She-Guevara racist white nationalist
Comments
-
You're right, confusing statement by me. Maybe it's a distinction without a difference but I don't think he just saw a black guy walking through his neighborhood and therefore suspected him of wrong doing. There were blacks that lived in that housing development. He was friendly with many of them. I think he saw someone who looked like the people who'd been ripping off the neighborhood acting strangely and that aroused his suspicion.TurdBuffer said:You have no idea if Zimmerman "profiled" anyone other than the fact that Trademark did fit the profile of the people who had been robbing the homes in that area for the previous two years.
Um, @SFGbob: You maybe wanna take another crack at that? Or stick with the "I've never shot anyone in my life. Other than that one guy" logic. Proofread much?
Profiling gets a bad name but we all profile. It's a shorthand way that our brains make sense of the world. Take for example the shooting yesterday in Maryland. When I first heard about it my brain immediately pictured the prep as a middle aged white guy or at least a male perp. I "profiled" the type of person who is usually responsible for those kind of shootings. I'm I racist against white people because when I first heard about it my initial reaction was to think it was a white male?
Is there anyone here who after hearing a story about someone who plays defensive back in college or the NFL and being told that person was in the room next door wouldn't walk into that room and suspect that athletic looking black guy was the DB before assuming that it was the athletic looking white guy?
It doesn't make you a racist just because you make assumptions that are usually accurate. If you hear about smash and grab robberies going on at Apple stores here in the Bay Area, why wouldn't you assume that the perps were black? It would be man bites dog if they were white and our brains just don't work that way. -
That's a lot of words to say you are racist.SFGbob said:
You're right, confusing statement by me. Maybe it's a distinction without a difference but I don't think he just saw a black guy walking through his neighborhood and therefore suspected him of wrong doing. There were blacks that lived in that housing development. He was friendly with many of them. I think he saw someone who looked like the people who'd been ripping off the neighborhood acting strangely and that aroused his suspicion.TurdBuffer said:You have no idea if Zimmerman "profiled" anyone other than the fact that Trademark did fit the profile of the people who had been robbing the homes in that area for the previous two years.
Um, @SFGbob: You maybe wanna take another crack at that? Or stick with the "I've never shot anyone in my life. Other than that one guy" logic. Proofread much?
Profiling gets a bad name but we all profile. It's a shorthand way that our brains make sense of the world. Take for example the shooting yesterday in Maryland. When I first heard about it my brain immediately pictured the prep as a middle aged white guy or at least a male perp. I "profiled" the type of person who is usually responsible for those kind of shootings. I'm I racist against white people because when I first heard about it my initial reaction was to think it was a white male?
Is there anyone here who after hearing a story about someone who plays defensive back in college or the NFL and being told that person was in the room next door wouldn't walk into that room and suspect that athletic looking black guy was the DB before assuming that it was the athletic looking white guy?
It doesn't make you a racist just because you make assumptions that are usually accurate. If you hear about smash and grab robberies going on at Apple stores here in the Bay Area, why wouldn't you assume that the perps were black? It would be man bites dog if they were white and our brains just don't work that way. -
-
Very few words just to say you're a pedophile Hondo.
-
Actually liked the Creepy and Turd back and forth. That was reasonable and well thought out discussion, but it is mixed in with so much AIDS it's still hard to read.
-
Lol ok!SFGbob said:Very few words just to say you're a pedophile Hondo.
-
I don't see color.SFGbob said:
You're right, confusing statement by me. Maybe it's a distinction without a difference but I don't think he just saw a black guy walking through his neighborhood and therefore suspected him of wrong doing. There were blacks that lived in that housing development. He was friendly with many of them. I think he saw someone who looked like the people who'd been ripping off the neighborhood acting strangely and that aroused his suspicion.TurdBuffer said:You have no idea if Zimmerman "profiled" anyone other than the fact that Trademark did fit the profile of the people who had been robbing the homes in that area for the previous two years.
Um, @SFGbob: You maybe wanna take another crack at that? Or stick with the "I've never shot anyone in my life. Other than that one guy" logic. Proofread much?
Profiling gets a bad name but we all profile. It's a shorthand way that our brains make sense of the world. Take for example the shooting yesterday in Maryland. When I first heard about it my brain immediately pictured the prep as a middle aged white guy or at least a male perp. I "profiled" the type of person who is usually responsible for those kind of shootings. I'm I racist against white people because when I first heard about it my initial reaction was to think it was a white male?
Is there anyone here who after hearing a story about someone who plays defensive back in college or the NFL and being told that person was in the room next door wouldn't walk into that room and suspect that athletic looking black guy was the DB before assuming that it was the athletic looking white guy?
