmerman like a victim.
I don't think theHill rises to the level of WaPo, NYT or WSJ when it comes to journalistic integrity (the other three are widely known to be among the best), but they are a credible source.
To your point, the article in theHill was fair enough. You weren't asking me, but I'm not bothered by it. I would have paid more attention to your post if you led with that. Instead, the FIRST thing I saw was a bunch of BS, and I basically tuned it out, only read on for the following discussion.
That he is suing seems to be a fact. The rest of the OP seems to be overly biased propaganda.
He had another lawsuit in December against the parents, one of the media groups, the lawyers, Rachel Jeantel, and Brittany Diamond Eugene, who he claims is the 'real girlfriend' of Trayvon. Possibly others as well, can't quite recall.
It was announced with great fanfare and the usual un/supportive reactions ... and then it has quietly disappeared from the news. Not. A. Peep. About It. Not sure what to make of that. Been absolute radio silence.
My guess is maybe it's being settled and so no one is talking. I'm betting those being sued did not want to get into discovery. But who knows.
You should have led with that article. Unlike the one you cited in the OP, it's not full of lies and mis-truths.
Read the part YOU DECIDED TO QUOTE in the OP. It's full of BS, and paints Zimmerman like a victim.
I don't think theHill rises to the level of WaPo, NYT or WSJ when it comes to journalistic integrity (the other three are widely known to be among the best), but they are a credible source.
To your point, the article in theHill was fair enough. You weren't asking me, but I'm not bothered by it. I would have paid more attention to your post if you led with that. Instead, the FIRST thing I saw was a bunch of BS, and I basically tuned it out, only read on for the following discussion.
That he is suing seems to be a fact. The rest of the OP seems to be overly biased propaganda.
it's not my job to constantly coddle easily-triggered leftists and prevent them from seeing sources that may get their panties in a bunch.
if you're not bright enough to google up an alternate source that won't enrage you, it's really not my problem.
We don't know that, that's scumbag Zimmerman's story. I don't believe him. Unfortunately, his murder victim is unable to cooberate the story....
That's not Zimmerman's story. His account is not even part of the proof that he was the victim.
His innocence is proven conclusively by other facts.
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.
