clevis16
WHY AND HOW DID THIS CASE GO TO TRIAL, ONLY REASON I KNOW OF IS BECAUSE THE NIGGERS RAISED HELL AND THE POLITICIANS CAVED AND GAVE IT TO THEM.
Quote 0 0
screamin seamen
Yes sir we live in a state where a bunch of welfare robbers run the show. Oh wait that's the entire USA. Start shooting the rioters it will stop real fast
Budget bogger
Quote 0 0
dizdak
  Zimmerman is liable to sit in jail just so they can feel like they pleased the colored folks of the nation.. They are afraid of another Rodney King outbreak..
90 yota ext cab, linked, 14.9s, 454 / th400 dual cases
Quote 0 0
NoPatienceRacing
I'm kinda hoping they riot so we get to beat the shit out them, just saying.
Go Big or Go Home
Quote 0 0
Junkyardranger
NOT GUILTY!
Quote 0 0
clevis16
let the open season begin if its black or brown its down if they start rioting around here and acting like idiots!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote 0 0
dizdak
  Woo Hooo!!!!  Holy chit!!!  "day be gonna hafta ak a fool now"
90 yota ext cab, linked, 14.9s, 454 / th400 dual cases
Quote 0 0
NoPatienceRacing
Go figure the browns/blacks were all talk about rioting and burning down Sanford when Zimmerman was found not guilty. But that does sound a lot like work and we all know how much they like that.
Go Big or Go Home
Quote 0 0
chevmudder
NoPatienceRacing wrote:
Go figure the browns/blacks were all talk about rioting and burning down Sanford when Zimmerman was found not guilty. But that does sound a lot like work and we all know how much they like that.
Quote 0 0
RedRio88
its bull shit,leave the guy alone! they found him not guilty! but thats not a nuff! society thinks that they must keep the blacks happy?they all ways find something to piss and moan about! 
Quote 0 0
coonbottom
I am glad he wasn't found guilty of murder. I think that would have really screwed up valid self defense cases in the future: 
"Of course I shot the bad guy! He was raping my wife in the face!"
"Well ...if you hadn't been walking down that dark alley way and put yourselves in that position, the bad guy would have never attacked you and your wife"

However, I am surprised he didn't get manslaughter. Was Zimmer a murderer? No. But was he a dick and responsible for Trayvon's death. Yes.

Maybe the judge (who was biased as h*ll) didn't explain manslaughter well enough but he could have easily been convicted of that. 
The craziest thing about all of this is why are people on the other side of the country protesting and rioting? The one thing that has come from this case is, it has finally proven that most of California is completely and totally, batsh*t crazy.
I don't think of myself as a "has been", but rather, "retired loser". 
Quote 0 0
BossLady720
Amazing all this fuss over a black kid creeping around in the dark getting shot by a trigger happy wanna be cop but when a good looking young white woman clearly murdered her own child and got away with it whats happened? Nothing. The justice system is completly screwed an our priorities are to make black people happy. Why? Cause white people use to own them? We owned them cause their own people sold them to white people. They continue to kill each other in the hood an its no big deal. Figure that one out.
Quote 0 0
iniviate
coonbottom wrote:
But was he a dick and responsible for Trayvon's death. Yes.



explain....
mcreynoldsair wrote:
if your going to change your screen name need to change how you wright

no punctuation and you spelled dozier wrong
Quote 0 0
ramrod
iniviate wrote:
coonbottom wrote:
But was he a dick and responsible for Trayvon's death. Yes.
<br><br><br>explain....


X2
Quote 0 0
biglog56
Couple of me and my buddies are in class out here in California for awhile we wanna buy shirts saying no justice for trayvon
Slacker in the marines
Quote 0 0
coonbottom
iniviate wrote:
explain....

Well, this was the original issue with this case and why it got media spot light to begin with. It wasn't a race issue till o-dawg and the rest of the media made it one.

The problem is, self defense laws, like the stand your ground law, were made so a person could defend themselves, or another person, from harm. 
If you are standing there waiting for a buss and someone robs you at gun point, you can kill them and not have it as a murder charge. 
If you see a gas station clerk getting the crap kicked out of them, you can kill the person attacking them.

The problem is/was the intent of the law wasn't if someone intentionally put themselves in a situation where they needed to defend themselves. 

If you walk into a biker bar and yell, "Hey all you f****t @ss p*ssies". Then kick their bikes over, you should get your butt beaten into a red pulp, not pull out a firearm and try to say you are simply defending yourself. 

