"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.
Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.
Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.
Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.
If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
@Pawz: That myth has been disproven so many times I can't believe you're making that argument here in 2018. Poverty does not cause crime. Correlation is not Causation. Stop.
Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.
Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.
Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.
Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.
If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
@Pawz: That myth has been disproven so many times I can't believe you're making that argument here in 2018. Poverty does not cause crime. Correlation is not Causation. Stop.
Disagree. Poverty is an evil that begets more evil. The 20th century alone is littered with examples of this on a massive scale: communism, Nazi Germany. As well as every day crimes that probably would not occur if poverty were eliminated, which is impossible, until we develop Star Trek like technology. Replicators, laser beams and shit.
"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Wow, if only the prosecution would have called you. You seem to know all about the facts of the case that the state wasn't able to uncover. 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. In fact, Trademark profiled Zimmerman when he told his girl friend that Zimmerman looked like a "Creepy ass Cracker."
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Wow, if only the prosecution would have called you. You seem to know all about the facts of the case that the state wasn't able to uncover. 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. In fact, Trademark profiled Zimmerman when he told his girl friend that Zimmerman looked like a "Creepy ass Cracker."
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
Killing someone cause you got your ass beat is not equal retribution.
And respond about this explosion of crime rate deal you are talking about.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.
Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.
Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.
Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.
If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
If poverty were the cause of crime why didn't you have more crime when the poverty rate was much higher? Why did you have an explosion of the crime rate during periods when the poverty rate was falling?
Explosion of crime rates? Please to be explaining.
Poverty rate fell all through out the 1960s and early 1970s. Crime rate exploded during that time period. What did increase during that time was the rate of out of wedlock births.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
I asked for the stats to back it up.
And I asked you what would qualify as an explosion. I've seen your Kunt act enough times already Hondo. Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an explosion? Yes or no?
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
I asked for the stats to back it up.
And I asked you what would qualify as an explosion. I've seen your Kunt act enough times already Hondo. Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an explosion? Yes or no?
Present your stats. Support your argument.
And there's a lot more to crime stats when you are talking in relation to poverty than just the murder rate.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
I asked for the stats to back it up.
And I asked you what would qualify as an explosion. I've seen your Kunt act enough times already Hondo. Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an explosion? Yes or no?
Present your stats. Support your argument.
And there's a lot more to crime stats when you are talking in relation to poverty than just the murder rate.
Hondo I've seen your Kunt act enough around here. I post stats that show a doubling in murder, robbery, rape, and you then engage in a semantics based Kunt act over the word "explosion."
Give me the number in the increase that would make it okay to call it an "explosion?"
Btw, the level of your ignorance is really something. Anyone with just a cursory knowledge of American post war society and what happened to the crime rates in this country through-out the 60s, 70s and 80s would have no problem describing it as an "explosion" in crime. Amazing how poorly informed you are.
Nowhere in my post is any kind of apology for Sharpton being anything less than a charlatan. I'd have him over for dinner b4 David Duke any day though. I would never equate those two as analogs.
Yeah you just ran interference for the fact that Obama hired the piece of shit to lead his get out the vote effort by you didn't "apologize" for Sharpton and since you appear to be one of those precise language Kunt's quote where I said you apologized Coug?
I didn't say you said I apologized for anything; that's my word, used in response to your allegation of white washing. Call it interference if you wish. I see it as no different than Bannon's advice, taken to heart and implemented by Trump, of invoking the religious loons on the right. They both have inconvenient friends. That was the point. Obama has about as much in actual common with Farrakahn and Sharpton as Trump does with Jerry Falwell. In any event, I'm not carrying the torch for the dysfunction in American politics. You can argue that with someone else.
As to comparing you to the 'racism is over crowd', how so? That wasn't the point at all. The point was even that crowd, who don't believe racism is really an issue anymore, acknowledge that the past has loaded meaning, so, you know, an effigy of a black guy swinging from a tree is a little different than a effigy of Trump that pokes fun of his weight and his comb over.
