# Students want watch leader who shot Trayvon Martin arrested



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

> ORLANDO, Florida (AP) — The case of a white neighborhood watch captain who shot an unarmed black teen last month has prompted student protests in Florida on Monday, and is garnering national attention as civil rights leaders, politicians and even the White Houseweigh in.​
> 
> But authorities may be hamstrung by a state law that allows people to defend themselves with deadly force.​
> 
> ...



Source:USAToday
http://www.usatoday....rtin/53655188/1
Another reason to hate Florida.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Another reason to hate Florida.



So we should hate Florida because their younger generation is protesting inhumanity?

Sounds cool.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Another reason to hate Florida.
> ...


No, you didn't read the article. Because Zimmerman wasn't arrested.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 20, 2012)

So the kid was minding his own business, was packin' skittles, and this white dude was in his car with a gun.
White guy gets out of car, shoots kid, and gets off on self defense.

God Bless America.

That's called murder, not self defense.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Hells Malice said:


> So the kid was minding his own business, was packin' skittles, and this white dude was in his car with a gun.
> White guy gets out of car, shoots kid, and gets off on self defense.
> 
> God Bless America.
> ...


Not according to the NRA or Florida (bought and owned by the NRA).


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No, you didn't read the article. Because Zimmerman wasn't arrested.



I read the article but unless Zimmerman was proven to have not shot out of self defense, he's "innocent until proven guilty". To be honest there's not much in the article about how it happened and what exactly happened or even if the crime was racial. A lot of it is just guesswork.

EDIT: I'm certainly not defending anyone here but I know little about what happened and I'm not gonna deem anyone a murderer or a jumpy neighborhood watch leader from the little bit I've seen.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, you didn't read the article. Because Zimmerman wasn't arrested.
> ...


It's not guesswork Zimmerman was told not to get out of his car by the police. He disobeyed got out and shot the kid, claimed self defense.


----------



## Sterling (Mar 20, 2012)

Bringing fists to a gunfight is dumb (not that he knew). Since this young man had been unarmed, use of deadly force is unneeded. If I felt threatened, I would always shoot lower. A leg wound will incapacitate a threat just as well as a bullet in the head.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> It's not guesswork Zimmerman was told not to get out of his car by the police. He disobeyed got out and shot the kid, claimed self defense.



In all honesty if I felt threatened and a cop told me to "stay in the car" when I could deal with the threat myself I'd do the latter. Of course the issue of whether this was self defense or not.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > It's not guesswork Zimmerman was told not to get out of his car by the police. He disobeyed got out and shot the kid, claimed self defense.
> ...


Then you're pretty paranoid. And you should then be arrested.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

Sterling said:


> Bringing fists to a gunfight is dumb (not that he knew). Since this young man had been unarmed, use of deadly force is unneeded. If I felt threatened, I would always shoot lower. A leg wound will incapacitate a threat just as well as a bullet in the head.


This is what you're saying now. Without proper CQC training the natural instincts dictate that you kill your enemy - it is an inner force that is hard to control. To some self-control it comes naturally, others are trigger-happy, quick to pull it when terrified and require field training to become calm and collected in health/life-threatening situations.



smile72 said:


> Then you're pretty paranoid. And you should then be arrested.


If he did it in self-defense then God bless him for shooting an attacker in the leg.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Then you're pretty paranoid. And you should then be arrested.



Well I'm saying like if I saw a guy beating up another guy or breaking into a house or something. Of course if some dude was just taking a stroll I wouldn't run out with my gun shouting "YIPPEE KAY YAY MOTHERFUCKER", but if it was like a mugging or other violent crime, I'd definitely intervene if I had the resources to do so.

Also, arresting someone purely for paranoia (note: not any actual act like a shooting or assault) is pretty authoritarian right there.




Foxi4 said:


> This is what you're saying now. Without proper CQC training the natural instincts dictate that you kill your enemy - it is an inner force that is hard to control. To some it comes naturally, others are trigger-happy, quick to pull it when terrified.



If Metal Gear Solid 3 has taught us anything, proper CQC involves hiding in tall grass and jumping them before they call their guards on the radio.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild & Foxi4 are unlearned on the topic of Racism. Any White on Black crime is a hate crime. The vice versa isn't. Theft, murder, etc. It's a hate crime. You cannot argue against it. Unless you're racist at heart.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Guild & Foxi4 are unlearned on the topic of Racism. Any White on Black crime is a hate crime. The vice versa isn't. Theft, murder, etc. It's a hate crime. You cannot argue against it. Unless you're racist at heart.



So if I shoot a black guy because he's attacking me it's a "hate crime" but if I shoot a white guy whose attacking me then it's just self defense?

Pretty sure there was a whole episode on South Park about hate crimes but I can't really recall it.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Then you're pretty paranoid. And you should then be arrested.
> ...


In this case, don't create your own scenario. It's not being arrested for being paranoid, it's being arrested for murder when you've already killed someone such as in this case.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Guild & Foxi4 are unlearned on the topic of Racism. *Any White on Black crime is a hate crime.* The *vice versa isn't.* Theft, murder, etc. It's a hate crime. You cannot argue against it. Unless you're racist at heart.


Not sure if trolololing... or serious...

Nope, trolololing.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> In this case, don't create your own scenario. It's not paranoid when you've already killed someone such as in this case.



Well if this Zimmerman guy just shot him for "looking suspicious" then he deserves a needle in the arm.

I think this whole "self defense" law in theory sounds great but in practice seems a subject of abuse.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > In this case, don't create your own scenario. It's not paranoid when you've already killed someone such as in this case.
> ...


It is, no, it's a bad idea because the NRA supports. In the past they have supported keeping legal cop killer bullets and plastic guns.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > In this case, don't create your own scenario. It's not paranoid when you've already killed someone such as in this case.
> ...


