Charles Barkley: Zimmer was right to be acquitted

[QUOTE=Dresta]I don't care whether he's black or not, his comments were stupid, ignorant and racist, hence the criticism.

I don't care what caused such moronic views, because what caused them is irrelevant to their validity, which is all that i'm concerned with. I don't have time to try and 'understand' people over the internet, geez. He could be anybody, and could have any agenda, how could i possibly know?[/QUOTE]

Okay :oldlol: but have you ever heard the phrase "Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in his shoes?" You can never have a honest discussion about race, sexism, whatever if you're never willing to understand the other side.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Okay :oldlol: but have you ever heard the phrase "Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in his shoes?" You can never have a honest discussion about race, sexism, whatever if you're never willing to understand the other side.[/QUOTE]
By your logic we can never criticize anyone until we are put in their shoes. Guess I can't be critical of politicians unless I am one myself. And I can't condemn pedophiles unless I try raping some children. And I can't call out racist bigots unless I have plastic surgery and change my skin to their color.

Trying to "understand" someone isn't a prerequisite for criticism. When ignorant bullshit is being spewed without any logic or objectivety you don't need to be in someone else's shoes to realize it's wrong.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Okay :oldlol: but have you ever heard the phrase "Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in his shoes?" You can never have a honest discussion about race, sexism, whatever if you're never willing to understand the other side.[/QUOTE]


This is a great point & I think it is the key to fixing alot of problems.. If people can try to see issues from someone else's point of view instead knee jerk shouting them down and saying "I dont have time to see their point of view"?

you could find understanding alot easier..

If you have time to criticize someone else's comments, then you also have time to consider their point of view..

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Okay :oldlol: but have you ever heard the phrase "Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in his shoes?" You can never have a honest discussion about race, sexism, whatever if you're never willing to understand the other side.[/QUOTE]
Oh shut up, that was not what i was saying at all. As if i was saying the position and difficulties of the other side should be ignored. Are you saying the position of the 'other side' is ignorance and racism? If so you do that 'other side' a grand disservice. But then i don't even take the idiotic step of dividing this into 'sides' in the first place - that is the best way to create an irreparable divide.

There is NO excuse for spewing ignorance, especially hateful ignorance that some uninformed person could easily believe. There is NO reason to appease people with such views merely because their 'shoes' are different. You cannot understand what it is like to be anyone else by definition, so what you appear to be proposing is an impossible standard which would preclude people from passing judgement on ANYTHING.

This is the ****ing internet for God's sake: the guy could be a fat Chinese man trying to fill his time by winding people up, how the HELL is anyone supposed to be able to place themselves in the shoes of someone they don't KNOW anything about?

[QUOTE=Dresta]Oh shut up, that was not what i was saying at all. As if i was saying the position and difficulties of the other side should be ignored. Are you saying the position of the 'other side' is ignorance and racism? If so you do that 'other side' a grand disservice. But then i don't even take the idiotic step of dividing this into 'sides' in the first place - that is the best way to create an irreparable divide.

There is NO excuse for spewing ignorance, especially hateful ignorance that some uninformed person could easily believe. There is NO reason to appease people with such views merely because their 'shoes' are different. You cannot understand what it is like to be anyone else by definition, so what you appear to be proposing is an impossible standard which would preclude people from passing judgement on ANYTHING.

This is the ****ing internet for God's sake: the guy could be a fat Chinese man trying to fill his time by winding people up, [B]how the HELL is anyone supposed to be able to place themselves in the shoes of someone they don't KNOW anything about?[/B][/QUOTE]

It's simple...

[IMG]http://www.clublexus.com/gallery/data/4740/brb-using-imagination.jpg[/IMG]

[url]http://youtu.be/Ebu6Yvzs4Ls[/url]

[QUOTE=Graviton]By your logic we can never criticize anyone until we are put in their shoes. [B]Guess I can't be critical of politicians unless I am one myself. And I can't condemn pedophiles unless I try raping some children. And I can't call out racist bigots unless I have plastic surgery and change my skin to their color. [/B]

Trying to "understand" someone isn't a prerequisite for criticism. When ignorant bullshit is being spewed without any logic or objectivety you don't need to be in someone else's shoes to realize it's wrong.[/QUOTE]

Nope completely missing the point so badly that it's laughable. :facepalm

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Nope completely missing the point so badly that it's laughable. :facepalm[/QUOTE]
Then tell me your point, that phrase can be applied to absolutely anything to just excuse all kinds of horrible acts.

