Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Zimmerman is H2O Man Jun 2013 #1
Zimmerman is Wolf Frankula Jun 2013 #74
And he was timdog44 Jun 2013 #158
+1,000 malaise Jun 2013 #105
Zimmerman is: NYC_SKP Jun 2013 #2
+1000 smirkymonkey Jun 2013 #133
It seems so fucking obvious - I hope the jury can figure it out! AAO Jun 2013 #253
Even when armed, you have a right to talk to people in public Recursion Jun 2013 #3
You have a right to talk to people in public? burnodo Jun 2013 #5
Um... seriously? What amendment covers speech? (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #14
ludicrous burnodo Jun 2013 #18
You can talk to anyone you like on a public street... Pelican Jun 2013 #20
Yes, so what's your point? nm rhett o rick Jun 2013 #25
Follow the thread... Pelican Jun 2013 #32
It was a dark and stormy night.... SCVDem Jun 2013 #37
Absolutely! n/t marew Jun 2013 #49
Why didn't Zimmerman ask Martin a question while on the phone with csziggy Jun 2013 #224
"... no "punk" would be stupid enough to attack someone with a phone to their ear." oldhippie Jun 2013 #346
Z was NOT told to stay in his truck. GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #387
You have no right to detain anyone going about their business, either. Ikonoklast Jun 2013 #237
keep heaven05 Jun 2013 #271
It seems like there is enough emotion to keep this going until the sun burns out... Pelican Jun 2013 #272
yeah heaven05 Jun 2013 #273
So.. to sum up your post... Pelican Jun 2013 #285
ok heaven05 Jun 2013 #290
My favorite part of this whole thing... Pelican Jun 2013 #291
We aren't talking about a "Good afternoon" here. It's GD CREEPY to be approached AT NIGHT by a WinkyDink Jun 2013 #44
And don't forget this was a 17-year old minor being stalked by a grown man and a stranger. cheapdate Jun 2013 #219
Exactly. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #280
15 going on 16 years old. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #396
What Kind of Person? liberalmike27 Jun 2013 #51
Well said JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #80
The defense is not using the "stand your ground" approach. xtraxritical Jun 2013 #202
When a defense has to rely on strategic lawyering ingenuity, that says something about their case. pacalo Jun 2013 #240
Nope JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #265
Your second paragraph puts it well treestar Jun 2013 #242
Amen Threedifferentones Jun 2013 #269
.. Buzz Clik Jun 2013 #178
kewl! burnodo Jun 2013 #236
You are so in denial. FarPoint Jun 2013 #209
Do you have a right to follow them around and intimidate them? DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2013 #8
Follow? Yes. intimidate? no (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #16
Most people would feel intimidated if they were followed; especially at night and by a stranger DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2013 #24
A right to follow? burnodo Jun 2013 #28
Perden me iggerance here, but Jackpine Radical Jun 2013 #161
Legally? I don't know. Do you? Recursion Jun 2013 #164
Actually, I don't know, but I imagine the FL statutes are online. Jackpine Radical Jun 2013 #165
A lot of truly dickish behavior is entirely legal and doesn't (legally) justify violence Recursion Jun 2013 #167
And only one had a gun Progressive dog Jun 2013 #207
Except only one created the scenario in which the other got killed. cui bono Jun 2013 #227
Zimmerman did not want Trayvon to go away hfojvt Jun 2013 #255
Really? locdlib Jun 2013 #270
I think "following" someone who's pretty obviously trying to avoid contact... Lizzie Poppet Jun 2013 #287
Did he have the right to chase someone around? MrScorpio Jun 2013 #9
If Z grabbed M he was wrong Recursion Jun 2013 #17
The answers that you're NOT giving to all of my questions are quite telling indeed. nt MrScorpio Jun 2013 #22
Would your beliefs change if it were a woman being stalked polly7 Jun 2013 #27
make it better d_r Jun 2013 #203
You'll be alright Cirque du So-What Jun 2013 #29
It's funny you say that Lordquinton Jun 2013 #99
No, I'm the one admitting I *don't* know the sequence of events. Recursion Jun 2013 #103
You're acting like it is fact that Martin even did that Lordquinton Jun 2013 #123