We have a pretty good fix for that - before you are allowed to "kill in self-defense" with a firearm, you're supposed to shoot two times in the air while backing away, only then you are allowed to aim at the attacker unless the situation is dire enough to validate aiming on the spot, such as "being shot at" etc. Ballistic experts can easily determine how many times the gun was shot and which bullets came first, thus it's easier to determine whether the situation validated the use of lethal force and whether the defender did everything he could to scare the attacker away.

That, and extremely taxing training, both psychological and physical before you even get a permission to own a firearm. It's quite a rarity when someone gets one of those.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Hyro-Sama said:
> 
> 
> > Guild & Foxi4 are unlearned on the topic of Racism. Any White on Black crime is a hate crime. The vice versa isn't. Theft, murder, etc. It's a hate crime. You cannot argue against it. Unless you're racist at heart.
> ...



See you're just not getting it. If you shoot a white guy then it could self defense or just plain ol' murder. You shoot a black guy period it's a hate crime. South park is an unreliable soure b/c your learning about racism from white racists. Try Key & Peele.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> It is, no, it's a bad idea because the NRA supports. In the past they have supported keeping legal cop killer bullets and plastic guns.



Well just because some jackwagons support a law doesn't mean it's bad.

If everything was judged by its fanbases then opinions would be a lot different.



Hyro-Sama said:


> See you're just not getting it. If you shoot a white guy then it could self defense or just plain ol' murder. You shoot a black guy period it's a hate crime. South park is an unreliable soure b/c your learning about racism from white racists. Try Key & Peele.



I'm assuming you're engaging in humor in which case, what's up dog.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > It is, no, it's a bad idea because the NRA supports. In the past they have supported keeping legal cop killer bullets and plastic guns.
> ...


No,when it's the NRA, it is different. When they support a law you know it's bad. But it's bad for a lot of other reasons also. Such as this case where it's impossible to disprove self defense.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


Bias. You are no longer listened to due to this one lovely generalisation. Good night.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Guild McCommunist said:
> ...


Don't care, read up on NRA, and what they support. And do you seriously think I care about what you think Foxi4?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No,when it's the NRA, it is different. When they support a law you know it's bad. But it's bad for a lot of other reasons also. Such as this case where it's impossible to disprove self defense.



You think it's bad. I do think there's a place for self defense and laws to defend yourself. It's ridiculous that if you shoot a robber attempting to kill you after discovering him robbing your house that you can be subject to penalties.

Unless you're a professional forensics investigator I'll take your "it's impossible to disprove self defense" thing to be as reliable of a statement as that of a two year olds.

If anything I think there should be more laws towards nonlethal ways of self defense.




smile72 said:


> Don't care, read up on NRA, and what they support. And like I care what you think Foxi4.



I think time and time again we've proven that more people care what Foxi thinks rather than you.

Especially when it comes to the Playstations.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 20, 2012)

Or you could look at it the other way and could be wondering why the black kid was in a white neighbourhood. Those are just teeming with racists. He was asking for it.

EDIT: Oh wait, you guys are having a serious discussion in the* Off-Topic section*? I'll just leave now. Bye.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No,when it's the NRA, it is different. When they support a law you know it's bad. But it's bad for a lot of other reasons also. Such as this case where it's impossible to disprove self defense.
> ...


No, that's how this law works, unless someone sees it, the person can claim self defense, if there are wounds. And again still don't care what Foxi4 thinks.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No, that's how this law works, unless someone sees it, the person can claim self defense, if there are wounds. And again still don't care what Foxi4 thinks.



Claiming self defense and proving it are completely different. I can "claim" self defense but if the forensics prove me wrong then that claim doesn't hold up.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, that's how this law works, unless someone sees it, the person can claim self defense, if there are wounds. And again still don't care what Foxi4 thinks.
> ...


In Florida, that's how the law works.Unless you can prove it's not self defense (if the person claims self defense) then they can't be arrested.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 20, 2012)

For what it's worth, I care what Foxi4 thinks. *Most *of the time.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I think time and time again we've proven that more people care what Foxi thinks rather than you.
> 
> Especially when it comes to the Playstations.


I lol'd. 



Hyro-Sama said:


> For what it's worth, I care what Foxi4 thinks. *Most *of the time.


I lol'd a bit more. 

As for smile's comment, saying that everyone in the NRA is an idiot is like saying that every Muslim is a terrorist (the Jihad is in the qu'ran, afterall), every Jew is good with buisness, every blackman is a potential mugger and everybody from the South of the States is a redneck. Your point is as moot as it gets - some people are in the NRA *just* to have fun with guns, they don't give two flips about what the organisation represents.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> In Florida that's how the law works.



That seems incredibly doubtful. If I walk up to a guy alone in an alley and shoot him in the head and claim self defense I seriously doubt they'd throw my case out the window and go "WELL THAT WAS AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE".

If it really is this way (and no offense, well, some offense, but I won't take your word for it that the law exactly works this way) then there's some issues with the law in general.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> > I think time and time again we've proven that more people care what Foxi thinks rather than you.
> ...


No, I didn't say they were all idiots. I said what they stand for nearly 100% of the time is bad.Please don't lie Foxi.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No, I didn't say they were all idiots. I said what they stand for nearly 100% of the time is bad.Please don't lie Foxi.


What you said was that if something is supported by the NRA then it must be stupid, it's not a long-shot to assume that you treat every NRA member as a retard. Please don't stretch the truth.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> If there is no one around and you have wounds that show self defense. They have to prove it's not self defense.



Well if I have wounds to show self defense that belong to the "victim" then it's probably self defense. If a guy keeps slugging at me and I feel my life is in danger I won't hesitate to shoot.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, I didn't say they were all idiots. I said what they stand for nearly 100% of the time is bad.Please don't lie Foxi.
> ...


