"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." - Obama. What the MSM isn't telling you.

Originally posted by rufusdrak

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by RSF77
I don't see any of those people protesting when a white guy ends up shot on the wrong side of town.

How many of those cases do we see the shooter get released without any charge or accountability? Please, list me the cases, thanks.

www.americanthinker.com...


How's this one, for your liking.

Let's have a look at this case:

We know this because in fact, such an event occurred in 2009 in Greece, N.Y., a suburb of Rochester. Roderick Scott, a black man, shot and killed an unarmed white teen, Christopher Cervini, whom he believed was burglarizing a neighbor's car, with a licensed .40 cal. handgun.

There are many similarities between the Scott-Cervini case and the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case in Florida. In both cases, there had been a spate of criminal activity in the neighborhood. In both cases, the shooters called 911 to report suspicious activity, yet chose to confront the unarmed suspects outside their residence and off their own property prior to the arrival of the police. In both cases, the shooters claimed that they felt threatened, and fired in self-defense. In both cases, local law enforcement applied relevant state law.

Read more: www.americanthinker.com...#ixzz1q4gQLwwr

But of course, we're comparing cases that were handled differently:

The Trayvon Martin case reminds me of Roderick Scott. In both cases, a man claiming to be protecting his neighborhood notifies police about an unarmed 17-year-old boy he thinks is causing trouble and minutes later shoots him dead, sparking debate about guns and self-defense.

Scott shot Christopher Cervini in 2009 in Greece on a windy and rainy night. Scott saw Cervini and his friends rifling through neighbors’ cars. He went outside with a gun as his girlfriend called police. Scott confronted Cervini and said the youth ran at him. Scott shot Cervini dead.

Police wasted no time charging Scott with murder. A grand jury knocked the charge down to manslaughter. Scott testified in his own defense. A jury acquitted him.

Scott was charged right away. No charges have been filed against George Zimmerman, the man who killed Trayvon. Scott is black and Cervini was white. Zimmerman is white and Martin was black. People think race was a factor in Martin’s killing. People thought race was a factor in charging Scott.

therochesterian.com...

Zimmerman was not held accountable, he was not charged.

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Ultimately one needs to consider each party individually.

Martin: No criminal record. Suspended from school for tardiness.

Zimmerman: Involved in two separate domestic violence incidents. Arrested in 2005 for felony battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence. Since Zimmerman's father is a retired magistrate judge, he was allowed to plea to a much lesser charge of resisting arrest without violence.

*********

Zimmerman bit off more than he could chew when he took on Martin, and once the ass whipping started the only way for him to save his own life was to kill Martin. Regardless, Zimmerman could have avoided the situation had he chosen to follow the proper protocols and allow the police to do their jobs rather than play vigilante. Zimmerman ignorance cost Martin his life, and he should be made to pay for that mistake.

Since you're throwing ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments against Zimmerman, how about we throw out the fact that Martin seemed to be a known drug dealer as evidenced by the fact that other drug users posted on his facebook wall asking for drugs in code language.
Also, where did you hear he was suspended for "tardiness"? 8 days (effectively 2 school weeks) of suspension seems to be a lot for tardiness. It must of been some major tardiness and truancy so he's not exactly the perfect little well schooled angel he's made out to be huh?

The lord understands what happened, and when its time for Zimmerman to leave this earth, he will die and go straight to hell

reply to post by LastProphet527


You took a GREAT thread and turned it into a joke with your nonsense. god will not judge this zimmerman as he was right and most importantly there is no god.

I would know.

Stop preaching on a thread like this when if anything and if there is a god he already intervened and saved the white guy!!!!

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Ultimately one needs to consider each party individually.

Martin: No criminal record. Suspended from school for tardiness.

Zimmerman: Involved in two separate domestic violence incidents. Arrested in 2005 for felony battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence. Since Zimmerman's father is a retired magistrate judge, he was allowed to plea to a much lesser charge of resisting arrest without violence.