"Chase" is the right word to use. Mariana Jun 2013 #42
are you really suggesting it is AGAINST THE LAW to start a conversation with someone who does DrDan Jun 2013 #66
You have no right to force someone to have a conversation Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #70
my point is - it is not against the law to initiate the conversation DrDan Jun 2013 #75
But it is against the law to force another person to engage in conversation Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #78
thank you - here is the comment I was responding to DrDan Jun 2013 #81
No, you said there was a right to initiate conversation Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #86
I did say "start a conversation" - but I never implied that TM had to respond DrDan Jun 2013 #94
No reasonable person believes this was a simple "Hello" Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #128
good heavens - that was my example of "starting a conversation" DrDan Jun 2013 #134
As a female, I beg to differ... TinkerTot55 Jun 2013 #142
my . . . point . . . is . . . that it is NOT against the law DrDan Jun 2013 #147
An unarmed kid was shot and killed by the person who stopped him Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #154
And, as a woman, if some guy walked up to me in the dark and rain prole_for_peace Jun 2013 #157
It is irrelevant to whether it is against the law or not. What is relevant is would a MillennialDem Jun 2013 #169
this is what started this conversation DrDan Jun 2013 #172
To me stalking John2 Jun 2013 #192
this part of the thread originated from a question as to whether one can initiate a conversation DrDan Jun 2013 #194
look up the definition of asault... icarusxat Jun 2013 #321
look up the definition of "conversation" - (I could not find "asault", btw) DrDan Jun 2013 #324
yeah heaven05 Jun 2013 #281
guess it is too much to expect you to read anything - but what I said was that DrDan Jun 2013 #297
yeah heaven05 Jun 2013 #299
well why don't you just tell me what you think I said then . . . DrDan Jun 2013 #305
And if it was just two people out for a stroll, you might actually have a point. jeff47 Jun 2013 #87
wow - that is quite a stretch as to what is being discussed DrDan Jun 2013 #92
Because the entirety of your argument requires it. jeff47 Jun 2013 #97
I said that? Don't think so. DrDan Jun 2013 #104
In your attempt to justify Zimmerman's actions. jeff47 Jun 2013 #107
justified his actions? DrDan Jun 2013 #114
what heaven05 Jun 2013 #289
reading that was 5 seconds I wasted DrDan Jun 2013 #295
I'm heaven05 Jun 2013 #298
better get at your homework DrDan Jun 2013 #301
thanks heaven05 Jun 2013 #306
This is very disingenuous. The CONTEXT is being FOLLOWED through a development, not a mere WinkyDink Jun 2013 #77
This is perfectly legal under FL law. reusrename Jun 2013 #257
Well, that's one way of putting it Cirque du So-What Jun 2013 #12
Not if they don't want to talk to that armed person. bravenak Jun 2013 #13
A right to talk to, yes. Question, and demand answers, no. Chase down, no. Shoot, no. Scuba Jun 2013 #19
Question and demand answers, yes. And Martin had a right to ignore him. Recursion Jun 2013 #84
Ask, yes. Demand answers, no. Scuba Jun 2013 #88
Maybe we mean different things by "demand"? I think we're saying the same thing. Recursion Jun 2013 #90
If I'm lawfully occupying the space I'm in I'm going to tell you to fuck off... DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2013 #98
And you'd have every right to do so Recursion Jun 2013 #101
I don't think that is "the big question". It's one of many, and not the most important. Scuba Jun 2013 #126
I tried that once Cirque du So-What Jun 2013 #129
Disgusting behavior Just Saying Jun 2013 #206
Only if you're standing in my yard. madashelltoo Jun 2013 #166
I disagree. If you knock on my door or come into my house or onto my property, yes. If you are just MillennialDem Jun 2013 #170
So it would be ok to punch you if you did? (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #173
If I chased you for five minutes as is what happened in this case, YES. MillennialDem Jun 2013 #174
If I were persuaded Z chased him, sure Recursion Jun 2013 #175
If TM came back and punched him, yes he was in wrong. If Zimmerman caught up to TM or cut him MillennialDem Jun 2013 #176
