Trayvon Martin: Cellphone pics of guns and drugs

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
I tell ya, men just aren't men anymore...

Did you stick your chest out and thump it a bit when you said that? Comical.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

If your dumb enough to put yourself into said situation...then you better know how to defend yourself. Hell learn to defend yourself anyways....you never know when you might need it.

Not saying that his actions were not dumb, but being dumb is neither illegal or justifies an assault.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

So if you are blindsided and having your head beat into the ground you should just take the potentially crippling assault? That's just stupid.

edit on 31-5-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-5-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

George wasn't blindsided. He was actually given a clear warning of TM's approach, or so he claims. George wasn't supposed to be drunk or mentally debilitated in some other way that would explain why he was unable to retreat from Trayvon towards the safety of his truck, but we are expected to believe that he allowed Trayvon to march right up to him and punch his face before he could even react? Absolute hogwash.

ANd his injuries came from where? Were they a product of magic?

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Not saying that his actions were not dumb, but being dumb is neither illegal or justifies an assault.

Being dumb doesn't justify murder either.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Not saying that his actions were not dumb, but being dumb is neither illegal or justifies an assault.

Being dumb doesn't justify murder either.

No but getting your head beat into the pavement does justify self defense.

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by jheherrin

 

LOL, and we can trust the CHIEF witness for the prosecuter, which is where you are getting your information?? The same chief witness who lied under oath and has a buttload of credibility issues?

What are you talking about?

What did I say that is not confirmed to be true?

What are YOU talking about? I quoted your message. Everything you stated there mainly came from the prosecuter's CHIEF WITNESS, who lied under oath. Do I need to give you google links as well?? You are the one parroting stuff you've read elsewhere. Not my problem if you can't be bothered to look into any further than some crappy article on CNN. Deny ignorance!

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Baddguy

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Baddguy

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

You clearly have no idea as to the use of force allowed during confrontations.

Anyone can confront anyone else.
If I confront you, because I think you are going to commit a crime, not showing a firearm and you attack, there is no problem with me shooting you. Regardless of what your intentions were/are.

you have a coward mindset...regardless of what the intentions were/are...there is no problem shooting...an unarmed person????????

and i never said i havent been beaten...i said ive never called for help even if i was jumped by multiple people

edit on 31-5-2013 by Baddguy because: (no reason given)

You are being disingenuous. You make it sound like he executed an unarmed man who wa just standing there. He was getting his head beaten into the pavement...something any reasonable person could articulate was a life threatening situation. What justification is there for physically assaulting someone who is following you on a public street?

he got his head beat in for aggressively stalking! what the HEOW man!!!!!!! your being disingenuous!!!!
stop acting like TM just ran up on a suspicious GZ and started beating on him

He did. You ahve failed to answer the question. Where is it reasonable or legal to physically assault someone for following you on a public street?

legal?? no place...reasonable..this case....TM should have knocked GZ out cold and he would still be alive

but my main point is GZ is a coward/wife beater, whos stupidity and cowardice got him into this situation and people with cowardice mindsets are defending him with "TM is a thug who smokes pot and got expelled"

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Where is it reasonable or legal to physically assault someone for following you on a public street?

That's what the 'talking heads' on tv are continually bringing up.
Just Zimmerman being 'stupid' and following someone isn't illegal.
Even though his actions caused the situation, it isn't illegal.
The only thing illegal was the actual lethal event.
If Martin jumped Zimmerman, even though Zimmerman was following him, it would mean
Martin was the perp.

That's why I'm thinking that they'll go with a Manslaughter conviction.
(and I have no idea if it's the right thing or not).
Manslaughter .... like in car accidents when people die and it's not intended ....
Because Zimmermans following Martin set the events in motion that ended
with a death ... even if the death was Martins fault because he jumped Zimmerman.
(I'm not saying Martin did ... I'm saying 'IF' he did)

Originally posted by Baddguy

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Baddguy

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Baddguy

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

You clearly have no idea as to the use of force allowed during confrontations.