Like I said, if something is inherently stupid/evil/wrong, you don't need to "feel" for the person to criticize it. Just basic common sense would suffice.

[QUOTE=Dresta]Oh shut up, that was not what i was saying at all. As if i was saying the position and difficulties of the other side should be ignored. Are you saying the position of the 'other side' is ignorance and racism? If so you do that 'other side' a grand disservice. But then i don't even take the idiotic step of dividing this into 'sides' in the first place - that is the best way to create an irreparable divide.

There is NO excuse for spewing ignorance, especially hateful ignorance that some uninformed person could easily believe. There is NO reason to appease people with such views merely because their 'shoes' are different. You cannot understand what it is like to be anyone else by definition, so what you appear to be proposing is an impossible standard which would preclude people from passing judgement on ANYTHING.


This is the ****ing internet for God's sake: the guy could be a fat Chinese man trying to fill his time by winding people up, how the HELL is anyone supposed to be able to place themselves in the shoes of someone they don't KNOW anything about?[/QUOTE]

The poster ohthehorror is not a troll. He's a solid poster and I've seen him post in many other topics. I know it's hard to tell around here since there are so many posters, but I can tell that post was simply a response to all the bs that gets spewed around here about minorities.

There will always be sides to a divide. Always. Instead of assuming that there are no differences, if people ever want to actually make progress they need to at least try and understand why someone's perspective is the way it is. And I'm not saying it's racists to ignore the other perspective but the divide will always be there unless you try and understand. I have no idea about your life personally or struggles you've gone through, but if I sat down and understood where you were coming from I'd get a lot more clear picture of why you believe the things you do.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]The poster ohthehorror is not a troll. He's a solid poster and I've seen him post in many other topics. I know it's hard to tell around here since there are so many posters, but I can tell that post was simply a response to all the bs that gets spewed around here about minorities.

There will always be sides to a divide. Always. Instead of assuming that there are no differences, if people ever want to actually make progress they need to at least try and understand why someone's perspective is the way it is. And I'm not saying it's racists to ignore the other perspective but the divide will always be there unless you try and understand. I have no idea about your life personally or struggles you've gone through, but if I sat down and understood where you were coming from I'd get a lot more clear picture of why you believe the things you do.[/QUOTE]
oh the horror is actually just an emotional poster that randomly lashes out at people for the most trivial things. I have experienced it first hand. He may not be a troll but he has their tendencies.

What he said may have been posted in the heat of a moment and in anger, but it was still an ignorant, hateful, racist comment. The state of his mind and feelings is irrelevant, it doesn't excuse what he did. Because he sure as hell didn't follow your advise to "put yourself in their shoes", he just went right to judging on his high horse. But now we are the bad guys for calling him out on that? :oldlol:

[QUOTE=Graviton]oh the horror is actually just an emotional poster that randomly lashes out at people for the most trivial things. I have experienced it first hand. He may not be a troll but he has their tendencies.

What he said may have been posted in the heat of a moment and in anger, but it was still an ignorant, hateful, racist comment. The state of his mind and feelings is irrelevant, it doesn't excuse what he did. Because he sure as hell didn't follow your advise to "put yourself in their shoes", he just went right to judging on his high horse. But now we are the bad guys for calling him out on that? :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

I don't disagree about what he said being disrespectful and hateful, but do you really think he believes that? Basically what he did was twist words and history to paint a negative picture of white people. The exact same thing that has been posted about black people, yet I don't see the posters that called him out calling out the people that are posting things about black people. I'm not saying as a white person you need to defend minorities, but at the same time you have to acknowledge the crap that's getting thrown the other way and why someone would react that way. And I'm talking about strictly in this thread or all the threads related to this case.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]I don't disagree about what he said being disrespectful and hateful, but do you really think he believes that? Basically what he did was twist words and history to paint a negative picture of white people. The exact same thing that has been posted about black people, yet I don't see the posters that called him out calling out the people that are posting things about black people. I'm not saying as a white person you need to defend minorities, but at the same time you have to acknowledge the crap that's getting thrown the other way and why someone would react that way. And I'm talking about strictly in this thread or all the threads related to this case.[/QUOTE]


:cheers: total agreement..