Totally agree. I don't know which happened (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #177
On another note, I need to stop multitasking while posting. The appears missing in two MillennialDem Jun 2013 #179
Ah, you Millenials... We Gen-Xers don't need to multi-task to have typos (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #180
Here is something that was posted by someone else, I'm not sure if it's accurate or not MillennialDem Jun 2013 #181
If those paths are correct, that's pretty damning of Zimmerman, yes. Are they? Recursion Jun 2013 #188
For what it's worth naaman fletcher Jun 2013 #208
I know, I am just presenting a case where it is possible Zimmerman was MillennialDem Jun 2013 #223
I agree with you 100% morally. naaman fletcher Jun 2013 #225
If that is true, then Zimmerman ambushed him davidpdx Jun 2013 #232
Of course, Zimmy is clearly racist. MillennialDem Jun 2013 #234
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #276
This message was self-deleted by its author jeff47 Jun 2013 #89
Beg your pardon sarge43 Jun 2013 #21
I encourage you to view the testimony of the dispatcher... Pelican Jun 2013 #34
Yeah, she did have authority to tell a civilian to stay out of a potential crime scene. sarge43 Jun 2013 #46
You should tell him that... Pelican Jun 2013 #62
Then Noffke was wrong sarge43 Jun 2013 #83
You should write a letter... Pelican Jun 2013 #116
Right after you write to Martin's parents about "real" world. n/t sarge43 Jun 2013 #130
What does that even mean? Pelican Jun 2013 #131
I can't ignore the common-sense advice Noffke gave Zimmerman that evening. pacalo Jun 2013 #241
Dispatch does not have authority to command. Just the fact of the law. Bluenorthwest Jun 2013 #91
OK then, they have authority to strongly advise. They're often first contact. sarge43 Jun 2013 #112
"OK, we don't need you to do that..." HiddenAgenda63 Jun 2013 #43
Just in case you weren't sure about my intentions in starting this thread... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #71
Jump to the conclusions you want much? A Simple Game Jun 2013 #95
"What are you following me for..." makes HIM the initiator? Not the person actually following him? arcane1 Jun 2013 #132
fail SemperEadem Jun 2013 #160
Look back up thread at 181 davidpdx Jun 2013 #235
The fact that the 911 dispatcher is a "civilian" doesn't negate the common-sense advice pacalo Jun 2013 #245
What? Doctor_J Jun 2013 #266
actually, you dont pasto76 Jun 2013 #35
Agreed. no evidence Z did anything like that Recursion Jun 2013 #54
Where the HELL do you live?! I sure as hell don't want to be approached by total STRANGERS at NIGHT. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #41
Me either JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #85
We don't know exactly how Zimmerman initiated it. caseymoz Jun 2013 #109
Or Martin started with a punch to the face. We don't know Recursion Jun 2013 #148
And yet the only arguments you can posit are against Trayvon. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #196
No, Martin didn't start it. caseymoz Jun 2013 #201
you forgot the letter "s" fascisthunter Jun 2013 #228
Is that all Zimmerman wanted, to *talk* to the person he didn't recognize? pacalo Jun 2013 #243
You don't have a right to stalk them however. Maraya1969 Jun 2013 #249
If George Zimmerman has simply talked to Trayvon Martin, this would have ended very differently. Kennah Jun 2013 #258
Couldn't agree more. 99Forever Jun 2013 #4
Zimmerman is warrior1 Jun 2013 #6
Gun nuts. They 'are the law.' nt onehandle Jun 2013 #7
What it is. No mistake. nt MADem Jun 2013 #10
Trayvon Martin had every right to fight his stalker and hunter. polly7 Jun 2013 #11
Apparently your are only allowed to defend yourself with a firearm prole_for_peace Jun 2013 #159
so let's say Trayvon threw a punch Skittles Jun 2013 #261
Exactly prole_for_peace Jun 2013 #313
You are so right walkerbait41 Jun 2013 #15
Imagine the situation reversed kristopher Jun 2013 #23
This is an appropriate analogy. A Brand New World Jun 2013 #30
Yup, and people would not have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to his defense fund. SunSeeker Jun 2013 #36
Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #59
