Zimmerman Part Two

[yossarian]

You used the word "thug" five times in a post in which you argue that race was not a factor. Hmmmmm....

He also describes Dunn's actions that led to someone dying as an "overreaction." I have to say, I think he's just having us on, no one can be that stupid and racist.

 

[TobyTyler]

Ok, so let's table that for a second, you don't think he deserves to do 60 years for his overreaction that resulted in one person being dead and shooting at a van full of other people?

Yes. I've never said otherwise. I've only said that it could have been avoided with a little common courtesy on the part of the thugs in the van when asked to turn their music down.

 

[TobyTyler]

You used the word "thug" five times in a post in which you argue that race was not a factor. Hmmmmm....

So you think a"thug" can only be black? You don't see the irony there in you calling me a racist? Seems that it is you who made the racial conclusion there.

 

[TobyTyler]

He also describes Dunn's actions that led to someone dying as an "overreaction." I have to say, I think he's just having us on, no one can be that stupid and racist.

Race has nothing to do with it. If white thugs were asked by an older black man to turn down their music and they got nasty with him, I would have no sympathy for them if the situation escalated to where the man decided he needed to shoot at them. Its not me who is injecting race into it, it is you and Crimson.

 

[joshuar56]

That didn't happen. The thugs tried to get away after the one thug was shot. There was no crouching down and letting led fly as the van was driving off. Racism? The thugs were acting up. Your shrill cries of racism are falling on deaf ears here. He didn't shoot the thug cause he was black, he shot him because he over-reacted to a thug being an asshole.

You were there? Cause actual witnesses seem to disagree with you. In fact, he was convicted of 3 counts of attempted murder because he did just that. Don't let that stop you from trolling however...

 

[TobyTyler]

You were there? Cause actual witnesses seem to disagree with you. In fact, he was convicted of 3 counts of attempted murder because he did just that. Don't let that stop you from trolling however...

Yes.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Race has nothing to do with it. If white thugs were asked by an older black man to turn down their music and they got nasty with him, I would have no sympathy for them if the situation escalated to where the man decided he needed to shoot at them. Its not me who is injecting race into it, it is you and Crimson.

And you don't see any problem with that phrase?

Just to clarify your position, when a black teenager is persistently followed and confronted by an angry, armed man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot when he punches that person. By contrast, when a black teenager doesn't turn his music down at the "request" of an angry man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot. But you're right, I'm sure race has nothing to do with those two perfectly consistent positions.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Yes.

Michael? Is that you? Sure explains a lot. They're letting you use the computer in prison, huh?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Yes. I've never said otherwise. I've only said that it could have been avoided with a little common courtesy on the part of the thugs in the van when asked to turn their music down.

And it could have been avoided with a little less bat-shit crazy from Dunn.

Out of curiosity, would it change your opinion if Dunn was disrespectful when he "asked" the kids to turn the music down?

 

[SEC Official]

This was nothing like Zimmerman... when you are being attacked, the use of deadly force is reasonable.

Getting in an argument about music and shooting into the side of a car is just reckless... nobody I know that is a law abiding gun owner would do that....

True, thugs are thugs and our society is going down hill in many areas... and hopefully they all kill each other to keep their numbers in line since they don't want help to get out.... but you can go around shooting thugs just because they are disrespectful.

 

[joshuar56]

Michael? Is that you? Sure explains a lot. They're letting you use the computer in prison, huh?

Yes, but he only has time for a couple of replys, in between the gang rapings.

 

[SEC Official]

And you don't see any problem with that phrase?

Just to clarify your position, when a black teenager is persistently followed and confronted by an angry, armed man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot when he punches that person. By contrast, when a black teenager doesn't turn his music down at the "request" of an angry man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot. But you're right, I'm sure race has nothing to do with those two perfectly consistent positions.

Sure, if a male near adulthood starts beating you, it is 100% reasonable to defend yourself with deadly force.

If Zimmerman would have NOT pulled.. and the kids knocks him unconscious and ends up killing him (either with brute force or with Zimmerman's own weapon) then everyone would have been screaming "why didn't he shoot him"

It was a no win situation. But if people want to break the law... they need to suffer the consequences.

Now, if you want to debate why GZ shouldn't have been following him .. that is a worthy debate. But if anyone near adult male size is on top of you beating you ... your life can end quickly if you lose control.

The problem is the attitude of people these days is just plain ignorant.

Example: A guy recently held up a dollar store and had the store manager down with a gun on his head threatening to shoot him. A law abiding concealed weapon permit holder pulled and shot the guy. His family go very upset along with the community because they felt like he wasn't being impacted because the gun wasn't pointed at him... and he had no right to shoot the perp...

Really? That is the kind of idiotic logic we are dealing with. It clearly says in my concealed weapon paperwork I have the right to stop a felony if someone's life is in danger. Wouldn't you expect the same if you were being held at gunpoint and threatened?

 

[Dodub]

This was nothing like Zimmerman... when you are being attacked, the use of deadly force is reasonable.

Getting in an argument about music and shooting into the side of a car is just reckless... nobody I know that is a law abiding gun owner would do that....