Didn't say it was stupid, said it was bad. Can't stop lying huh? Quote correctly please.



Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > If there is no one around and you have wounds that show self defense. They have to prove it's not self defense.
> ...


The police told him not to leave his car. He left his car. Threatened the kid. The kid fought back. And he murdered him.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> The police told him not to leave his car. He left his car. Threatened the kid. The kid fought back. And he murdered him.



That's different then. If he just walked out of the car and pulled a gun and then threatened the kid then that's murder. If he walked out of the car, asked the kid what he was doing, and the kid attacked him, then that's self defense.

Is there any evidence to show he got out of the car and pulled the gun first? If not then it's still "innocent until proven guilty".


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> If there is no one around and you have wounds that show self defense. They have to prove it's not self defense.


If legislature is bad then it is stupid. Good, beneficial legislature is not stupid. Bad Law = Stupid Law. Would you like a shovel? You seem to be very eager to dig a bigger hole for yourself. You could be a politician, really - you're very particular about words, you cling to them as if you've never heard of synonyms.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > The police told him not to leave his car. He left his car. Threatened the kid. The kid fought back. And he murdered him.
> ...


He didn't ask the kid, pulled a gun on him. The kid had skittles and iced tea. Yes, there is, my god, you haven't read the article at all. He followed the kid.



Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > If there is no one around and you have wounds that show self defense. They have to prove it's not self defense.
> ...


Bad doesn't necessarily mean stupid. I think Chairman Mao was bad, he certainly wasn't stupid. No Foxi, it doesn't seem like you comprehend the English language. Thank you, I could be a politician, but not for the reason you point out. Good laws can be called stupid look how many people think Medicare,Medicaid or Social Security were stupid, even though they have positive results.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> He didn't ask the kid, pulled a gun on him. The kid had skittles and iced tea. Yes, there is, my god, you haven't read the article at all. He followed the kid.



I read the article, it said...

"The Florida shooting happened when Zimmerman spotted Martin as he was patrolling his neighborhood on a rainy evening last month and called police to report a suspicious person. Against the advice of the dispatcher, Zimmerman then followed Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store with a bag of Skittles in his pocket."

Never said anything about him pulling the gun first, it just says he followed him.

Also if he was really hellbent on murdering this kid I doubt he would've called the cops first. He'd be better off shooting the kid, then calling the cops and claiming self defense so he wouldn't have this whole "He went against the dispatcher" thing hanging around his neck.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/GRAPHIC-Trayvon-Martin-911-calls-released/-/1637132/9450044/-/6m827cz/-/index.html
911 tapes.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

By the way...



> _"According to several 911 calls from the neighborhood,* the two wrestled* and screams for help went out from one of the two. (...) When police came to the scene, Zimmerman dropped his weapon and told them he shot Martin in self defense."_
> 
> http://newsfeed.time...ense-or-racism/



...and just so that one thing is clear - I am not partial to either side, I just think this is a matter for police investigators to settle, not an opportunity for some online lynching.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> By the way...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We all know the police won't charge him. Hopefully the U.S. government will charge him with a hate crime. And thanks for the article it mentions that there is a controversy as some believe the Sanford Police Department are protecting Zimmerman.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> We all know the police won't charge him. Hopefully the U.S. government will charge him with a hate crime.


He is not arrested _*yet*_, this does not mean that there is no investigation in-progress. If sufficient materials are gathered to persecute him then hell yes, he will be arrested.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > We all know the police won't charge him. Hopefully the U.S. government will charge him with a hate crime.
> ...


Thanks to the law they won't arrested. The current police chief believes arresting Zimmerman would be a violation of his civil rights.And the state attorney might press charges for manslaughter, not murder. If Trayvon was white. Zimmerman's ass would have been in jail.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


Are you saying this on some kind of grounds or do you just feel like that'd be the scenario? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm pretty sure that the law in question does not specify any races involved, just the procedure.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Foxi4 said:
> ...


No,when I listened to the 911 tapes, I felt he was racist. Plus the Sanford Police Department has a terrible history with racism.




> On 16 July 2005, two parking lot security guards, one the son of a Sanford Police Department veteran and the other a volunteer for the department, shot a Black teen, Travares McGill, in the back, killing him. They claimed self-defense, and the case was dismissed in court.
> 
> In 2010, a Florida Department of Law Enforcement report noted that Sanford police Officer Christopher McClendon had misused his official position by helping a car dealer recover cars from delinquent customers in exchange for having his own car payments forgiven.
> 
> ...




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_Police_Department_(Florida)


----------



## Veho (Mar 20, 2012)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136#.T2hDONnCenA



> Another officer corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help. The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Veho said:


> http://abcnews.go.co...36#.T2hDONnCenA
> 
> 
> 
> > Another officer corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help. The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.


As I've said I believe if Trayvon was white. Zimmerman would be in jail. The Sanford Police Department is corrupt and racist.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> As I've said I believe if Trayvon was white. Zimmerman would be in jail. The Sanford Police Department is corrupt and racist.









I dunno, they did take down a whole corrupt night watch society in the town.

Oh, you said Sanford, not Sandford.

But it's good to know you know so much about a police department in an obscure town that you've never been to or even heard of until this case. You're just a fountain of knowledge.

EDIT: Also, you forget that Zimmerman is Hispanic. If the department was really racist they'd go after him just as hard.