+1000 gollygee Jun 2013 #61
The defense would say the white youth initiated the confrontation with racist comments. OnlinePoker Jun 2013 #96
The question has a deeper meaning. It deals with his idea that he was "cop for the gated community" jwirr Jun 2013 #26
One DUer said we can't assume anything because we weren't there. Neither were the police Nanjing to Seoul Jun 2013 #31
There are those who think citizens not on the jury should have lobotomies pre-verdict. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #47
Zimmerman is a product of the NRA Tippy Jun 2013 #33
and Hate Radio Doctor_J Jun 2013 #267
Yes Tippy Jun 2013 #335
The same type of person who supported lynching in the past Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #38
K&R. Zimmerman stalked and killed an unarmed kid who was minding his own business. DLevine Jun 2013 #39
The hysterical groupthink on these threads is really something to behold Azathoth Jun 2013 #40
Considering he told the police he was following before the fight began... Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #45
In other words, you don't need evidence because you think your assumption is "obvious" Azathoth Jun 2013 #48
Are you suggesting the call to police I mentioned is not evidence? Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #52
Yes, it is "evidence" Azathoth Jun 2013 #58
He started the confrontation Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #63
So because he said "they always get away," we now KNOW that he started the confrontation? Azathoth Jun 2013 #72
It makes it pretty clear that he was not going to allow Martin to get away Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #76
You're misstating the evidence Azathoth Jun 2013 #120
well heaven05 Jun 2013 #307
How small does that corner have to get before you stop painting? Scootaloo Jun 2013 #185
lol, if you want to accuse me of a fallacy, you have to actually demonstrate it Azathoth Jun 2013 #190
you heaven05 Jun 2013 #303
zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed young person SemperEadem Jun 2013 #163
But it is up to the court to weigh the evidence, not you or me. n/t totodeinhere Jun 2013 #244
I am entitled to my opinion, The court can't tell me not to look at the evidence myself Bjorn Against Jun 2013 #247
well heaven05 Jun 2013 #302
Agreed. Anyone more than two brain cells. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #60
It demonstrates Zimmerman's intent. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #122
Bingo Little Star Jun 2013 #156
Do you know the difference between "intense" and the hyperbolic "hysterical"? Z was the STALKER. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #50
So now we're casually comparing Z to Manson, but it's wrong to call these threads "hysterical"? Azathoth Jun 2013 #55
My analogy was intended to be precise, to wit: The night-time "creepy-crawly" runs the Mansion WinkyDink Jun 2013 #64
You think it's a precise analogy to compare a guy on the phone with 911 following someone he claims Azathoth Jun 2013 #82
"Trayvon did not have the right to respond disproportionately." Says you. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #195
it really is not hard to understand how lynch mobs gained energy after reading DrDan Jun 2013 #69
No lynch mob mentality here JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #102
there are many here who have already concluded that Z is guilty - even though DrDan Jun 2013 #111
DrDan JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #117
before punishment - 2d murder charges need to be proven DrDan Jun 2013 #118
Ditto JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #127
I'm not sure those jurors John2 Jun 2013 #197
well it is a good thing we have jurors deciding this case who will be DrDan Jun 2013 #200
you heaven05 Jun 2013 #311
I do have faith in their upcoming decision - you have a problem with the jury? DrDan Jun 2013 #316
Need heaven05 Jun 2013 #319
so you don't trust the judgement of the jury . . . DrDan Jun 2013 #325
yes heaven05 Jun 2013 #328
No one here is advocating lynching Just Saying Jun 2013 #210
a week into testimony and there are those here who have decided Z is guilty DrDan Jun 2013 #212
Thinking someone is guilty Just Saying Jun 2013 #214