True, thugs are thugs and our society is going down hill in many areas... and hopefully they all kill each other to keep their numbers in line since they don't want help to get out.... but you can go around shooting thugs just because they are disrespectful.

I'm curious. What makes these kids thugs? Dunn is the real thug in this situation, unless of course thug means black.

 

[Dodub]

Sure, if a male near adulthood starts beating you, it is 100% reasonable to defend yourself with deadly force.

If Zimmerman would have NOT pulled.. and the kids knocks him unconscious and ends up killing him (either with brute force or with Zimmerman's own weapon) then everyone would have been screaming "why didn't he shoot him"

It was a no win situation. But if people want to break the law... they need to suffer the consequences.

Now, if you want to debate why GZ shouldn't have been following him .. that is a worthy debate. But if anyone near adult male size is on top of you beating you ... your life can end quickly if you lose control.

The problem is the attitude of people these days is just plain ignorant.

Example: A guy recently held up a dollar store and had the store manager down with a gun on his head threatening to shoot him. A law abiding concealed weapon permit holder pulled and shot the guy. His family go very upset along with the community because they felt like he wasn't being impacted because the gun wasn't pointed at him... and he had no right to shoot the perp...

Really? That is the kind of idiotic logic we are dealing with. It clearly says in my concealed weapon paperwork I have the right to stop a felony if someone's life is in danger. Wouldn't you expect the same if you were being held at gunpoint and threatened?

George Zimmerman is hardly a law abiding, responsible gun owner. I think that has been proven by his own behavior.

The rest of your post is your personal opinion and there is no reason to argue opinions.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Sure, if a male near adulthood starts beating you, it is 100% reasonable to defend yourself with deadly force.

If Zimmerman would have NOT pulled.. and the kids knocks him unconscious and ends up killing him (either with brute force or with Zimmerman's own weapon) then everyone would have been screaming "why didn't he shoot him"

It was a no win situation. But if people want to break the law... they need to suffer the consequences.

Now, if you want to debate why GZ shouldn't have been following him .. that is a worthy debate. But if anyone near adult male size is on top of you beating you ... your life can end quickly if you lose control.

The problem is the attitude of people these days is just plain ignorant.

Example: A guy recently held up a dollar store and had the store manager down with a gun on his head threatening to shoot him. A law abiding concealed weapon permit holder pulled and shot the guy. His family go very upset along with the community because they felt like he wasn't being impacted because the gun wasn't pointed at him... and he had no right to shoot the perp...

Really? That is the kind of idiotic logic we are dealing with. It clearly says in my concealed weapon paperwork I have the right to stop a felony if someone's life is in danger. Wouldn't you expect the same if you were being held at gunpoint and threatened?

I'm not getting into whether Zimmerman was justified in his actions or not. We've had that discussion. Toby blames Davis for what happened to him because he was rude. Toby blames Martin for what happened to him despite Zimmerman being far more than rude.

 

[TobyTyler]

And you don't see any problem with that phrase?

Just to clarify your position, when a black teenager is persistently followed and confronted by an angry, armed man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot when he punches that person. By contrast, when a black teenager doesn't turn his music down at the "request" of an angry man, he is to blame for the situation and deserves to be shot. But you're right, I'm sure race has nothing to do with those two perfectly consistent positions.

Quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard you say on this board. You haven't got a clue as to what frame of mind Zimmerman was in that night or what actually happened that night. An angry black man attacked a hispanic man and got the gun. That is the only thing we know about that night. As for anyone "deserving" to be shot. I challenge you to find the post where I said anyone deserved to be shot. I simply said, the most modest amount of common courtesy on the part of the thug in the van and he is alive today.

 

[TobyTyler]

And it could have been avoided with a little less bat-shit crazy from Dunn.

Out of curiosity, would it change your opinion if Dunn was disrespectful when he "asked" the kids to turn the music down?[/QUOTE]

Yes.

 

[TobyTyler]

Yes, but he only has time for a couple of replys, in between the gang rapings.

Please don't bring your sexual fantasies to this board. There are other boards for that.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard you say on this board. You haven't got a clue as to what frame of mind Zimmerman was in that night or what actually happened that night. An angry black man attacked a hispanic man and got the gun. That is the only thing we know about that night. As for anyone "deserving" to be shot. I challenge you to find the post where I said anyone deserved to be shot. I simply said, the most modest amount of common courtesy on the part of the thug in the van and he is alive today.

I've listened to the things he said to a 911 operator before he confronted Martin. There's absolutely no doubt he was angry.

And again, why is the kid in the car a thug? Initially you said it was because he had a shotgun, but he didn't. So what is it really? Isn't Dunn the obvious thug here? And if not, why not?

 

[TobyTyler]

I'm not getting into whether Zimmerman was justified in his actions or not. We've had that discussion. Toby blames Davis for what happened to him because he was rude. Toby blames Martin for what happened to him despite Zimmerman being far more than rude.

Martin could not control himself and attacked Zimmerman. He sufered the consequences for his actions. Dunn could not control himself when disrespected by the thug and Dunn suffered the consequences for his actions. The thug could not control himself when his boorish behavior was called on by a white man and so he suffered the consequences. Its really that simple.