Anyone can confront anyone else.
If I confront you, because I think you are going to commit a crime, not showing a firearm and you attack, there is no problem with me shooting you. Regardless of what your intentions were/are.

you have a coward mindset...regardless of what the intentions were/are...there is no problem shooting...an unarmed person????????

and i never said i havent been beaten...i said ive never called for help even if i was jumped by multiple people

edit on 31-5-2013 by Baddguy because: (no reason given)

You are being disingenuous. You make it sound like he executed an unarmed man who wa just standing there. He was getting his head beaten into the pavement...something any reasonable person could articulate was a life threatening situation. What justification is there for physically assaulting someone who is following you on a public street?

he got his head beat in for aggressively stalking! what the HEOW man!!!!!!! your being disingenuous!!!!
stop acting like TM just ran up on a suspicious GZ and started beating on him

He did. You ahve failed to answer the question. Where is it reasonable or legal to physically assault someone for following you on a public street?

legal?? no place...reasonable..this case....TM should have knocked GZ out cold and he would still be alive

but my main point is GZ is a coward/wife beater, whos stupidity and cowardice got him into this situation and people with cowardice mindsets are defending him with "TM is a thug who smokes pot and got expelled"

You really have a warped sense of manhood and courage...honestly, you sound like a 13 year old boy. When is it ever reasonable to attack someone who is following you on a public street? That is a violent, immature, thuggish mindset. You don't beat up Jehovah's Witnesses do you?

Originally posted by NavyDoc

ANd his injuries came from where? Were they a product of magic?

They came as a result of some kind of scuffle, but they certainly aren't indicative of a severe beating, which is what George claims he was getting. If Z's ground defence was really as crap as he is making out, Trayvon would have pummelled his face to a literal pulp, if he was capable of putting a 30lb heavier man on his ass with one punch, even when the 30lb heavier man could see it coming.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Not saying that his actions were not dumb, but being dumb is neither illegal or justifies an assault.

Being dumb to the point of putting events in motion that cause a death isn't illegal.
Martin wasn't cornered .... he could have left. He chose not to. (if reports are correct)
So perhaps this is a case of dumb meets dumb ... with a gun in the middle??

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

ANd his injuries came from where? Were they a product of magic?

They came as a result of some kind of scuffle, but they certainly aren't indicative of a severe beating, which is what George claims he was getting. If Z's ground defence was really as crap as he is making out, Trayvon would have pummelled his face to a literal pulp, if he was capable of putting a 30lb heavier man on his ass with one punch, even when the 30lb heavier man could see it coming.

He had injuries on the back of his head that are consistent with the testimony of having his head hammered into the pavement in addition to the broken nose. Just as you say, the evidence is consistent with TM initiating the physical assault.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Not saying that his actions were not dumb, but being dumb is neither illegal or justifies an assault.

Being dumb to the point of putting events in motion that cause a death isn't illegal.
Martin wasn't cornered .... he could have left. He chose not to. (if reports are correct)
So perhaps this is a case of dumb meets dumb ... with a gun in the middle??

Perhaps...I give you that. TM knew he was followed. He had a phone. Did he go to his dad's girlfriend's house and lock the door? Nope. Did he call the police? Nope...he called his girlfriend. Did he run away form the fat older guy? Nope. He came back to have a fight and this action is quite consistent with his past.

Originally posted by Baddguy
but my main point is GZ is a coward/wife beater, whos stupidity and cowardice got him into this situation and people with cowardice mindsets are defending him with "TM is a thug who smokes pot and got expelled"

Funny.

You are complaining about people saying Martin is a thug/druggie.
But you turn around and do the same thing ... with Zimmerman.

Either Martin being a thug/druggie who skipped school matters the same as Zimmermans being a wife beater ... or neither matters. Ya'll have to pick one or the other ... either this stuff matters FOR BOTH .. or it doesn't matter FOR BOTH. Equally.