you are entitled to your opinion - as am I DrDan Jun 2013 #215
Sure Just Saying Jun 2013 #216
hmmmmm - I sense a bit of guilt DrDan Jun 2013 #217
As with so many things you've posted today Just Saying Jun 2013 #218
like stating EVERYONE deserves a fair trial" DrDan Jun 2013 #220
Yes clearly you're the victim here. Just Saying Jun 2013 #221
never claimed to be a victim, now did I DrDan Jun 2013 #222
Intent was proven to me when he got out of his vehicle. Can you prove me wrong? A Simple Game Jun 2013 #79
cannot disagree with your gun comment - agree completely - read my tagline DrDan Jun 2013 #121
So you're saying he intended to confront/fight Trayvon while he was on the phone with 911? Azathoth Jun 2013 #125
I'm saying he intended to confront Martin when he ignored the advice given by 911. A Simple Game Jun 2013 #182
"groupthink" yeah, you keep telling yourself that is all it is fascisthunter Jun 2013 #233
The "gunner" namecalling has become the DU version of "socialist" namecalling Azathoth Jun 2013 #260
yeah heaven05 Jun 2013 #317
if heaven05 Jun 2013 #296
Under the principles of self-defense ewagner Jun 2013 #53
The self-defense and FL stand-your-ground laws are predicated upon legal conduct. reusrename Jun 2013 #144
How do we know that? naaman fletcher Jun 2013 #211
From testimony. reusrename Jun 2013 #238
A paranoid schizophrenic orpupilofnature57 Jun 2013 #56
isn't the real question whether a law was broken? DrDan Jun 2013 #57
Freerepublic conservatives, that's who. Kablooie Jun 2013 #65
I can only venture guesses as to what kind of person would think zimmerman had the "right" etherealtruth Jun 2013 #67
Exactly. K&R, n/t. ms liberty Jun 2013 #68
Zimmerman was claiming authority that he did not have. He was packing heat. Is there any chance AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #73
The Young Turks had a good segment with Zimmerman muttering "Fucking Coons" under his breath OnlinePoker Jun 2013 #115
That's what I hear too. It's definitely not 'goons'. imho. nt. polly7 Jun 2013 #119
Yes, sounds like he mumbles 'fu**ing coons' just before the responder says lumpy Jun 2013 #162
Lets play my favorite version of this game: Nevernose Jun 2013 #93
This message was self-deleted by its author polly7 Jun 2013 #100
Not a single person JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #124
In your version, the 17 year old white girl also holds the black man down Azathoth Jun 2013 #139
Sure, why not? Nevernose Jun 2013 #145
Well, if you're going to play, you have to get the facts correct Azathoth Jun 2013 #153
You Are Awfully Invested In This Case HangOnKids Jun 2013 #168
You illustrate Zimmermans credibility problem nicely Nevernose Jun 2013 #186
This is why I find John2 Jun 2013 #205
Here is logic for John2 Jun 2013 #288
George's actions were grossly negligent and highly irresponsible. egduj Jun 2013 #106
I agree Zimmerman called the cops obama2terms Jun 2013 #108
Not me! hedgehog Jun 2013 #110
I agree 100%. Zimmerman was the aggressor... HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #113
I'm no lawyer, but if I were---I'd call it pre-meditated homicide. BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2013 #135
I think it was, too, but it would be hard to prove. NYC_SKP Jun 2013 #136
HEY SKP! BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2013 #140
Very well put, Mr. Scorpio. n/t pnwmom Jun 2013 #137
+1,000,000 madaboutharry Jun 2013 #138
He didn't. krispos42 Jun 2013 #141
Zimmerman followed and murdered an unarmed teenager. Everything else is just defense B.S. OregonBlue Jun 2013 #143
If Zimmerman is innocent.... dtom67 Jun 2013 #146
If Zimmerman had been killed with his own gun Generic Other Jun 2013 #149
It's Neighborhood WATCH, not Neighborhood CHASE many a good man Jun 2013 #150
Also Neighborhood Watch guidelines are very specific sarge43 Jun 2013 #171
Good OP. I haven't read any of the replies yet, Moses2SandyKoufax Jun 2013 #151
If Trayvon was an adult and had a gun darkangel218 Jun 2013 #152
Do you mean if the circumstances had been the same, or if Zimmerman had assaulted Trayvon? RichardPatrick Jun 2013 #189
Glenn Beck fans. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #155