It doesn't make you a racist just because you make assumptions that are usually accurate. If you hear about smash and grab robberies going on at Apple stores here in the Bay Area, why wouldn't you assume that the perps were black? It would be man bites dog if they were white and our brains just don't work that way. -
Fat George didn't attack or assault anyone. Fat George lived in that neighborhood and briefly followed someone who didn't live in that neighborhood. From the time Trademark took off running to the time Zimmerman hung up with the police operator Trademark could have been back at the place he was staying and torching up the weed he had just bought a blunt for. But that's not what happened. Trademark decided to get into a fight, to show the "creepy ass cracker" that he wasn't a punk.
Where was Trademark all of that time when George was talking on his phone? [Walking? Standing in one place?
Things he's allowed to do as an American citizen.] For all Zimmerman knew the police were going to be there any second. Zimmerman didn't start a fight that for all he knew was going to be witnessed by the police.
You admit that Trademark was beating George's ass. So just how much of a beating was he supposed to take? How many times would you let me smash your head into the concrete after I'd already broken your nose?
You don't know any of what I bolded. At. All. It's all conjecture based on what you hope happened so that you can justify the killing of a kid you don't approve of.
How much? I don't know. If someone fucks with your kid at school, and your kid winds up in a fight with that kid, and your kid surprisingly starts kicking that kid's ass, how much of a beating should that kid take before shooting your kid? What if that kid was following your kid around and being a shit bag and pushed him past his limits? In the wake of your kid's killing, would you be making the points you're making here? What if there were no witnesses to establish who threw the first punch, but there was plenty of evidence to suggest that the kid who shot your kid was the instigator by following him around and being an agitator for no reason? What if that kid also had a history of arrests for smacking his mom around? Would that fact that you had caught your kid with weed and that your kid had been in fights at school before be the primary considerations in dismissing fault of the shooter?
Again, you put a lot of stock in some trouble from the 17-year old's background, and you ignore entirely the piles of paper it would take to list Zimmerman's adult resume qualifications to be shit-bag of the year.
I can't remember the last time someone here not named Sledog clung on to such a loser argument so steadfastly. Well done. -
Actually, looking at the facts you can know quite a bit of it. There's no evidence that Zimmerman ever hit or struck Trademark. No marks on his hands so sign of any physical struggle with Trademark like Trademarks clothes being stretched out and pulled and no marks or bruises on Trademarks face or body.creepycoug said:Fat George didn't attack or assault anyone. Fat George lived in that neighborhood and briefly followed someone who didn't live in that neighborhood. From the time Trademark took off running to the time Zimmerman hung up with the police operator Trademark could have been back at the place he was staying and torching up the weed he had just bought a blunt for. But that's not what happened. Trademark decided to get into a fight, to show the "creepy ass cracker" that he wasn't a punk.
Where was Trademark all of that time when George was talking on his phone? [Walking? Standing in one place?
Things he's allowed to do as an American citizen.] For all Zimmerman knew the police were going to be there any second. Zimmerman didn't start a fight that for all he knew was going to be witnessed by the police.
You admit that Trademark was beating George's ass. So just how much of a beating was he supposed to take? How many times would you let me smash your head into the concrete after I'd already broken your nose?
You don't know any of what I bolded. At. All. It's all conjecture based on what you hope happened so that you can justify the killing of a kid you don't approve of.
How much? I don't know. If someone fucks with your kid at school, and your kid winds up in a fight with that kid, and your kid surprisingly starts kicking that kid's ass, how much of a beating should that kid take before shooting your kid? What if that kid was following your kid around and being a shit bag and pushed him past his limits? In the wake of your kid's killing, would you be making the points you're making here? What if there were no witnesses to establish who threw the first punch, but there was plenty of evidence to suggest that the kid who shot your kid was the instigator by following him around and being an agitator for no reason? What if that kid also had a history of arrests for smacking his mom around? Would that fact that you had caught your kid with weed and that your kid had been in fights at school before be the primary considerations in dismissing fault of the shooter?
Again, you put a lot of stock in some trouble from the 17-year old's background, and you ignore entirely the piles of paper it would take to list Zimmerman's adult resume qualifications to be shit-bag of the year.
I can't remember the last time someone here not named Sledog clung on to such a loser argument so steadfastly. Well done.
From the time Zimmerman called the police dispatcher to when the call ended was just a few minutes. Trademark was also talking on his phone with his girlfriend when he made the creepy ass cracker comment. From the time Trademark first mention he was being followed to when he ran away and Zimmerman lost sight of him was just a couple minutes. Trademark's girl friend admitted that even she believed that Trademark started the fight and that Trademark was "always fighting."
I haven't ignored anything. You're the only pulling claiming straight out of your ass about Zimmerman possibly grabbing and detaining Trademark.
The one thing we know for certain is that Trademark could have easily walked from the area where Zimmerman lost sight of him and made it safely back to his dad's girlfriends place. But for some reason he didn't do that and he confronted Zimmerman exactly like what his girlfriend thought he had done. -
No one should be surprised that someone who was living the thug life of guns, drugs and fighting ended up the way Trademark ended up.
https://cnn.com/2013/05/23/justice/florida-zimmerman-defense/index.html