My thoughts at this point .. they both probably had serious issues ...
I'm looking forward to the info that will come out in the trial.

Originally posted by Tribunal

What if Zimmerman followed you and grabbed you?

Now were are getting detailed.
If grabbed, I shot.
If confronted, I don't shot.
It all depends on the situation.

Originally posted by Tribunal
All we know for sure is that Zimmerman was agitated and focused on Martin. We know that he was chasing him.

I was chased down the other day for leaving a bag of groceries behind. Doesn't constitute use of force.

Originally posted by Tribunal

Martin called his girlfriend saying he is scared because he is being followed.

Well, that was dumb. 911 has a better ability to help.

Originally posted by Tribunal
The next thing we know is someone is caling for help and pleading for his life, and then a gunshot.

And still no ID on who said it.

Originally posted by Tribunal
Zimmerman can say that Martin attacked him but there are no witnesses to confirm this.

And that means what?

Originally posted by Tribunal
If a strange man followed me around at night and maybe tried to stop me, I would fight too. If during the fight I discovered a gun I would try to take it away.

So, if a strange person followed you, you would fight as they handed you your dropped wallet??

Originally posted by Tribunal
The point is you can't trust the shooters story and everything points to him being the aggressor.

Aggressor how? Following or confrontation is not against the law, nor is it a defense for attacking someone.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
OK, this explains it and I can understand your view point better. You are excused as well as the elderly and fragile of health.

While not being as quite "elderly" as FF do mind drawing in your condescension? It's very unbecoming. Actually there's been far too many personal attacks here. Don't make me alert the Mod Squad.

Omg, the comment was perfectly acceptable in the light of their ongoing conversation. The one poster jokingly questioned her manhood to which she responded that she is a woman. He then excused her. I found it pretty funny.

Your comment however is in fact offensive.

No rule was broken in any way, shape or form.

Yet you threaten with the "Mod Squad" over a perceived insult? What TandC rule was broken?

"Mod Squad"

"A group of superinflated zeros and their immense egos"

reply to post by Baddguy


So, I am supposed to get into a fight with someone???
You may have labeled me a coward, but you are about the dumbest person I have come across.

You can go home bloodied or what ever you want, and save your macho bravado. I will go home at the end of it.


My life is worth more then the other persons.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

ANd his injuries came from where? Were they a product of magic?

They came as a result of some kind of scuffle, but they certainly aren't indicative of a severe beating, which is what George claims he was getting. If Z's ground defence was really as crap as he is making out, Trayvon would have pummelled his face to a literal pulp, if he was capable of putting a 30lb heavier man on his ass with one punch, even when the 30lb heavier man could see it coming.

He had injuries on the back of his head that are consistent with the testimony of having his head hammered into the pavement in addition to the broken nose. Just as you say, the evidence is consistent with TM initiating the physical assault.

If George had merely claimed TM "tried" to slam his head against the sidewalk, they'd be marginally consistent, but he claims his head was actually SLAMMED, not pressed forcefully, against a concrete surface. Does George have a particularly bump-resistant head?

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by macman

 

Man..what is it with ATS posters and the avatars..This is like the 10th time someone brought it up.

I searched avatars and like this one..no deep thought into it..just looked good at the moment..it does not represent anything to me..

What does stating facts have to do with being an internet tough guy...

If something I said made me look like a tough guy to you...then ooops...no need to worry..I am not going kick you internet butt...

edit on 31-5-2013 by kerazeesicko because: I CAN

Yeah, no tough guy at all. Maybe go back and re-read your posts then.


I am sure that you would do the same being in some of the situations I can explain.

reply to post by macman


You misundertood the point of my post.

You are arguiing from the belief that M attacked Z, which is based on Z's own words, which are not confirmed by witnesses.

What I am saying is, that based on the things we do know, it seems more likely that Z confronted and maybe touched M, than the other way around.