----------



## PettingZoo (Mar 20, 2012)

what a pig

it appears there's a possibilty that there may be some form of corruption, what with that witness being corrected by the officer.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > As I've said I believe if Trayvon was white. Zimmerman would be in jail. The Sanford Police Department is corrupt and racist.
> ...


i know he's Hispanic, that's his father defense for saying he's not racist. Because Hispanics can't hate Black People.It's also not an obscure town, it's the county seat of Seminole County, it has 53,570 people and I have heard of Sanford long before this case, I have never been there but I have heard of it. Don't go throwing insults around. When you don't even know what you're talking about.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> i know he's Hispanic, that's his father defense for saying he's not racist. Because Hispanics can't hate Black People.It's also not an obscure town, it's the county seat of Seminole County, it has 53,570 people and I have heard of Sanford long before this case, I have never been there but I have heard of it. Don't go throwing insults around. When you don't even know what you're talking about.



You said the police department is racist and I was pointing out that Zimmerman was Hispanic and thus would be subject to racism. Hispanics have plenty of racial crap thrown at them. Go look at Arizona if you want a good example.

I was pointing out that you're acting like you know everything on a town you've read up on on Wikipedia and talk about their police department and their morals as though you've been subject to them. As much as I love Wikipedia it makes everyone who reads it think they're a would-be expert or scholar on the subject.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 20, 2012)

Can we let the police do their investigative work before throwing accusations that they're racist, that they're corrupt, etc.?

Those things may turn out to be true, but in the mean time, assuming and prejudging gets us nowhere.


----------



## Devin (Mar 20, 2012)

Ouch, about a hour away from where I live. ._.


----------



## Thesolcity (Mar 20, 2012)

Gotta love media, I'll stick to the police report when its released.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> i know he's Hispanic, that's his father defense for saying he's not racist. Because Hispanics can't hate Black People.It's also not an obscure town, it's the county seat of Seminole County, it has 53,570 people and I have heard of Sanford long before this case, I have never been there but I have heard of it. Don't go throwing insults around. When you don't even know what you're talking about.


I think it is safe to assume that the majority of the PD forces are white, thus, as Guild said, Zimmerman would be subjected to racism himself. He definatelly would not be "defended" by racists so your claim that the PD is bias is nullified. Your form of defense is that hispanics can hate blacks just as much as white people can. By following this line of logic, you could also put a black man on trial for a hate crime for attacking another black man. Hell, we could trial a white person for attacking another white person - I hate plenty of white people afterall. Are those hate crimes too?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > i know he's Hispanic, that's his father defense for saying he's not racist. Because Hispanics can't hate Black People.It's also not an obscure town, it's the county seat of Seminole County, it has 53,570 people and I have heard of Sanford long before this case, I have never been there but I have heard of it. Don't go throwing insults around. When you don't even know what you're talking about.
> ...


The police are protecting him though they have tried to tell witnesses, that they didn't hear Trayvon Martin screaming but Zimmerman. Of course, they can my father is himself a racist. You can hate all you  want when you act on it according to the federal government it's a crime. And here is the definition of a hate crime. You also have to prove it's a hate crime, and you can in this case. And to assume it can't be a hate crime just because a minority is involved is beyond stupid, if you had listened to the 911 calls you would understand how people see this as a hate crime.


> In crime and law, *hate crimes* (also known as *bias-motivated crimes*) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, sex, gender identity, social status or political affiliation.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime#United_States


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> > In crime and law, *hate crimes* (also known as *bias-motivated crimes*) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, sex, gender identity, social status or political affiliation.
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia....e#United_States


*sighs* You're not getting my point. At all.

Your argument is that Zimmerman is defended by a racist Police Department wheras if that was true, he himself would be subjected to persecution. Or do you not understand that?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 20, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > i know he's Hispanic, that's his father defense for saying he's not racist. Because Hispanics can't hate Black People.It's also not an obscure town, it's the county seat of Seminole County, it has 53,570 people and I have heard of Sanford long before this case, I have never been there but I have heard of it. Don't go throwing insults around. When you don't even know what you're talking about.
> ...


I know what's going on in Arizona. I think Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch.Not necessarily you can like Hispanics and all think blacks are thiefs, murders, etc. This case is an example.I have provided evidence that this police department has a terrible history with racism.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> (...)Not necessarily you can like Hispanics and all think blacks are thiefs, murders, etc. This case is an example.I have provided evidence that this police department has a terrible history with racism.


You can also like blacks and dislike hispanics on the exact same basis. How is this an argument? Are you implying that the PD works on the principles of selective racism? *sighs*

If anything, I would suspect that the PD treats Zimmerman with a degree of favourism _*because he was a watch captain*_, not because he was of hispanic origin.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 20, 2012)

smile72 said:


> I know what's going on in Arizona. I think Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch.Not necessarily you can like Hispanics and all think blacks are thiefs, murders, etc. This case is an example.I have provided evidence that this police department has a terrible history with racism.



Your typical run-of-the-mill white racists usually hate anything that's darker than a beige color. It'd seem rather odd to have an entire police department of selective white racists who are down with Hispanics but hate on black people.

It is the police's job to protect the rights of the accused and uphold "innocent until proven guilty". Maybe they heard Zimmerman shout for help and not Martin. You weren't there. They were. Currently I'll take their account over yours.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > I know what's going on in Arizona. I think Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch.Not necessarily you can like Hispanics and all think blacks are thiefs, murders, etc. This case is an example.I have provided evidence that this police department has a terrible history with racism.
> ...


No they weren't. They weren't. You clearly can't even read.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> I think Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch.



Smile72: Decries racism, has no problems displaying blatant sexism.

Classiest Poster 2012, hands down.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No they weren't. They weren't. You clearly can't even read.









I'm pretty sure they listened to the tapes, pretty sure that they've read more witness accounts then you and I'm pretty sure that they also have more evidence to support their claims, in contrast to you who have no evidence whatsoever to support yours other then a gut feeling.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Gahars said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > I think Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch.
> ...