The thing about the incident that gets me (and Ive said it before) is how now it is OK to go for your gun if you are getting your ass kicked..

I remember growing up and there was a debate between black kids and white grown ups about the gun culture.. and white grown ups would say

"Its p*ssy to pull out a gun just because you cant fight"

and now? that logic doesnt seem to be the case anymore..

My thing is this.. You gotta be a bigtime p*ssy to need your gun because some kid 8 years younger than you is whupping your ass..

George Zimmerman would be dead today if didnt have his gun to shoot an kill an unarmed teenager? really? c'mon

That is ridiculous, and it is even more astounding to see people try and justify that way of thinking..

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]:cheers: total agreement..

The thing about the incident that gets me (and Ive said it before) is how now it is OK to go for your gun if you are getting your ass kicked..

I remember growing up and there was a debate between black kids and white grown ups about the gun culture.. and white grown ups would say

"Its p*ssy to pull out a gun just because you cant fight"

and now? that logic doesnt seem to be the case anymore..

My thing is this.. You gotta be a bigtime p*ssy to need your gun because some kid 8 years younger than you is whupping your ass..

George Zimmerman would be dead today if didnt have his gun to shoot an kill an unarmed teenager? really? c'mon

That is ridiculous, and it is even more astounding to see people try and justify that way of thinking..[/QUOTE]

Yeah man the way this whole trial has brought out the worst in some people just baffles my mind. I understand people arguing in favour of the justice system and I even to a degree understand people arguing in favour of gun laws, but this whole Zimmerman can never do anything wrong way of thinking is disturbing. The guy that trained in MMA couldn't take a teenager? And of course the guy would lie to cover his own ass, I doubt anyone will ever hear the true story.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Yeah man the way this whole trial has brought out the worst in some people just baffles my mind. I understand people arguing in favour of the justice system and I even to a degree understand people arguing in favour of gun laws, but this whole Zimmerman can never do anything wrong way of thinking is disturbing. The guy that trained in MMA couldn't take a teenager? And of course the guy would lie to cover his own ass, I doubt anyone will ever hear the true story.[/QUOTE]


I saw that chick Rachel Jeantel on some interview, and she mentioned "ass whuppin"...

take your ass whuppin like a man... It was a situation where somebody was getting their tail kicked and he pulled out a gun..

Now, anybody can say "I thought my life was in danger so I just shot him"

Now everybody has gotta pack their sh*t and shoot first..

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]:cheers: total agreement..

The thing about the incident that gets me (and Ive said it before) is how now it is OK to go for your gun if you are getting your ass kicked..

I remember growing up and there was a debate between black kids and white grown ups about the gun culture.. and white grown ups would say

"Its p*ssy to pull out a gun just because you cant fight"

and now? that logic doesnt seem to be the case anymore..

My thing is this.. You gotta be a bigtime p*ssy to need your gun because some kid 8 years younger than you is whupping your ass..

George Zimmerman would be dead today if didnt have his gun to shoot an kill an unarmed teenager? really? c'mon

That is ridiculous, and it is even more astounding to see people try and justify that way of thinking..[/QUOTE]

I agree with the gun but at the same time, going by GZ story, if i was losing a fight, had my nose broken and was having my head smashed to the ground, I would fear for my life and if I had a gun I probably would have pulled it myself. I think the majority of people would have done the same in that situation since in that situation it's a fight or flight, and if TM is on top of him flight is not an option.

Now if GZ was punched in the gut and pulled out a gun then it's a different story.

What I'm more angered about is the total circus this trial has become and the medias race baiting tactics. Using old photos of Trayvon, using edited 9/11 calls to make it seem GZ was this racist and the out right calling GZ white. I'm more upset these journalist were more interested in creating a story than looking at the facts and evidence.

[QUOTE=ALBballer]What I'm more angered about is the total circus this trial has become and the medias race baiting tactics. Using old photos of Trayvon, using edited 9/11 calls to make it seem GZ was this racist and the out right calling GZ white. I'm more upset these journalist were more interested in creating a story than looking at the facts and evidence.[/QUOTE]


Im more upset about an unarmed kid getting shot to death and people insinuating that he somehow brought it on himself..

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I saw that chick Rachel Jeantel on some interview, and she mentioned "ass whuppin"...

take your ass whuppin like a man... It was a situation where somebody was getting their tail kicked and he pulled out a gun..