Making him the ' Neighborhood Threat ' orpupilofnature57 Jun 2013 #184
I've been shaking my head for days wryter2000 Jun 2013 #183
Incarcerated or free, I think he's a deadman either way. He's not gonna avoid "fucking coons" forevr DRoseDARs Jun 2013 #187
I hope that you don't approve of the thought that if he goes free someone should totodeinhere Jun 2013 #246
Trayvon with a y and no I don't. He's made such a mess of his own case, then there's his def team. DRoseDARs Jun 2013 #252
One word;Vigilante. that is all. Rain Mcloud Jun 2013 #191
Absolutely right Jake2413 Jun 2013 #193
I'm unclear on the rules for a claim of self defense. tclambert Jun 2013 #198
Zimmerman has to prove John2 Jun 2013 #213
My understanding is ctaylors6 Jun 2013 #230
That does help, John2 Jun 2013 #256
Yeah, that helped. Thank you. tclambert Jun 2013 #397
Did you want us to actually answer your questions? If so, then here: ZombieHorde Jun 2013 #199
Are you arguing that the rules of felony murder come into play? tclambert Jun 2013 #204
a gun-humping, cowardly piece of SHIT, Mr. Scorpio Skittles Jun 2013 #226
A bigot Eddie Haskell Jun 2013 #229
you nailed it... I'll add that Zimmerman's Defenders believe a gun owner... fascisthunter Jun 2013 #231
I don't defend what Zimmerman did. But I do defend his right to a fair totodeinhere Jun 2013 #248
Mahalo MrScorpio for providing.. Cha Jun 2013 #239
I think they should have tried him for manslaughter madville Jun 2013 #250
Great Opening Statement! AAO Jun 2013 #251
you don't start a fight by following somebody hfojvt Jun 2013 #254
I'm a little curious here... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #262
What difference does that make? hfojvt Jun 2013 #350
It makes every difference in the world why Zimmerman was chasing after Martin and how... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #353
The seed for the confrontation was Zimmerman's staring hard enough at Trayvon to make him pacalo Jun 2013 #263
I think George's version of the events are very strange. Notafraidtoo Jun 2013 #259
People keep asking Mkap Jun 2013 #264
That is the main point WhataKnight Jun 2013 #268
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #274
My heart bleeds for you MrScorpio Jun 2013 #275
1. Z killed with a gun. 2. Trayvon had no drugs. 3. Thus, you are part of the "fantasy" contingent. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #279
I heaven05 Jun 2013 #282
ohh heaven05 Jun 2013 #326
you heaven05 Jun 2013 #277
Look at the post #274 MrScorpio Jun 2013 #278
he's heaven05 Jun 2013 #283
POOF! nt MrScorpio Jun 2013 #284
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #336
I suggest that you familiarize yourself with this site's rules MrScorpio Jun 2013 #338
This is the precise reason I couldn't care less if Trayvon swung first. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2013 #286
The fact he had a round in the chamber madokie Jun 2013 #292
Wow. He chambered a round beforehand... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #293
The DA told about this in his opening statement madokie Jun 2013 #312
Carrying with an empty chamber is actually extremely uncommon. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2013 #318
But It does show that he took an additional step, in preparation to fire the gun right away MrScorpio Jun 2013 #320
True. I think anyone carrying at all can be considered "prepared to use it." Lizzie Poppet Jun 2013 #322
Excellent point nt MrScorpio Jun 2013 #323
Empty chamber? you are kidding right? RGR375 Jun 2013 #304
Especially when you're on the hunt for black teenagers... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #308
Isn't he cute? Can we keep him for a while? ETA, luv his name also uppityperson Jun 2013 #310
Well, I did write the OP for his benefit MrScorpio Jun 2013 #315
Sorry not me madokie Jun 2013 #314
The golden rule RGR375 Jun 2013 #294
So basically, in Florida, it's open season on Black Teenagers... That explains everything! MrScorpio Jun 2013 #300
Take a deep breath RGR375 Jun 2013 #327
So you think Trayvon started beating up Zimmy because he felt "disrespected"? This is all Trayvon's uppityperson Jun 2013 #330
you heaven05 Jun 2013 #331
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #363