Yes, I do. Jan Brewer is a dumb bitch. And so is Scott Walker. And so is Rick Scott. There are a lot of dumb bitches as governors.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No they weren't. They weren't. You clearly can't even read.



Rebuttal of the Year 2012.

I've been reading but you've been making no point to prove me otherwise.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

http://abcnews.go.co...36#.T2kcHsWPWft
Veho posted this article originally. Read it Guild. Before you blame the victim learn the facts.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...



That's like calling a black governor a (for the sake of the example) coon, but justifying it as "totally not racist" by calling white governors the same derogatory term.

It does not suddenly make your original comment okay. The language is still hateful and vile. It's a flimsy, obvious excuse.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

I can vouch for smile72 when he says people on this forum cannot read. Quite a few members (even some elite members) have a difficultly reading things before posting. I've experienced this myself but thatlls for another topic. BITCH NO.

@[member='smile72']: I would suggest against name dropping. It makes it worse. A lot worse.

@Gahars: Reported your racist comment. Saying that word is not  okay even in an example. K, bro?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Gahars said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Gahars said:
> ...


Not the same. Fine she's an asshole. Does that make you happy?


----------



## Gahars (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...



You resort to petty, childish name calling to discredit people you disagree with ideologically. Does that make you proud?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Gahars said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Gahars said:
> ...


Nope, but I think people who want to treat me as as second class citizen are pieces of shit. And I don't care how you view me.She's an ignorant liar, who stuck her finger in the president's face,lied about him in her book. She's the vile person.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> http://abcnews.go.co...36#.T2kcHsWPWft
> Veho posted this article originally. Read it Guild. Before you blame the victim learn the facts.



Sorry, the excerpt I read from Veho made it appear the the police corrected the woman to make her statement true, not that they denied her statement. That's my bad.

Still, the report says they got into a fistfight and that Zimmerman shooting the guy would have technically been self defense, especially if he was getting pretty harshly beat. The issue is who started the fistfight. Maybe Zimmerman approached the man, asked him what he was doing, and the fight broke out. Maybe Zimmerman jumped him. Maybe the guy noticed Zimmerman following him and started the altercation. There's too many ifs to say if Zimmerman was guilty or not.



Hyro-Sama said:


> Reported your racist comment. Saying that word is not  okay even in an example. K, bro?



No, it's completely fine for the sake of example. Using it to be offensive is not. We read Huckleberry Finn and hear the "n word" plenty of times, hell we even read the book aloud.

Also, I'm sure you weren't a big fan of In the Flesh?

[yt]v_leY_LgOuQ[/yt]

This isn't the original version (it's the re-recorded movie verison) but they're both similar.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > http://abcnews.go.co...36#.T2kcHsWPWft
> ...


No, he is guilty, he got out of his car when the police told him not to, I'm actually tired of saying this. Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman didn't get out of the car and stalk him.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

Damn. My troll failed. I'm gonna leave for a while.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...



So stooping down to what you see as their level is justified as long as you are the one doing it?

@[member='Hyro-Sama']

If you are absolutely, then I'm sorry to have offended. However, I think it's pretty clear that the intention of the post was to draw attention to the hateful language being displayed. If we cannot use and discuss such language, then how can we hope to teach the evils of racism and the need for understanding?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Gahars said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Gahars said:
> ...


No, but to just say I disagree with her is a lie. I view her as a vile and disgusting bigot.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No, he is guilty, he got out of his car when the police told him not to, I'm actually tired of saying this. Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman didn't get out of the car and stalk him.



Technically that makes him guilty of disobeying an officer (or whatever the official name is), not murder. The report also said that following Martin wasn't illegal.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

Gahars said:


> @[member='Hyro-Sama']
> 
> If you are absolutely, then I'm sorry to have offended. However, I think it's pretty clear that the intention of the post was to draw attention to the hateful language being displayed. If we cannot use and discuss such language, then how can we hope to teach the evils of racism and the need for understanding?



I understood what you meant. I was joking. Sorry. Moreover, I agree with your latter point about the necessity to use those words in order to teach the future generation to think differently.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, he is guilty, he got out of his car when the police told him not to, I'm actually tired of saying this. Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman didn't get out of the car and stalk him.
> ...


In other words, Zimmerman is guilty of disobeying a direct order while Trayvon was guilty of attacking an officer on-duty and resisting arrest/questioning and he was shot during the forementioned fight.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...



Zimmerman wasn't an officer, he was just a night watch captain, FYI. Still, disobeying orders from an officer is an offense. Like refusing to get out of your car when you're asked to for a parking ticket is illegal.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, he is guilty, he got out of his car when the police told him not to, I'm actually tired of saying this. Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman didn't get out of the car and stalk him.
> ...


It doesn't matter he violated an order and murdered Trayvon, Trayvon wasn't a thief his father lived in that gated community. Have you listened to the 911 calls? If not. These were the 911 calls the police were reluctant to release and for good reason.It shows Zimmerman to be a racist.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/GRAPHIC-Trayvon-Martin-911-calls-released/-/1637132/9450044/-/6m827cz/-/index.html


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > Guild McCommunist said:
> ...


I'm pretty sure that a night watch captain is allowed to question a person he or she deems suspicious, much like a volunteer sheriff deputy is.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 21, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> > @[member='Hyro-Sama']
> ...



I figured (hence the "if you're serious part"), and it's no problem. I just thought that providing a rationale in case someone else brought up the point. 




smile72 said:


> No, but to just say I disagree with her is a lie. I view her as a vile and disgusting bigot.



The English language is filled with strong, powerful words that you can use to express a variety of emotions (For example, "I find x's view on y deplorable. What x says is truly sickening. Etc., etc.).