Now, anybody can say "I thought my life was in danger so I just shot him"

Now everybody has gotta pack their sh*t and shoot first..[/QUOTE]

Well, it didn't sound like a normal fight. It sounded like one person on the offensive who didn't suffer a single blow and one person entirely on the defensive, possibly calling for help.

Way different than, say, two willing participants fist fighting on their feet or something.

[QUOTE=2013 Lakers]Well, it didn't sound like a normal fight. It sounded like one person on the offensive who didn't suffer a single blow and one person entirely on the defensive, possibly calling for help.

Way different than, say, two willing participants fist fighting on their feet or something.[/QUOTE]


How is Zimmerman getting his ass kicked by a kid so easily? :oldlol:

The kid is unarmed..Zimmerman is a grown man who evidently has some kind of training in fighting..

I obviously dont believe a word of Zimmerman's story and he obviously has every reason to lie about what happened..

but all that aside.. Its almost like Zimmerman is helpless.. How is he so helpless?

Like I said, you gotta be the biggest chump around to need your gun in that situation..

It gives almost anyone the justification to do the same thing if they ever get into a situation where they are losing a fight..

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]How is Zimmerman getting his ass kicked by a kid so easily? :oldlol:

The kid is unarmed..Zimmerman is a grown man who evidently has some kind of training in fighting..

I obviously dont believe a word of Zimmerman's story and he obviously has every reason to lie about what happened..

but all that aside.. Its almost like Zimmerman is helpless.. How is he so helpless?

Like I said, you gotta be the biggest chump around to need your gun in that situation..

It gives almost anyone the justification to do the same thing if they ever get into a situation where they are losing a fight..[/QUOTE]

His MMA trainer gave him a rating of 0.5/10 for his fighting ability and body control. That's pretty bad.

All I'm saying is the situation seems markedly different than one where two people willingly enter into a fight. If it was as one-sided as the injuries make it look, I can easily see George getting hit with fear at some point during the assault where he realizes, [I]Oh shit, I'm not gonna be able to get this guy off of me.[/I]

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]Im more upset about an unarmed kid getting shot to death and people insinuating that he somehow brought it on himself..[/QUOTE]

Well the evidence shows that he did initiate the confrontation.

[QUOTE=2013 Lakers]His MMA trainer gave him a rating of 0.5/10 for his fighting ability and body control. That's pretty bad.[/quote]

I have zero MMA training and I could last longer than Zimmerman did against a 17 year old kid.



[quote]All I'm saying is the situation seems markedly different than one where two people willingly enter into a fight. If it was as one-sided as the injuries make it look, I can easily see George getting hit with fear at some point during the assault where he realizes, [I][B]Oh shit, I'm not gonna be able to get this guy off of me.[/B][/I][/QUOTE]

alot of people get into fights and then realize "Oh sh*t, this guy is kicking my ass"

Im saying that now it is OK to shoot the person if you are losing?


Even trayvon is beating him up, the kid is unarmed... and originally trayvon is minding his own business, not even committing a crime or looking for zimmerman..

[QUOTE=ALBballer]Well the evidence shows that he did initiate the confrontation.[/QUOTE]


What evidence is this?

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I have zero MMA training and I could last longer than Zimmerman did against a 17 year old kid. [/QUOTE]

But you probably wouldn't be rated 0.5/10 as a fighter. It's possible that Zimmerman was just physically weak and soft, but I don't fault him for that.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]alot of people get into fights and then realize "Oh sh*t, this guy is kicking my ass"

Im saying that now it is OK to shoot the person if you are losing?[/QUOTE]

If you're not looking for a fight when you're confronted but end up on the ground without any other option for retreat, I think so. It's different than two guys getting into a fist fight in a bar or similar.

[QUOTE=2013 Lakers]But you probably wouldn't be rated 0.5/10 as a fighter. It's possible that Zimmerman was just physically weak and soft, but I don't fault him for that.



If you're not looking for a fight when you're confronted but end up on the ground without any other option for retreat, I think so. It's different than two guys getting into a fist fight in a bar or similar.[/QUOTE]

Its nothing against you, but I think people have to stretch themselves very far in order to believe Zimmerman's story

I personally dont buy it, especially his account of Trayvon jumping out of the bushes and attacking him

It kind of goes to point that someone could be so weak that he needs a gun to save him from an unarmed kid 8 years younger than himself.. and its not like zimmerman is in his 50's :oldlol: .. He's in his 20's

Yeah, Zimmerman had a duty to just fight harder against the person who's assaulting him! Rasheed's stuck in a Friday movie fantasy land.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/nBpt4vol.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]How is Zimmerman getting his ass kicked by a kid so easily? :oldlol:

The kid is unarmed..Zimmerman is a grown man who evidently has some kind of training in fighting..