There were no eye witnesses to the start of the struggle. A few people saw the thing in mid-fight, conflicting testimony was offered as to who they heard screaming, and some people saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Testimony was inconsistent about whether he was bashing his head into the sidewalk. None of that means he attacked him. Sure, all you had to do was look at Zimmerman to know he got his ass kicked. But if someone approaches you threateningly, or even grabs hold of you, or starts a fight with you, and you wind up kicking his ass, and he shoots you, you score that as self-defense because you attacked him? Really? The taped 911 call is at least a strong hint that he (1) thought Martin was up to no good (he was not, at least that night, which is all that matters), and (2) he was frustrated that the kid might get away. "Fucking punks ... these assholes always get away." All that transpired, transpired, and the story becomes that Martin, who Zimmerman was following, lurked out of the darkness and 'sucker punched him.' Nobody saw that. What everyone does know is that Zimmerman started following a kid he thought was doing something wrong, who wasn't doing anything wrong.
Like I said, Martin was no saint, but I grew up with a lot of people whose profiles weren't much better than his, and some worse. They're normal people now. If, sincerely, none of that even gives you pause, coupled with the fact that a 17-year old kid who had a lot of time to get his life going in a better direction got whacked on a night he was walking and minding his own business, then we are different kinds of people and likely will not reach any kind of consensus on pretty much anything. I don't believe that you actually see it that simply, and that instead we are doing the HCH crazy dance.
Unless Bannon has a body count that I'm unaware of, or you have some evidence that Bannon participated in a racist smear job that he knew wasn't true, comparing Bannon to Sharpton is like comparing apples to dog-shit. You missed the point.
Your claims about Zimmerman grabbing and holding Trademark are pulled straight out of your ass. I 'claimed' no such thing. You, not me, are the one doing all the claiming over a salient point neither you, nor I, nor anyone else other than Zimmerman knows, and thus are the only one reaching in ass.
And the cuts to the back of Zimmerman's head as well as the dampness of his jacket coupled with the only credible eyewitness testimony provides pretty clear evidence that Trademark was smashing Zimmerman's head against something. That has been discussed. That Zimmerman, in one way or the other, wound up with his ass kicked is not in dispute. Embarrassingly for him, the 168 lb. kid who'd been minding his own business up to that point was too much for the cop-wannabe.
Other than the bullet through his chest there was zero evidence that Zimmerman ever hit or struck Trademark. Right, because he was a pussy. What we don't know is why they wound up in that situation in the first place, but what we do know is that Zimmerman, who is not a professionally trained anything, profiled and stalked him, and was, at best, agitated with his presence.
Zimmerman had no marks on his hands. Trademark had cut knuckles. Again, that's because Zimmerman got his ass kicked by a kid he was stalking.
You may not like what Zimmerman did but he was perfectly in his right to do so and had violated no laws with his actions. That depends on the circumstances. It all depends on Zimmerman's entire role in the altercation, not just the obvious conclusion that he can't fight. Also you have no idea if Trademark was up do no good. No, nor do I have any idea if you're a serial killer or not. And?
The fact that he doubled back and attacked someone when he was just feet away from the unit where he was staying tells me he wasn't up to any good. You don't know if he doubled back. You keep talking about this as if you were there. You were not. All we know is (1) Zimmerman was stalking a 17-year old skinny kid walking on the sidewalk at night, (2) Zimmerman was, at best, agitated by his presence, (3) Zimmerman was armed and the kid was unarmed, and (4) Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked before shooting the kid.
Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him. No, not necessarily on either of those points. That's not the law.
Is it your view that lethal force is always and unequivocally justified and blameless in any situation in which a person is being handed their ass in a fist fight?