*********

Zimmerman bit off more than he could chew when he took on Martin, and once the ass whipping started the only way for him to save his own life was to kill Martin. Regardless, Zimmerman could have avoided the situation had he chosen to follow the proper protocols and allow the police to do their jobs rather than play vigilante. Zimmerman ignorance cost Martin his life, and he should be made to pay for that mistake.

going to have to disagree. i live in a bad neighborhood (can't afford better areas). i have been jumped, held up at gun point, car/home broken into. yes let's just let police do their jobs because they prevent so much crime. if i had a gun, you better believe i would not have been jumped and put in the ER for 2 nights. if some punk ass was on top of me beating me and all i could do was pull a gun, then yeah he would be at least pistol whipped.

he should not have pursued him, but he was trying to see what was going on. if i saw somebody in my complex looking into windows i would have my eye on them for sure.

Originally posted by rufusdrak

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by rufusdrak
You're right he approached the stranger and thus broke a "RULE" of neighborhood watch, which is not a LAW

Actually I think it is against the law to harass somebody on the street, especially when you are the one with the gun and the other person is unarmed. I'm fairly certain there is a law out there that covers this.

You're wrong

No I'm not wrong. Trayvon didn't have to answer to anybody for simply walking down the street. Zimmerman decided to confront him with a gun at the ready, for no real reason other than suspicion.

Trayvon didn't have to show anybody any papers in the first place, ok? Had Zimmerman stayed put and cooperated with police, this situation would have turned out differently and he wouldn't have needed to put his face all over the media. He has himself to blame.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Zimmerman decided to confront him with a gun at the ready, for no real reason other than suspicion.

So your saying that Zimmerman moved tactically toward Trayvon with his gun out? According to the eyewitness that never happened.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


when you walk into a gated community, you don't belong there. if i was trayvon and in a gated community i would have most likely avoided confrontation by telling the person asking me what im doing here "looking for my dad who works here". but im sure he had to flex his "swag" when zimmerman confronted him

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by rufusdrak
You're right he approached the stranger and thus broke a "RULE" of neighborhood watch, which is not a LAW but simply a guideline. By LAW, Zimmerman was in full legal jurisdiction to approach Martin and question him. I can at any time of the night by law approach someone in the street and ask them a question, that is not illegal. So despite how hard you're trying to paint Zimmerman in a negative light, you have still not been able to indicate one single illegal act that Zimmerman committed.

Yes I did. I proved Negligence on his part.

And guess what? You have a legal right to free speech, you not have a legal right to follow me, detain me, or ask me anything. Zimmerman nor you, nor any other private citizen have a legal right to question anyone.

If you want to bicker over breaking "guidelines", I can throw a ton that Martin broke too. One cardinal guideline: you are not allowed to be in a fenced off gated community where you do not live. Oh but his step father lived there you said? Well then on your way back you are not allowed to LOITER and stand around looking into windows in this PRIVATE gated community, so two can play that game of "guide line" breaking.

He was a visitor. He he had a legal right to be there. Also, can you show me this guideline you speak of? I showed you the rules of neighborhood watch which proved my claim that Zimmerman was under no duty to follow. Can you show me where this guideline is you speak of, or did you just make that up?

Yet only my arguments are correct when we speak of LAW breaking because Zimmerman broke none and for all intents and purposes Martin has a history of being a law breaker and a rule breaker as evidenced by the fact that:
1. he was a known drug dealer and
2. he was on a 8 day suspension from school at the time of his death

#1. Zimmerman had no way of knowing if Martin was a known drug dealer. This is an irrelevant point when discussing Zimmerman's decision to follow Martin. This decision to follow Martin is Negligence on the art of Zimmerman. This Negligence resulted in the death of Martin. By legal definition, that is Involuntary Manslaughter and that is a crime.

#1 A. Can you show me any proof that Martin was a "known drug dealer"?

2. Weather or not Martin was suspended from school is irrelevant. Zimmerman had no knowledge of this prior to his confrontation with Martin. It has zero bearing at all in this case, unless your agenda is to cast blame on the deceased.

Nice strawman argument in your first paragraph, no one said Zimmerman was interrogating nor detaining him. You attempted to disprove me by proving that detaining is not legal, yet I never even so much as hinted that Zimmerman detained Martin so thus your straw man article gets thrown out the window to the garbage where it belongs. Nice try though.