I obviously dont believe a word of Zimmerman's story and he obviously has every reason to lie about what happened..

but all that aside.. Its almost like Zimmerman is helpless.. How is he so helpless?

Like I said, you gotta be the biggest chump around to need your gun in that situation..

It gives almost anyone the justification to do the same thing if they ever get into a situation where they are losing a fight..[/QUOTE]

2 points

1. you dont need to believe zimmerman. look at the physical evidence after the fight.

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/trayvon-martin-autopsy_n_1525763.html[/url]

Unless the doctors are lying, Trayvon had abrasion on the hand, and the single gunshot wound. he had no marks on the face or body indicating that he was struck or hit.

Zim had a 2 black eyes, a broken nose and cuts to the back of his head.

During the trial the prosecution conceded that trayvon was on top of Zim.

2. a huge part of Zim's defense was that he was extremely weak.

[url]http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/08/just-physically-soft-zimmermans-mma-instructor-says-he-was-a-lousy-fighter/[/url]

His mma instruct basically made zim out to be one of the weakest males ever. a guy who had zero aptitude for fighting and poor physical strength. I dont think his mma trainer cared about him enough to lie under oath at a murder trial.

to me 5 possible scenarios are (that are consistent with the evidence):

1. Zim tells trayvon he has a gun and he is going to shoot him, as hardwood tmac has stated his belief in. Trayvon then attacks Zim in self defense because running away would give zim a target. on the ground zim manages to pull the gun out and shoot trayvon.

Likelihood imo: low, i just dont think a guy with a gun that is concealed would bring it up in any circumstance. what is there to be gained?

2. Zim pulls out his gun in anger after a verbal argument with trayvon and aims it at him. Trayvon, in self defense closes the distance between the two knocks zim down beats on zim until zim shoots him.

likelihood imo: low, if someone aims a gun at you and you charge irl, it is suicide no one can move faster than a person can pull a trigger.

3. Zim swings on trayvon but misses and trayvon counter attacks zim and does the damage.
Likelihood imo: possible, I could see this one happening. Zim despite his proven weakness may have been trying to overcompensate for his weakness.

4. Zim and trayvon argue. Slurs are exchanged, Zim calls trayvon the n word, trayvon calls zim a cracker, etc. Trayvon gets pissed attacks zim.
Likelihood imo: I think this is what happened.

5. Zim goes and politely questions Trayvon about the recent string of break ins. Trayvon overreacts and attacks Zim.
Likelihood imo: low, based on Zim's 911 call he was agitated and referred to trayvon as an asshole that was about to get away.

[QUOTE=MavsSuperFan]2 points

1. you dont need to believe zimmerman. look at the physical evidence after the fight.

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/trayvon-martin-autopsy_n_1525763.html[/url]

Unless the doctors are lying, Trayvon had abrasion on the hand, and the single gunshot wound. he had no marks on the face or body indicating that he was struck or hit.

Zim had a 2 black eyes, a broken nose and cuts to the back of his head.

During the trial the prosecution conceded that trayvon was on top of Zim.

2. a huge part of Zim's defense was that he was extremely weak.

[url]http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/08/just-physically-soft-zimmermans-mma-instructor-says-he-was-a-lousy-fighter/[/url]

His mma instruct basically made zim out to be one of the weakest males ever. a guy who had zero aptitude for fighting and poor physical strength. I dont think his mma trainer cared about him enough to lie under oath at a murder trial.

to me 5 possible scenarios are (that are consistent with the evidence):

1. Zim tells trayvon he has a gun and he is going to shoot him, as hardwood tmac has stated his belief in. Trayvon then attacks Zim in self defense because running away would give zim a target. on the ground zim manages to pull the gun out and shoot trayvon.

Likelihood imo: low, i just dont think a guy with a gun that is concealed would bring it up in any circumstance. what is there to be gained?