Are you so disapproving of teenagers who do weed, steal shit, vandalize property and get into fights at school such that you think they deserve whatever results from any situation in which they find themselves winning a fist fight? Because you can suppose away and do all the tuff shit talk you want, but you don't know shit about how that fight started other than the armed guy who got his ass kicked was stalking the unarmed guy who kicked his ass for no good reason. And walking around at night with your hood over your head and candy in your pocket is not a good reason.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
I asked for the stats to back it up.
And I asked you what would qualify as an explosion. I've seen your Kunt act enough times already Hondo. Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an explosion? Yes or no?
Present your stats. Support your argument.
And there's a lot more to crime stats when you are talking in relation to poverty than just the murder rate.
Hondo I've seen your Kunt act enough around here. I post stats that show a doubling in murder, robbery, rape, and you then engage in a semantics based Kunt act over the word "explosion."
Give me the number in the increase that would make it okay to call it an "explosion?"
Btw, the level of your ignorance is really something. Anyone with just a cursory knowledge of American post war society and what happened to the crime rates in this country through-out the 60s, 70s and 80s would have no problem describing it as an "explosion" in crime. Amazing how poorly informed you are.
I'm just asking you to support your srory man. I also know what's happened to crime stats the last 30 years and what's happened to poverty for those 30 years. So post up the facts.
"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Wow, if only the prosecution would have called you. You seem to know all about the facts of the case that the state wasn't able to uncover. 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. In fact, Trademark profiled Zimmerman when he told his girl friend that Zimmerman looked like a "Creepy ass Cracker."
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
Says the guy who takes Zimmerman's word on its face that Trayvon "doubled back to kick his ass", even though nobody saw any such "doubling back", and even though Zimmerman absolutely needs that point to stick to make his self-defense claim even appear. Says the guy who ignores one of the few facts that was not in dispute: that Zimmerman was following this kid and had already tried and convicted him of doing 'something' and was concerned that he would 'get away' from, you know, walking down the sidewalk.
Interesting that you bring up Trayvon's comments about Zimmerman. It would seem to suggest that Trayvon was at least arguably in apprehension of harm with this adult following him around for no apparent reason. You couple that with the 911 tape and it looks like maybe Fat George was the one up to no good that night.
Nobody really knows. If I had to guess, George got himself into something through some combination of his mouth and his actions and severely underestimated this kid, and then as he found himself getting his ass kicked, panicked, and shot him.
And while we're on the 'on his way to becoming a thug' shtick, let's not forget that Zimmie himself was far from a model citizen. There is enuff shit out there about him and his wife, both before and after the incident, to call into question whether he was out there 'up to no good'. Then you add the tape of the 911 call.
"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Wow, if only the prosecution would have called you. You seem to know all about the facts of the case that the state wasn't able to uncover. 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. In fact, Trademark profiled Zimmerman when he told his girl friend that Zimmerman looked like a "Creepy ass Cracker."
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
Says the guy who takes Zimmerman's word on its face that Trayvon "doubled back to kick his ass", even though nobody saw any such "doubling back", and even though Zimmerman absolutely needs that point to stick to make his self-defense claim even appear. Says the guy who ignores one of the few facts that was not in dispute: that Zimmerman was following this kid and had already tried and convicted him of doing 'something' and was concerned that he would 'get away' from, you know, walking down the sidewalk.
Interesting that you bring up Trayvon's comments about Zimmerman. It would seem to suggest that Trayvon was at least arguably in apprehension of harm with this adult following him around for no apparent reason. You couple that with the 911 tape and it looks like maybe Fat George was the one up to no good that night.
Nobody really knows. If I had to guess, George got himself into something through some combination of his mouth and his actions and severely underestimated this kid, and then as he found himself getting his ass kicked, panicked, and shot him.
And while we're on the 'on his way to becoming a thug' shtick, let's not forget that Zimmie himself was far from a model citizen. There is enuff shit out there about him and his wife, both before and after the incident, to call into question whether he was out there 'up to no good'. Then you add the tape of the 911 call.
STFU it's all the liberal media's fault. Without them it never would have been news and Zimmerman wouldn't even have had to go to to trial.