Zimmerman killed Trayvon out of self defense. He was innocent of murder.
However, it was because of Zimmerman's actions that Trayvon ended up getting killed. 

So really it should have been two cases in one. 

I think the prosecution realized he would have been found innocent way too late so they threw the manslaughter charge at him later in the trial. (or was it sooner, I don't remember?)

Look at it from this perspective-
What if Trayvon had broke and ran while Zimmerman was still after him. But instead of it ending up in a fight, Trayvon ran in front of a bus and was killed.
That would not be murder, but Zimmerman's actions would have led to his death. Which, is manslaughter. 

That is why I was surprised he was found completely innocent. 




I don't think of myself as a "has been", but rather, "retired loser". 
Quote 0 0
BossLady720

^^^^ I agree. Now they are going to try to change the law so people who are actually in danger have to have their throat slit before they can defend themselves. Zimmermen didn't have to approach Trayvon. He could have just watched him and waited until he did break the law but instead he confronted him an of coarse like any other teenager in sure he gave him a attitude an told him to mind his own damn business an we all know how it ended.
Quote 0 0
iniviate
coonbottom wrote:

The problem is/was the intent of the law wasn't if someone intentionally put themselves in a situation where they needed to defend themselves. 

If you walk into a biker bar and yell, "Hey all you f****t @ss p*ssies". Then kick their bikes over, you should get your butt beaten into a red pulp, not pull out a firearm and try to say you are simply defending yourself.



but that's not what he did..... he was following a group of bikers who were casing a place. when they spotted him, they proceeded to whip his ass.

should we, as citizens not be allowed to try and prevent crime?

Let's say i see a guy walking around my neighbors property. What should i do? I'm probably going to go talk to them, see what they're doing. What if they attack me? am i not allowed to defend myself?




Quote:
Look at it from this perspective-
What if Trayvon had broke and ran while Zimmerman was still after him. But instead of it ending up in a fight, Trayvon ran in front of a bus and was killed.
That would not be murder, but Zimmerman's actions would have led to his death. Which, is manslaughter. 

That is why I was surprised he was found completely innocent.


I think it's a pretty big stretch, but i could certainly see a jury convicting him of manslaughter.
mcreynoldsair wrote:
if your going to change your screen name need to change how you wright

no punctuation and you spelled dozier wrong
Quote 0 0
iniviate
BossLady720 wrote:
Zimmermen didn't have to approach Trayvon. He could have just watched him and waited until he did break the law but instead he confronted 



He was attempting to just watch him from the truck until the police got there, but he lost sight of Travon, that's why he got out of the truck.

Turns out, Travon was waiting, hiding, ready to confront Zimmerman.
mcreynoldsair wrote:
if your going to change your screen name need to change how you wright

no punctuation and you spelled dozier wrong
Quote 0 0
coonbottom
BossLady720 wrote:
Now they are going to try to change the law so people who are actually in danger have to have their throat slit before they can defend themselves.

That is what I am afraid of the most. The legislatures from all states are going to scramble to change the statutes but the courts will have case law updates stating otherwise. 

It will be a mess until O-dawg bans all firearms, self-defense laws, and dissolves the courts in his 4th term. 


iniviate wrote:

but that's not what he did..... he was following a group of bikers who were casing a place. when they spotted him, they proceeded to whip his ass.


should we, as citizens not be allowed to try and prevent crime?

No. Yes. 
Depends on what the judge's and jury's definition of vigilantism is. 
SCOTA said that is was not law enforcement's responsibility to prevent crime or to protect. It was to respond to a crime. 

So, is it now a civic duty for civilians to help prevent crime? Well ..maybe. But the prosecuting attorney would probably ask why didn't you just call 911? *shrug*

iniviate wrote:

Let's say i see a guy walking around my neighbors property. What should i do? I'm probably going to go talk to them, see what they're doing. What if they attack me? am i not allowed to defend myself?

Depends on if you are in your yard or your neighbors. Once you leave your yard then that opens up the same argument. 
Their defense could be, "I was at the wrong address and some crazy huge cracker came up and scared me. I am allowed to defend myself!".

I mean, if I didn't know you and you came up to me yelling at me I would probably reach for a weapon also. Even if I wasn't casing a place. 




I don't think of myself as a "has been", but rather, "retired loser". 
Quote 0 0
http://www.bigshocks.com/" target="_blank">