2. Zim pulls out his gun in anger after a verbal argument with trayvon and aims it at him. Trayvon, in self defense closes the distance between the two knocks zim down beats on zim until zim shoots him.

likelihood imo: low, if someone aims a gun at you and you charge irl, it is suicide no one can move faster than a person can pull a trigger.

3. Zim swings on trayvon but misses and trayvon counter attacks zim and does the damage.
Likelihood imo: possible, I could see this one happening. Zim despite his proven weakness may have been trying to overcompensate for his weakness.

4. Zim and trayvon argue. Slurs are exchanged, Zim calls trayvon the n word, trayvon calls zim a cracker, etc. Trayvon gets pissed attacks zim.
Likelihood imo: I think this is what happened.

5. Zim goes and politely questions Trayvon about the recent string of break ins. Trayvon overreacts and attacks Zim.
Likelihood imo: low, based on Zim's 911 call he was agitated and referred to trayvon as an asshole that was about to get away.[/QUOTE]

first of all.. good post..

as far as the broken nose is concerned.. a broken nose usually leads to blacks, and a broken nose and scratches on the back of someone's head doesnt necessarily mean his life was in danger.

if he is extremely soft, he probably shouldnt be following people and should have listened to the dispatch when they advised him to stop following the kid (I guess that why he needs his gun)

I have a gun and I understand how circumstances change when you have a gun.. there is a bit of a power trip that is unavoidable..

I also have been in situations where I was glad that I didnt have my gun on me when things went down (or I would have definitely killed someone).

imo I think George approached trayvon and tried to detain him.. Some words were probably exchanged and george tried to grab trayvon and the kid punched him in the face and went to kick his ass.. george goes for his gun and shoots the kid.. I think the cries for help were trayvon when he realizes zimmerman has a gun and is about to shoot him.

anyway good post... thanks for being mature

I don't know why you keep bringing up the age thing, it is pretty irrelevant. There will be plenty of 17-year olds that could beat to death plenty of 28-year olds. Amir Khan won olympic silver when he was 17, and there are surely many other examples.

He was old enough, would everything had been different if he were a few months older and was 18? Would people relinquish the emotive and inconsequential claim of 'he shot an unarmed kid and got away with it!' Because that is not an argument, it is empty rhetoric.

six foot tall 17 year old: cute little harmless kid
six foot tall 18 year old: adult

Big difference.

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]I don't disagree about what he said being disrespectful and hateful, but do you really think he believes that? Basically what he did was twist words and history to paint a negative picture of white people. [B]The exact same thing that has been posted about black people, yet I don't see the posters that called him out calling out the people that are posting things about black people.[/B] I'm not saying as a white person you need to defend minorities, but at the same time you have to acknowledge the crap that's getting thrown the other way and why someone would react that way. And I'm talking about strictly in this thread or all the threads related to this case.[/QUOTE]
Well i said to judge people as a group is moronic, and that people should be judged on an individual basis and that i wished people would stop going on about the 'white' race and the 'black' race: that shit is incorrect and annoying.

I think it is ignorant to focus on this Zimmerman case as if it some kind of grand injustice, when based on the facts of the case, there was no way a jury could convict and sentence the man to 20+ years. There are simply so many other, unequivocal injustices to be focusing on that i find it remarkable that this rather disgusting witch-hunt against Zimmerman is being pursued. It will not get anyone anywhere, and as we can see it is only pissing EVERYONE off - this will inflame racial hatreds, not dampen them. It is counter-productive and is being driven by self-serving opportunists like Al Sharpton.

What is so hard to see about all this?

[QUOTE=Dresta]I don't know why you keep bringing up the age thing, it is pretty irrelevant. There will be plenty of 17-year olds that could beat to death plenty of 28-year olds. Amir Khan won olympic silver when he was 17, and there are surely many other examples.[/quote]

I keep bringing it up because people keep insinuating that George Zimmerman was somehow helpless against trayvon...

that is a ridiculous insinuation.. I think I need to keep bringing it up in order to counteract some of the ridiculous notions perpetuated by some people...

Another ridiculous idea is the one that Martin was armed with the concrete...

that stuff is bullsh*t.. there is no real reason to pull a gun out when you receiving a good ass whupping unless you are 50, 60 years old or in a wheelchair..

Zimmerman wasnt some helpless elderly man.. get real..