As for the guideline, I'm assuming you're talking about private/gated communities, I can take the picture of the sign of the private community I happen to live in, which clearly states the guidelines, which clearly states you are not allowed to be in or loiter without proper ID showing you live there, how's that for proof.

Zimmerman had no way of knowing anything, only from what he can observe, and he clearly observed Martin acting suspicious, dressed suspiciously (in a hoodie concealing his face).
And as for that argument that has no bearing as you said on Zimmerman's decision but it does have bearing in court of law where it can obviously be used against Martin as an illustration of his character, the fact that he was a known drug dealer. As for your question of proof, it was posted numerous times in the thread, go back and search for it, there is a photo of Martin's facebook showing someone asking them to sell them some drugs using code slang for the drug.
2. The suspension thing once again is not relevant for Zimmerman but is relevant in the court of law because as I said it's an illustration of Martin's character. Plenty people here are ad hominem bombing Zimmerman for such and such he's done or such and such times he's called the police in 2004, etc, so don't whine when people therefore defend him by conversely calling into question Martin's checkered past.

I'm usually not one to get angry over threads, but some of you in here (especially OP) are racist. A young man got shot and killed and the incident should never have occurred. It's a neighborhood WATCH, not neighborhood SHOOT, not neighborhood CONFRONT...watch. Private citizens should not get involved with suspicious people, they should notify the police and keep to themselves.

This could have been a purple kid and an orange shooter, I don't care what colors are involved. Race is irrelevant to me, my concern is that I can be walking down the street with my hoodie on and lose my life over it...and the shooter can walk away without being arrested!!!

Originally posted by Six6Six

The lord understands what happened, and when its time for Zimmerman to leave this earth, he will die and go straight to hell

reply to post by LastProphet527

 

You took a GREAT thread and turned it into a joke with your nonsense. god will not judge this zimmerman as he was right and most importantly there is no god.

I would know.

Stop preaching on a thread like this when if anything and if there is a god he already intervened and saved the white guy!!!!

Textmost importantly there is no god.

TextI would know.

Thank God he has never, and will never, acknowledge something like you. So continue replying to the perfect thread of evil and hate.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by rufusdrak

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by rufusdrak
You're right he approached the stranger and thus broke a "RULE" of neighborhood watch, which is not a LAW

Actually I think it is against the law to harass somebody on the street, especially when you are the one with the gun and the other person is unarmed. I'm fairly certain there is a law out there that covers this.

You're wrong

No I'm not wrong. Trayvon didn't have to answer to anybody for simply walking down the street. Zimmerman decided to confront him with a gun at the ready, for no real reason other than suspicion.

Trayvon didn't have to show anybody any papers in the first place, ok? Had Zimmerman stayed put and cooperated with police, this situation would have turned out differently and he wouldn't have needed to put his face all over the media. He has himself to blame.

No where is there evidence that Zimmerman "confronted" anyone with "a gun at the ready" you're just spouting more lies as usual. You aren't even worth arguing in this thread, your postings are complete jokes. At least the other guys are sensibly defending their positions.

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Zimmerman decided to confront him with a gun at the ready, for no real reason other than suspicion.

So your saying that Zimmerman moved tactically toward Trayvon with his gun out? According to the eyewitness that never happened.

I'd care how he moved toward Trayvon, he had no reason to and he was advised to stay put and leave the situation to the real police to deal with. Trayvon wasn't armed, there was no evidence that Trayvon was breaking any laws, he was just walking through.

As for whether Zimmerman actually had his gun out? You don't have to have your gun out in order to be ready and set to use it, I know because I have one myself.

Originally posted by IamMe14
I'm usually not one to get angry over threads, but some of you in here (especially OP) are racist. A young man got shot and killed and the incident should never have occurred. It's a neighborhood WATCH, not neighborhood SHOOT, not neighborhood CONFRONT...watch. Private citizens should not get involved with suspicious people, they should notify the police and keep to themselves.