Jumping to name calling isn't going to make you any better.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> It doesn't matter he violated an order and murdered Trayvon, Trayvon wasn't a thief his father lived in that gated community. Have you listened to the 911 calls? If not. These were the 911 calls the police were reluctant to release and for good reason.It shows Zimmerman to be a racist.
> http://www.clickorla...cz/-/index.html


This is probably the 100th time you mention the calls - by now everybody and their dog has the link to them. You are also too quick at saying that he murdered the kid - clearly the Police Department has a different take on the issue then you do. It is not a fact - it is your personal judgement.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> It doesn't matter he violated an order and murdered Trayvon, Trayvon wasn't a thief his father lived in that gated community. Have you listened to the 911 calls? If not. These were the 911 calls the police were reluctant to release and for good reason.It shows Zimmerman to be a racist.
> http://www.clickorla...cz/-/index.html



He violated a law but if he shot in self defense then it wasn't a premeditated murder like everyone wants to think.

You can't be arrested for being a racist. You're a scumbag if you are but the case shows that Zimmerman shot Martin in an act of self defense. Zimmerman was involved in an altercation with Martin and he shot to defend himself. He didn't just walk up to Martin and shoot him in cold blood.

Also police can be "reluctant" to release information about a case because it's, you know, about a case. The case made national headlines and having everyone's nose poke into what should be an unbiased examination of facts isn't what everyone wants. Releasing evidence to show Zimmerman being a racist is just going to make the case even harder for the people investigating it and it doesn't make the department racist, just practical.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't matter he violated an order and murdered Trayvon, Trayvon wasn't a thief his father lived in that gated community. Have you listened to the 911 calls? If not. These were the 911 calls the police were reluctant to release and for good reason.It shows Zimmerman to be a racist.
> ...


As I have shown this police department has a very shady history, so I don't care what they think. I care what the U.S. Department of Justice thinks.


----------



## Todderbert (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > If there is no one around and you have wounds that show self defense. They have to prove it's not self defense.
> ...


not a situation you would want to be in, trying to draw your firearm with the attacker on you.  also if hes adept with a knife and hes that close, having a holstered firearm is a death sentence.  The firearm in most cases just needs to be presented to the attacker or attackers and 90% of the time a shot does not need to be fired to stop the event from escalating.  Most states having mandatory training of how to carry concealed firearms and when they may be presented....if you screw up and display it without imminent danger or cause you will go to jail for a felony.   I'm for gun carry, but my goddamn my state is the only one in the Union that does not allow it.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

Todderbert said:


> not a situation you would want to be in, trying to draw your firearm with the attacker on you.  also if hes adept with a knife and hes that close, having a holstered firearm is a death sentence.  The firearm in most cases just needs to be presented to the attacker or attackers and 90% of the time a shot does not need to be fired to stop the event from escalating.  Most states having mandatory training of how to carry concealed firearms and when they may be presented....if you screw up and display it without imminent danger or cause you will go to jail for a felony.   I'm for gun carry, but my goddamn my state is the only one in the Union that does not allow it.



Um, this isn't exactly Solid Snake I'm fighting and not every mugger on the streets is a trained assassin. I'm just saying that if a guy threw a few punches at me and had no intention of stopping until I was in mortal danger, I'd have no hesitation to shoot him if pulling a gun was an adequate deterrent for him.




smile72 said:


> He didn't identify himself to Martin.



The report said that following Martin wasn't a crime. If they were wrong then a much larger authority would be jumping on this case like white on rice (side note: NOT BEING RACIST TOWARDS CAUCASIANS OR THE ASIAN POPULATION).


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> As I have shown this police department has a very shady history, so I don't care what they think. I care what the U.S. Department of Justice thinks.


Not you - Wikipedia. If you're so eager to know what's their take then sit tight and wait for their opinion.


> He didn't identify himself to Martin.


And there I thought there were no eye witnesses? Just people who "heard the shot and the cries"?


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Todderbert said:
> 
> 
> > not a situation you would want to be in, trying to draw your firearm with the attacker on you.  also if hes adept with a knife and hes that close, having a holstered firearm is a death sentence.  The firearm in most cases just needs to be presented to the attacker or attackers and 90% of the time a shot does not need to be fired to stop the event from escalating.  Most states having mandatory training of how to carry concealed firearms and when they may be presented....if you screw up and display it without imminent danger or cause you will go to jail for a felony.   I'm for gun carry, but my goddamn my state is the only one in the Union that does not allow it.
> ...


But that wasn't the case.They were hence the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating this case as a hate crime. And the mayor of the town has asked them to also investigate the police department.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> There weren't there were witnesses who heard what happened hence the 911 calls. It features Trayvon screaming help.


People immediatelly hear when other people scream and cry for help, they never seem to hear when others identify themselves though... hum... Maybe because it's not _something you would really notice or something that is out of the ordinary?_


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > There weren't there were witnesses who heard what happened hence the 911 calls. It features Trayvon screaming help.
> ...


It's on the 911 call you can hear it Foxi. Why don't you listen to it? Before writing how about you do some research. Instead of just spamming to increase your post count.


----------



## Todderbert (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Todderbert said:
> 
> 
> > not a situation you would want to be in, trying to draw your firearm with the attacker on you.  also if hes adept with a knife and hes that close, having a holstered firearm is a death sentence.  The firearm in most cases just needs to be presented to the attacker or attackers and 90% of the time a shot does not need to be fired to stop the event from escalating.  Most states having mandatory training of how to carry concealed firearms and when they may be presented....if you screw up and display it without imminent danger or cause you will go to jail for a felony.   I'm for gun carry, but my goddamn my state is the only one in the Union that does not allow it.
> ...


unfortunately it is a reality, a lot of muggers/criminals carry knifes and know how to use them, and many murders are committed with them.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


LOL, pleasant accusation on your part. Excuse me, you have not convinced me to your cause with your share of evidence, I think I'll pass this thread until someone who actually is qualified to judge such cases will state an opinion. Preferably the formentioned Justice department.