[quote]He was old enough, would everything had been different if he were a few months older and was 18? Would people relinquish the emotive and inconsequential claim of 'he shot an unarmed kid and got away with it!' Because that is not an argument, it is empty rhetoric.[/QUOTE]

He shot an unarmed person (whether the guy 17 or 18 doesnt matter) and that "rhetoric" is no more or less valid than the idea that 1 punch and Zimmerman would have been dead.. Who was he up against? Bruce Lee?

like I said Zimmerman has got to be the biggest punk in Florida to get his ass kicked so cleanly and quickly that he needed his gun..

The "rhetoric" used to justify it is as empty as anything else

God this is just so boring. It is impossible and pointless to discuss things with people like you who are blinded by their emotions. None of what you say even if it were accurate would make Zimmerman guilty. You just keep bringing up things that are irrelevant as if they are case solvers.

If i were to ask the same kind of pointless questions as you it would be what kind of ***** after knocking someone to the ground mounts him and then pummels his head into the ground. If he was on top of him Zimmerman had nowhere to go - no person should be expected to just sit there and be forced to take that - anything could have happened from that point had he not had a gun, you don't know, so why are you pretending.

It's almost like you think Zimmerman was on trial for being shit at fighting - and you have the cheek to tell me to get real: you haven't rebutted or (so it appears) even read anything i said.

I'm so done with this shit. The blind race loyalty is truly pathetic, and i cba to argue with people that can't see the ****ing obvious because they are incapable of getting over their persecution complexes. What is sad is that no one would care if Trayvon Martin were any other skin colour (and this is proven by similar cases that have passed by in an instant), and that really is racist.

You need to get real, and you need to get some ****ing perspective (90% of these protesting bellends have probably never left the United States and so have a myopic and distorted view of the world and themselves - this is a BIG problem among all Americans, full stop).

This will be my last post on the matter anyway.

[QUOTE=Dresta]God this is just so boring. It is impossible and pointless to discuss things with people like you who are blinded by their emotions. None of what you say even if it were accurate would make Zimmerman guilty. You just keep bringing up things that are irrelevant as if they are case solvers.

If i were to ask the same kind of pointless questions as you it would be what kind of ***** after knocking someone to the ground mounts him and then pummels his head into the ground. If he was on top of him Zimmerman had nowhere to go - no person should be expected to just sit there and be forced to take that - anything could have happened from that point had he not had a gun, you don't know, so why are you pretending.

It's almost like you think Zimmerman was on trial for being shit at fighting - and you have the cheek to tell me to get real: you haven't rebutted or (so it appears) even read anything i said.

I'm so done with this shit. The blind race loyalty is truly pathetic, and i cba to argue with people that can't see the ****ing obvious because they are incapable of getting over their persecution complexes. What is sad is that no one would care if Trayvon Martin were any other skin colour (and this is proven by similar cases that have passed by in an instant), and that really is racist.

You need to get real, and you need to get some ****ing perspective (90% of these protesting bellends have probably never left the United States and so have a myopic and distorted view of the world and themselves - this is a BIG problem among all Americans, full stop).

This will be my last post on the matter anyway.[/QUOTE]

This is one of the best and most well thought out comments I've read thus far on this subject-matter. Congratulations for displaying some logic and reasoning, god knows that has been a struggle for many commenting on this case.

[QUOTE=Dresta]God this is just so boring. It is impossible and pointless to discuss things with people like you who are blinded by their emotions. None of what you say even if it were accurate would make Zimmerman guilty. You just keep bringing up things that are irrelevant as if they are case solvers.

If i were to ask the same kind of pointless questions as you it would be what kind of ***** after knocking someone to the ground mounts him and then pummels his head into the ground. If he was on top of him Zimmerman had nowhere to go - no person should be expected to just sit there and be forced to take that - anything could have happened from that point had he not had a gun, you don't know, so why are you pretending.

It's almost like you think Zimmerman was on trial for being shit at fighting - and you have the cheek to tell me to get real: you haven't rebutted or (so it appears) even read anything i said.

I'm so done with this shit. The blind race loyalty is truly pathetic, and i cba to argue with people that can't see the ****ing obvious because they are incapable of getting over their persecution complexes. What is sad is that no one would care if Trayvon Martin were any other skin colour (and this is proven by similar cases that have passed by in an instant), and that really is racist.

You need to get real, and you need to get some ****ing perspective (90% of these protesting bellends have probably never left the United States and so have a myopic and distorted view of the world and themselves - this is a BIG problem among all Americans, full stop).