Blacks have more run ins with the cops because blacks as a whole commit a hell of a lot more crime and live in higher crime areas where more police are usually deployed.
Factor in the fact that cops are more likely to view young black males as criminals, especially if they are sporting a certain look, and on account of this higher rate of criminal activity by blacks and you have the factors that explain the higher rate of blacks having run ins with the cops.
Racism plays some role in this but even black, Hispanic and Asian cops, especially in urban areas, quickly realize that it ain’t whitey that’s committing most of the crime, especially the violent crime.
Crime is the symptom. Poverty is the problem.
If you fix poverty, you wont have crime.
@Pawz: That myth has been disproven so many times I can't believe you're making that argument here in 2018. Poverty does not cause crime. Correlation is not Causation. Stop.
Disagree. Poverty is an evil that begets more evil. The 20th century alone is littered with examples of this on a massive scale: communism, Nazi Germany. As well as every day crimes that probably would not occur if poverty were eliminated, which is impossible, until we develop Star Trek like technology. Replicators, laser beams and shit.
"Trademark beating on Zimmerman violated all kinds of fucking laws and Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to plug him."
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Wow, if only the prosecution would have called you. You seem to know all about the facts of the case that the state wasn't able to uncover. 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. In fact, Trademark profiled Zimmerman when he told his girl friend that Zimmerman looked like a "Creepy ass Cracker."
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
Says the guy who takes Zimmerman's word on its face that Trayvon "doubled back to kick his ass", even though nobody saw any such "doubling back", and even though Zimmerman absolutely needs that point to stick to make his self-defense claim even appear. Says the guy who ignores one of the few facts that was not in dispute: that Zimmerman was following this kid and had already tried and convicted him of doing 'something' and was concerned that he would 'get away' from, you know, walking down the sidewalk.
Interesting that you bring up Trayvon's comments about Zimmerman. It would seem to suggest that Trayvon was at least arguably in apprehension of harm with this adult following him around for no apparent reason. You couple that with the 911 tape and it looks like maybe Fat George was the one up to no good that night.
Nobody really knows. If I had to guess, George got himself into something through some combination of his mouth and his actions and severely underestimated this kid, and then as he found himself getting his ass kicked, panicked, and shot him.
And while we're on the 'on his way to becoming a thug' shtick, let's not forget that Zimmie himself was far from a model citizen. There is enuff shit out there about him and his wife, both before and after the incident, to call into question whether he was out there 'up to no good'. Then you add the tape of the 911 call.
I haven't taken Zimmerman's word on anything. I looked at the physical evidence and I watched the trial. There was a reason why the police weren't going to charge him with a crime. I brought up Trayvon's comment about Zimmerman because it actually shows that Trademark profiled him. While the claims about Zimmerman profiling Trademark are pulled squarely out of your ass.
There was no "911 tape" it was the recorded call to the non-emergency police dispatch. And there's nothing on that tape that implicates Zimmerman in anything.
Moral of the story, don't go swinging on people when you don't know if they might be packing heat. Trademark got exactly what he deserved.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Like such fag Bob, you seem to think there's been an explosion in crime rates.. Where are the stats to back this up?
Hondo, lets get a real gauge on just how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. Comparing the rate of crime in 1958 America, with the rate of crime in 1978 America is it fair to say the crime rate exploded? What would the increase have to be before you could describe it as an "explosion?"
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
I asked for the stats to back it up.
And I asked you what would qualify as an explosion. I've seen your Kunt act enough times already Hondo. Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an explosion? Yes or no?
Present your stats. Support your argument.
And there's a lot more to crime stats when you are talking in relation to poverty than just the murder rate.
Hondo I've seen your Kunt act enough around here. I post stats that show a doubling in murder, robbery, rape, and you then engage in a semantics based Kunt act over the word "explosion."
Give me the number in the increase that would make it okay to call it an "explosion?"