----------



## gamefan5 (Mar 21, 2012)

Most amusing thread ever. People bashing comments at each other. Been so long since I've seen that. 
On topic though, I would prefer to let the police handle and make assumptions later because I fear this thread may get out of control.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> I think I'll pass this thread until someone who actually is qualified to judge such cases will state an opinion. Preferably the formentioned Justice department.



Well it is a smile72 thread, it wouldn't be complete without him passing judgment on issues he's a Wikipedia scholar in and then bashing everyone who isn't him.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > I think I'll pass this thread until someone who actually is qualified to judge such cases will state an opinion. Preferably the formentioned Justice department.
> ...


Or could it be that neither of you have provided any evidence to prove your points?


----------



## 431unknown (Mar 21, 2012)

For some reason this whole thread reminds me of that Married With Children episode where Al beat up the guy robing his shitty hovel of a home and ended up getting sued by the guy and then turned around and counter sued the robber for injuring his own hands on his face.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Or could it be that neither of you have provided any evidence to prove your points?



I have, you just shook your head and said "no, they're racists!" and denied the my logic because it's not your logic.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Or could it be that neither of you have provided any evidence to prove your points?
> ...


No, it's that this police department does have a history of racism.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> No, it's that this police department does have a history of racism.



But to say that they're completely wrong in this case when there is evidence supporting the theory that Zimmerman was attacked is to be biased. Maybe it's a shitty department but facts are facts, and the facts appear that Zimmerman was involved in a physical altercation with Martin and Zimmerman used the gun to end this altercation. That's self defense, and self defense is (and should be) a legal defense when it is indeed self defense.

EDIT: And if the Justice Department rules self defense, what then? Are they all racists? Are they wrong? They're the law of the land. I'm sure you'll dig up what you can to disprove them. You're just so concrete on thinking that you're right that any logic presented to you gets thrown out the window before proper review.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > No, it's that this police department does have a history of racism.
> ...


But they're probably not going to. They'll probably end up charging him with a hate crime. You act as if Trayvon is some thug who wanted to steal and fight. He stalked Trayvon, he didn't identify himself, he killed him, these are the facts.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> But they're probably not going to. They'll probably end up charging him with a hate crime. You act as if Trayvon is some thug who wanted to steal and fight. He stalked Trayvon, he didn't identify himself, he killed him, these are the facts.



I'm certainly not saying Trayvon is a "thug", that's a complete stab in the dark and a complete miss at that. Maybe Trayvon was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, but sometimes we're not the best people at these places and times. Sometimes we act irrationally. Zimmerman was suspicious, and in all honesty, it could be that way. I mean seeing some hooded guy in the dark, while raining is relatively sketchy. I can't tell the rest of the circumstances but that's what appears to have happened basically. Zimmerman maybe followed him to see if he was up to no good. I doubt he was like a goddamn Predator stalking Arnold Schwarzenegger, he was probably just following him. Maybe Trayvon noticed this and reacted violently. Zimmerman then defended himself with his gun.

There's a lot of "probablys" and "maybes", to the point that "simplifying" the facts as you have done certainly does the case no justice. It's like summarizing the plot of Saving Private Ryan (I'm on my second reference of this movie today so don't be ruining my groove) as guys going into enemy territory to save some Private Ryan guy. That's basically what happened but so much else happens along the way that it does no justice to the story to tell my summary.

You're assuming way too may. Maybe I am too but there's certainly no grounds to say your side of the story is right and mine is wrong when you're using equal amounts of imaginative putty to fill in the gaps. In your telling Zimmerman just walked out of his car slinging racial slurs like the Grand Dragon himself and then shot Martin. My side shows Zimmerman as perhaps slightly paranoid and Martin attacking him without properly confronting him. Zimmerman certainly isn't innocent but to mark this crime as a cold blooded murder is a lot of assumptions. And when you assume it makes an ass out of you and me.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 21, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> > Hyro-Sama said:
> ...



Hold on a tick, Trey and Matt are definitely not racists of any sort towards anything. They make fun of everything. It doesn't matter if you're black, white, brown, yellow, hindu, christian, handicapped or anything, they make fun of it. It's called laughter and joking, and I like what they do as I believe that the best way to forget about any sort of racism, is to laugh at it. If you're going to pick a show from Comedy Central and say it's racist, please, Daniel Tosh steals that cake, but even then, his are jokes too.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


Whole America has a history of racism so it is safe to assume that all Americans are racists. Germany has a history of Nazism so all Germans are obviously racist. I know I was supposed to bail but I simply cannot stop myself when you prepare such obvious traps for yourself and just wait till someone pushes you into them.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Hold on a tick, Trey and Matt are definitely not racists of any sort towards anything. They make fun of everything. It doesn't matter if you're black, white, brown, yellow, hindu, christian, handicapped or anything, they make fun of it. It's called laughter and joking, and I like what they do as I believe that the best way to forget about any sort of racism, is to laugh at it. If you're going to pick a show from Comedy Central and say it's racist, please, Daniel Tosh steals that cake, but even then, his are jokes too.



...And in all honesty South Park is, at times, a rather well done satire of many issues that display the issues in a rather frank light. I remember the hate crimes episode involving Token Black's father disliking the hate crimes laws for promoting inequality. Basically when two white guys murder each other it's considered murder and there's punishment, but when a white guy murders a black guy it's considered a murder AND a hate crime and it's not equal punishment. The episode was of course a lot more comedic than that but it does shed light on a side of the issue that makes total sense that you'd normally not think of.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Hyro-Sama said:
> 
> 
> > Guild McCommunist said:
> ...