This will be my last post on the matter anyway.[/QUOTE]

Its not irrelevant at all.. you sound sound like a petulant child right now... its sad...

I have more perspective than you could dream of having .. you are whining right now and its sad

your ridiculous "one punch" theory means that one punch is the thresh hold for people shooting one another.. The world world is supposed to bow to you because you are "annoyed" gtfoh :oldlol:


you refuse to see anyone else's point of view and makes you totally blind with any foresight of what this means..

This means (especially if we use your idea that one punch could be deadly) that it is OK to shoot a person if they punch you in the face.. the gun culture in America is bad enough

Only punks go for their guns on one punch.[B] You still havent given any good reason to escalate the fight from fists to guns and that is because you dont have a good reason plain simple[/B]..

All your whining is a waste of time..... point remains.. this verdict sends the message that it is OK to shoot if you start losing a fight..

That means F*ck it...Im packing and Im blowing a dude's head the f*ck off if I feel "my life is in danger" f*ck em.. I'll go to court and let them figure it out.. I live in Philly so I'll probably get black women to acquit me :confusedshrug:

Thanks Zimmerman

[QUOTE=Dresta]God this is just so boring. It is impossible and pointless to discuss things with people like you who are blinded by their emotions. None of what you say even if it were accurate would make Zimmerman guilty. You just keep bringing up things that are irrelevant as if they are case solvers.

If i were to ask the same kind of pointless questions as you it would be what kind of ***** after knocking someone to the ground mounts him and then pummels his head into the ground. If he was on top of him Zimmerman had nowhere to go - no person should be expected to just sit there and be forced to take that - anything could have happened from that point had he not had a gun, you don't know, so why are you pretending.

It's almost like you think Zimmerman was on trial for being shit at fighting - and you have the cheek to tell me to get real: you haven't rebutted or (so it appears) even read anything i said.

I'm so done with this shit. The blind race loyalty is truly pathetic, and i cba to argue with people that can't see the ****ing obvious because they are incapable of getting over their persecution complexes. What is sad is that no one would care if Trayvon Martin were any other skin colour (and this is proven by similar cases that have passed by in an instant), and that really is racist.

You need to get real, and you need to get some ****ing perspective (90% of these protesting bellends have probably never left the United States and so have a myopic and distorted view of the world and themselves - this is a BIG problem among all Americans, full stop).

This will be my last post on the matter anyway.[/QUOTE]

dang, that is one of the best written posts I've seen on ISH

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]first of all.. good post..

as far as the broken nose is concerned.. a broken nose usually leads to blacks, and a broken nose and scratches on the back of someone's head doesnt necessarily mean his life was in danger.

if he is extremely soft, he probably shouldnt be following people and should have listened to the dispatch when they advised him to stop following the kid (I guess that why he needs his gun)

I have a gun and I understand how circumstances change when you have a gun.. there is a bit of a power trip that is unavoidable..

I also have been in situations where I was glad that I didnt have my gun on me when things went down (or I would have definitely killed someone).

imo I think George approached trayvon and tried to detain him.. Some words were probably exchanged and george tried to grab trayvon and the kid punched him in the face and went to kick his ass.. george goes for his gun and shoots the kid.. I think the cries for help were trayvon when he realizes zimmerman has a gun and is about to shoot him.

anyway good post... thanks for being mature[/QUOTE]

First thank you

[QUOTE]if he is extremely soft, he probably shouldnt be following people and should have listened to the dispatch when they advised him to stop following the kid (I guess that why he needs his gun)[/QUOTE]

agreed, he has no business following anyone. I wish there was a law against citizens arrests. People without training shouldnt be trying to apprehend someone in 90% of instances.

[QUOTE]I have a gun and I understand how circumstances change when you have a gun.. there is a bit of a power trip that is unavoidable.. [/QUOTE]

no doubt the gun give zim a power trip that caused this mess.

[QUOTE]imo I think George approached trayvon and tried to detain him.. Some words were probably exchanged and george tried to grab trayvon and the kid punched him in the face and went to kick his ass.. george goes for his gun and shoots the kid.. I think the cries for help were trayvon when he realizes zimmerman has a gun and is about to shoot him.[/QUOTE]

plausible theory. I wont debate you on who cried out as that is unprovable either way. You will find "experts" who support both sides.