I take that you've determined Trayvon Martin to be the initial aggressor... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #334
You miss the mark RGR375 Jun 2013 #339
So Z could attack and fight with TM with no problem, but as soon as TM defending himself, he "cooked uppityperson Jun 2013 #341
You mean that you believe Zimmerman's story, even if it makes absolutely no sense MrScorpio Jun 2013 #342
two heaven05 Jun 2013 #389
Mr Scorpio, that should be RGR375's only son murdered. sarge43 Jun 2013 #329
So in Florida you can attack someone and when they fight back you can kill them? Wow. Welcome to DU, uppityperson Jun 2013 #309
776.041 Use of force by aggressor RGR375 Jun 2013 #332
I attack someone, when they fight back, I am justified in killing them. Which gunz site did you come uppityperson Jun 2013 #333
It's clear to me that it's people exactly like you whom we should be afraid of MrScorpio Jun 2013 #337
Apples and oranges RGR375 Jun 2013 #343
Are you saying that Zimmerman shouldn't be convicted? MrScorpio Jun 2013 #345
Sir you misunderstand me RGR375 Jun 2013 #348
Again with the statute recitations MrScorpio Jun 2013 #351
I haven't seen any evidence that Zimmerman was ever on the ground being pummeled. yardwork Jun 2013 #340
Watch the trial RGR375 Jun 2013 #344
It was too dark to see colors. Eyes physically can NOT differentiate colors when it is dark. uppityperson Jun 2013 #347
Tricks of light RGR375 Jun 2013 #355
Except he did not say light or dark but RED. He could NOT see red. That was impossible. uppityperson Jun 2013 #356
Obviously you haven't heard Good's testimony. He said that one was wearing "dark" the other "red." yardwork Jun 2013 #374
"Dark" and "red"? Huh, thanks for that. uppityperson Jun 2013 #379
Thank you for posting the careful explanation for why Good couldn't have been able to distinguish yardwork Jun 2013 #380
oops! RGR375 Jun 2013 #388
Huh, since I replied to yardwork about Good's testimony, I do not know wtf you are talking about. uppityperson Jun 2013 #398
with heaven05 Jun 2013 #390
Sadly, your OP and the many other threads etherealtruth Jun 2013 #349
People just do not understand RGR375 Jun 2013 #352
I posted about that statute upthread... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #354
Now is the time! RGR375 Jun 2013 #357
Yeah... Did you see this? MrScorpio Jun 2013 #358
Ok? RGR375 Jun 2013 #359
Mr Scorpio did in the link in post you are replying to. Here, look at my post, click on the link uppityperson Jun 2013 #362
First... I'd like you to define who you think was the aggressor here... I say it was Zimmerman MrScorpio Jun 2013 #364
Wow! RGR375 Jun 2013 #366
Hello. Can you see this post? uppityperson Jun 2013 #367
Ok I'm 17. You're a creepy guy in a car following countingbluecars Jun 2013 #368
That's the gist of it! etherealtruth Jun 2013 #369
That's it. Anybody who can't see that doesn't want to see it. yardwork Jun 2013 #378
What you're trying to do is lazily win people over to you own faulty reasoning MrScorpio Jun 2013 #370
you heaven05 Jun 2013 #391
I think people do understand etherealtruth Jun 2013 #361
what kind of person would think a thug like Zimmerman alc Jun 2013 #360
Zimmerman is getting a fair trial, is he not? MrScorpio Jun 2013 #365
No problems RGR375 Jun 2013 #372
Personally, I'd love for Zimmerman to get a fair trial... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #373
I feel so sorry for you. RGR375 Jun 2013 #376
How old are you? MrScorpio Jun 2013 #377
Then i shall tell you RGR375 Jun 2013 #382
Well, cool... MrScorpio Jun 2013 #386
Thank you for your service RGR375 Jun 2013 #392
Post removed Post removed Jun 2013 #393
Why? RGR375 Jun 2013 #384
hahahahaha. RGR375 "will accept a juries decision. RGR375 "will not". heh uppityperson Jun 2013 #385
since he IS getting a fair trial, not sure what your point is. uppityperson Jun 2013 #371
That's much more than Trayvon Martin got. /nt yardwork Jun 2013 #375
Not trying to start a fight RGR375 Jun 2013 #381
You heaven05 Jun 2013 #395
k&r Liberal_in_LA Jun 2013 #383
What kind of person? A bigot. Or at the very least, one who thinks black human life is less Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #394
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What kind of person would...»Reply #24