You take me way too seriously. bro. Chill. It's the *Off-Topic* section. This isn't a legitimate discussion.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > But they're probably not going to. They'll probably end up charging him with a hate crime. You act as if Trayvon is some thug who wanted to steal and fight. He stalked Trayvon, he didn't identify himself, he killed him, these are the facts.
> ...


I just believe Zimmerman is a paranoid cold blooded murderer (he has made 46 calls to the police sing July 2011).I believe he should have been arrested Zimmerman approached Trayvon. He didn't identify himself, if he had, this never would have happened.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

@[member='Hyro-Sama']
Liked for truth, lol. It doesn't even appear to be a discussion at all, this appears to be the official "smile says something and everybody disagrees with him" thread.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> This police department has a recent history of racism, again you choose to spam to increase your post count. Please stop spamming Foxi.



How come Foxi gets accused of trying to raise his post count but Mr. 10,000+ posts-in-almost-the-same-time over here doesn't? NOW THAT'S RACISM POSTISM.

Also you're not really disproving my point, you're just restating your opinion and restating facts that I already discussed, took into account, and offered reasons why they can be considered invalid. You're becoming a bit of a broken record.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

@[member='smile72']: Again, this is teh *Off-Topic* section. Your post count does not increase. Furthermore, go watch "The Wire". It might help you some.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > This police department has a recent history of racism, again you choose to spam to increase your post count. Please stop spamming Foxi.
> ...


But those are the facts. The difference is Foxi is posting useless garbage when he knows I'm not calling all of Sanford racist but the police department and he knows that I meant the racism was recent. But the facts aren't invalid because they're facts. And they help me show why the U.S. Justice Department will probably charge him with a hate crime.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 21, 2012)

Hyro-Sama said:


> @[member='smile72']: Again, this is teh *Off-Topic* section. Your post count does not increase. Furthermore, go watch "The Wire". It might help you some.



What. Pretty sure it's only EoF and intro that doesn't boost postcount.
EDIT: Yep. My postcount increased.

you're thinking of EoF, brah.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> But those are the facts. The difference is Foxi is posting useless garbage when he knows I'm not calling all of Sanford racist but the police department and he knows that I meant the racism was recent. But the facts aren't invalid because they're facts. And they help me show why the U.S. Justice Department will probably charge him with a hate crime.



That's _your_ interpretation of the facts. The facts that Zimmerman got out of his car against police orders, followed Martin, got into a physical altercation, and shot Martin are the facts. But you're putting a twist on these facts to make it sound like Zimmerman got out of the car with the intent of killing Martin (which seems highly improbable all things considered) instead of one thing leading to another and Zimmerman pulling the gun to end a fight which may have been started by him or Martin, who knew.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

The brutal truth here is that smile frowns upon people who disagree with him. Anyone who thinks in different categories is clearly a troll or a spammer, anyone who disagrees with the one and only true opinion is obviously wrong, anyone who draws different conclusions is stupid and finally, if you repeat something a hundred times, it is likely that it will become fact. I have a distinct feeling that I am not welcome here, I feel discriminated againts and I will consider reporting that to the GBATemp's Department of Justice. I am a victim of a Hate Crime.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > But those are the facts. The difference is Foxi is posting useless garbage when he knows I'm not calling all of Sanford racist but the police department and he knows that I meant the racism was recent. But the facts aren't invalid because they're facts. And they help me show why the U.S. Justice Department will probably charge him with a hate crime.
> ...


Oh no I know that he got out against police orders, I do believe that he had the intent of killing Trayvon (though I know it's my opinion). I believe the fight was started by a racist wannabee cop who didn't identify himself.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 21, 2012)

It's not useless, it is entirely valid. It's called "showing a similar statement to underline the nonsense of a claim in question".


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 21, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Oh no I know that he got out against police orders, I do believe that he had the intent of killing Trayvon (though I know it's my opinion). I believe the fight was started by a racist wannabee cop who didn't identify himself.



Well that's a lot of spin on the issue. I suggest we both wait for the Justice Department ruling in that case.

Although I do think it's odd that anyone who had the intention of killing someone would call the cops beforehand. Or getting into a physical fight that could have easily ended with Zimmerman getting the shit kicked out of him to the extent that he wouldn't even be able to use his gun. His story has too many holes of logic to think this was a murder. At most it sounds like a case of racial profiling gone wrong.



> The difference between you and Guild is that Guild is actually debating about the crime that happened in Sanford, *Florida.*Not spamming these useless posts.



Well fuck I thought we were talking about the Sandford police department and their eventual fight against the corrupt night watch society and the devilish Timothy Dalton.


----------



## smile72 (Mar 21, 2012)

Guild McCommunist said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh no I know that he got out against police orders, I do believe that he had the intent of killing Trayvon (though I know it's my opinion). I believe the fight was started by a racist wannabee cop who didn't identify himself.
> ...


Damn Guild you made me thought I misspelled.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Mar 21, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxh1DE5PQM0&feature=g-vrec&context=G28571d3RVAAAAAAAAAw


----------



## Sterling (Mar 21, 2012)

Since I've already put my two cents in, I've only got a couple more things to say. It would be relevant to the discussion, but seeing as Guild, and Foxi have already covered all bases and scored a homerun I see no need to continue what seems to be a rapidly degrading "discussion". To the point, I don't always agree with these guys, but what they've said and continue saying make much more sense than what you're saying smile.

The facts are there, the conclusions we can solidly draw upon are few until a solid ruling is delivered.


----------



## Veho (Mar 21, 2012)

Usually a "self defence" plea is a defence in court, not grounds for immediate release with no questions asked. 

Just saying. 


The sooner the entire world is positively _shingled _with cameras, the better.


----------