This could have been a purple kid and an orange shooter, I don't care what colors are involved. Race is irrelevant to me, my concern is that I can be walking down the street with my hoodie on and lose my life over it...and the shooter can walk away without being arrested!!!

yes we all agree this kid should not be dead but yeah we're racist because we don't jump head first into the biased media agenda

Originally posted by IamMe14
I'm usually not one to get angry over threads, but some of you in here (especially OP) are racist. A young man got shot and killed and the incident should never have occurred. It's a neighborhood WATCH, not neighborhood SHOOT, not neighborhood CONFRONT...watch. Private citizens should not get involved with suspicious people, they should notify the police and keep to themselves.

This could have been a purple kid and an orange shooter, I don't care what colors are involved. Race is irrelevant to me, my concern is that I can be walking down the street with my hoodie on and lose my life over it...and the shooter can walk away without being arrested!!!

Yes if someone walks up to you and asks you a simple question and you savagely assault them breaking their nose and lacerating their face to the point of stitches, you bet your arse that you will lose your life over it, case closed.

Ultimately one needs to consider each party individually.

Martin: No criminal record. Suspended from school for tardiness.

reply to post by ~Vixen~


You people who don't break the law or who are very naive need to understand that no presence of a criminal record does not mean NOT a criminal. It means nothing just a way for people to feel better about someone.

Bundy had no criminal record before his first kill.
BTK had no criminal record to speak of.
Most catholic priests who are caught molesting children had no prior record and are priests.



Means has not been caught yet. I personally have committed many "crimes" be they small or large and yet only been arrested once and charges dropped. My record and life reads like a perfectly upstanding member of the community. My neighbors think I am the most pleasant person they could meet and come to my house for get togethers and people come to my fund raising events not KNOWING that I have no compliance for society or any person I come across.

People and their "records" mean nothing together. They are false representations of a life that may be different and therefore can no be used as evidence of a good person.

The only thing we CAN use is the evidence from that night in question. And the latest evidence show that zimmerman may be innocent. After all, isnt America supposed to be innocent until proven guilty??????? PROVEN is the key word here

reply to post by Southern Guardian

You don't have to have your gun out in order to be ready and set to use it

So did he have a holster? or did he just have it between his pants and body? Without substantial visual evidence we will never know what really happened. Videotaped evidence.

Originally posted by Hardstepah

Originally posted by IamMe14
I'm usually not one to get angry over threads, but some of you in here (especially OP) are racist. A young man got shot and killed and the incident should never have occurred. It's a neighborhood WATCH, not neighborhood SHOOT, not neighborhood CONFRONT...watch. Private citizens should not get involved with suspicious people, they should notify the police and keep to themselves.

This could have been a purple kid and an orange shooter, I don't care what colors are involved. Race is irrelevant to me, my concern is that I can be walking down the street with my hoodie on and lose my life over it...and the shooter can walk away without being arrested!!!

yes we all agree this kid should not be dead but yeah we're racist because we don't jump head first into the biased media agenda

Yeah I guess defending an innocent man from a public lynch mob makes me a racist. Go figure.

reply to post by rufusdrak


Actually, if you go around approaching "suspicious" people all the time and asking them questions about what they are doing in "your" neighborhood...you're going to be the one who loses your life. Mind your own business.

Originally posted by rufusdrak
No where is there evidence that Zimmerman "confronted" anyone with "a gun at the ready"

Of course there's evidence. Zimmerman persued Trayvon with a loaded gun when he was specifically told by the operator not to do so, it's on the 911 recording. I don't know what your definition of confrontation is, but if I'm approached by some guy in the middle of the night with a loaded gun questioning me about why I am walking through, I definately see that as a threat.

Simple, Zimmerman could have stayed put. There was no evidence that Trayvon was committing a crime, he was just walking through, unarmed. I don't see any reason why you need to try so hard to justify zimmermans actions? He confronted and shot an unarmed kid simply because he looked out of place. You don't have to be a liberal or an anti-gun advocate to see just how wrong this turned out.

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

You don't have to have your gun out in order to be ready and set to use it

So did he have a holster? or did he just have it between his pants and body? Without substantial visual evidence we will never know what really happened. Videotaped evidence.

edit on 24-3-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)

According to that joker the confrontation played out like something out of Seal Team 6's diary. He thinks Zimmerman chased Martin with his gun out and cocked and tactically cornered him with gun drawn then opened fire without any cause at all and perforated his lifeless body.