Btw, the level of your ignorance is really something. Anyone with just a cursory knowledge of American post war society and what happened to the crime rates in this country through-out the 60s, 70s and 80s would have no problem describing it as an "explosion" in crime. Amazing how poorly informed you are.
I'm just asking you to support your srory man. I also know what's happened to crime stats the last 30 years and what's happened to poverty for those 30 years. So post up the facts.
What happen to the violent crime rate between 1960 and 1990 Hondo? How much did it increase? And how much would it have to increase before it could be called an "explosion?"
Comments
Look dude, that's the story the jury bought and Trayvon couldn't speak for himself, so we're stuck with it, and there's no need to keep rubbing it in. What I find terrible in that case is the absolute profiling and prejudice exercised by Zimmerman, and the complete inability of that dumb-fuck wannabe cop to de-escalate the situation with words. Thus, he had no business at all playing rent-a-cop that night, and Trayvon wouldn't be dead if he wasn't. At a minimum, it's a tragedy, and you sound like a yahoo gun nut to keep grinding away at "Trademark" and all that shit.
I run into weird, suspicious characters in my neighborhood a lot, because I live within walking distance of the local business district where shitheads rifle cars and roll drunk people for their wallets fairly frequently, and I've had a few showdowns with people I knew were casing or burglarizing the area, but I never stalked a person like Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, because that escalates vs. de-escalates the situation. Zimmerman is a douche, as we all know by now and a douche with a gun is a threat to everyone.
Would you be posting like this if Zimmerman was a known pedophile? I doubt it. And he probably is.
Just how much of a beating was Zimmerman supposed to take before he could respond? And following someone in public doesn't equal "stalking." Trademark was well on his way to becoming a thug. Guns, drugs and fighting were already things he had plenty of experience with. Let it be a lesson, if you're going to attack and start beating people you might want to make sure they aren't packing.
And respond about this explosion of crime rate deal you are talking about.
Poverty isn’t necessarily “the” cause of crime. Middle America was poor in the 1930. Very little crime. There was also very little illegitimacy. American is extremely wealthy in 2018. There is lots of crime compared to 1938. There is also lots of illegitimacy. Having illegitimate kids is a good way to get poor. Illegitimate kids having illegitimate kids is a really, really good way to get and stay poor. Get through high school, get a job, get married before you have kids is a great recipe to not be poor. That is also a good indicator that you won’t be a criminal. Call it good moral judgment. Of course, that is no seen as “white privilege” by ignorant leftards. Recipe works for Americans of all colors.
Would a doubling of the murder rate qualify as an "explosion?"
And there's a lot more to crime stats when you are talking in relation to poverty than just the murder rate.
Give me the number in the increase that would make it okay to call it an "explosion?"
Btw, the level of your ignorance is really something. Anyone with just a cursory knowledge of American post war society and what happened to the crime rates in this country through-out the 60s, 70s and 80s would have no problem describing it as an "explosion" in crime. Amazing how poorly informed you are.
Interesting that you bring up Trayvon's comments about Zimmerman. It would seem to suggest that Trayvon was at least arguably in apprehension of harm with this adult following him around for no apparent reason. You couple that with the 911 tape and it looks like maybe Fat George was the one up to no good that night.
Nobody really knows. If I had to guess, George got himself into something through some combination of his mouth and his actions and severely underestimated this kid, and then as he found himself getting his ass kicked, panicked, and shot him.
And while we're on the 'on his way to becoming a thug' shtick, let's not forget that Zimmie himself was far from a model citizen. There is enuff shit out there about him and his wife, both before and after the incident, to call into question whether he was out there 'up to no good'. Then you add the tape of the 911 call.
Or so I've heard.
There was no "911 tape" it was the recorded call to the non-emergency police dispatch. And there's nothing on that tape that implicates Zimmerman in anything.
Moral of the story, don't go swinging on people when you don't know if they might be packing heat. Trademark got exactly what he deserved.