• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Addressing the Off-Topic Zimmerman comments.

americanwoman said:
if you believe Zimmerman he was afraid for his life,
Click to expand...
Yes, after he was attacked.
Which has nothing to do with his getting out of his vehicle to keep tabs on the suspicious person until the police arrive.
And has absolutely nothing to do with being "wrong".



americanwoman said:
... that doesn't sound like he made the right decision. If I made a choice to pursue someone on foot that ended up in me fighting for my life, I certainly wouldn't look back and think I made a good or right choice. That's why those situations are best left to someone who is trained ro handle suspicious behavior.
Click to expand...
Again with the spin I see. This only speaks to your own bias and not to anything factual.
He followed to keep tabs on the suspicious person. That is not pursuit.

And looking back after all the information that is available is reviewed, it is quite clear that he was keeping tabs on a drug using violent thief.
Of course when looking back, that was a prudent (and by opinion, right) thing to do.
 
Excon said:
Yes, after he was attacked.
Which has nothing to do with his getting out of his vehicle to keep tabs on the suspicious person until the police arrive.
And has absolutely nothing to do with being "wrong".



Again with the spin I see. This only speaks to your own bias and not to anything factual.
He followed to keep tabs on the suspicious person. That is not pursuit.

And looking back after all the information that is available is reviewed, it is quite clear that he was keeping tabs on a drug using violent thief.
Of course when looking back, that was a prudent (and by opinion, right) thing to do.
Click to expand...

Your opinion thinks it's right to follow someone suspicious and mine doesn't, especially if by doing so you end up fighting for your life. Just doesn't seem like the right choice no matter how you spin it. You call me biased but fail to recognize your own.
 
americanwoman said:
Your opinion thinks it's right to follow someone suspicious and mine doesn't, especially if by doing so you end up fighting for your life.
Click to expand...
That isn't what I said, so stop with the misrepresentation.
I said it was prudent to do so. This is absent the knowledge of the out come.

Regardless of the outcome it turned out to be the "right" thing to do because of the information that was later revealed about Trayvon.
Everybody should keep tabs on the movings of a violent thief in their neighborhood so they can report them to the Police if need be.

Trayvon attacking him has nothing to do with any of these stated position.
Nor does it have anything to do with if the actions of following were prudent, correct or even right or "wrong".

Your argument is nothing but an emotive one and is typically used to deflect away from the wrongness and illegality of Trayvon's actions in a wrongheaded attempt to shift a negative focus onto Zimmerman.

It doesn't fly.


americanwoman said:
Just doesn't seem like the right choice no matter how you spin it.
Click to expand...
The only one who has spun is you.



americanwoman said:
You call me biased but fail to recognize your own.
Click to expand...
My bias is for the facts of the situation. Not my personal feelings.
By the facts he did nothing "wrong".
By the facts only Trayvon did something "wrong".
 
Excon said:
That isn't what I said, so stop with the misrepresentation.
I said it was prudent to do so. This is absent the knowledge of the out come.

Regardless of the outcome it turned out to be the "right" thing to do because of the information that was later revealed about Trayvon.
Everybody should keep tabs on the movings of a violent thief in their neighborhood so they can report them to the Police if need be.

Trayvon attacking him has nothing to do with any of these stated position.
Nor does it have anything to do with if the actions of following were prudent, correct or even right or "wrong".

Your argument is nothing but an emotive one and is typically used to deflect away from the wrongness and illegality of Trayvon's actions in a wrongheaded attempt to shift a negative focus onto Zimmerman.

It doesn't fly.



The only one who has spun is you.




My bias is for the facts of the situation. Not my personal feelings.
By the facts he did nothing "wrong".
By the facts only Trayvon did something "wrong".
Click to expand...

Still, that's your opinion that Zimmerman did nothing wrong, it's not a fact. I wonder if he himself thinks every decision he made that night was "not wrong."
 
americanwoman said:
Still, that's your opinion that Zimmerman did nothing wrong, it's not a fact. I wonder if he himself thinks every decision he made that night was "not wrong."
Click to expand...
No it is your opinion that he did something wrong.
My opinion is that you have yet to show that he did.

And you can't show that doing something prudent was wrong. You simply can't.


And as this is about the actual case, what is or isn't objectively wrong under the law applies.
The legality of it is that he did nothing wrong. That is fact which you can not refute.
 
Excon said:
No it is your opinion that he did something wrong.
My opinion is that you have yet to show that he did.

And you can't show that doing something prudent was wrong. You simply can't.


And as this is about the actual case, what is or isn't objectively wrong under the law applies.
The legality of it is that he did nothing wrong. That is fact which you can not refute.
Click to expand...

The legal verdict is that he is innocent of committing murder, which I agree with however I just can't agree he made the right choices that night. It's not emotion speaking, it's a more logical approach that if you let things get handled through the proper channels, you're not going to end up fighting for your life.

Can you honestly say that if he would have waited for the police, that would have been the better decision, or not?
 
americanwoman said:
The legal verdict is that he is innocent of committing murder, which I agree with ...
Click to expand...
The legal charges and verdict examined all the events that took place.
At no time was his following or getting out of his vehicle considered legally wrong.
That is because no law says it is.


americanwoman said:
... however I just can't agree he made the right choices that night.
Click to expand...
You have yet to show he made any "wrong" choice.


americanwoman said:
It's not emotion speaking, it's a more logical approach that if you let things get handled through the proper channels, you're not going to end up fighting for your life.
Click to expand...
No it is an emotional one.
Trayvon acting out violently has nothing to do with whether or not the initial actions of following or getting out of the vehicle were wrong. Those action aren't wrong but reasonable and prudent. Nothing you have said shows otherwise.

What you are doing is akin to blaming the victim, Zimmerman.
Again.
Your argument is nothing but an emotive one and is typically used to deflect away from the wrongness and illegality of Trayvon's actions in a wrongheaded attempt to shift a negative focus onto Zimmerman.

It doesn't fly.​

It is like saying that a person who got mugged going to the dentist should not have decided to go to the dentist because they could have predicted they would likely be mugged. That is as absurd a position to take as yours is.


americanwoman said:
Can you honestly say that if he would have waited for the police, that would have been the better decision, or not?
Click to expand...
Better?
Like I said; Emotive.
This does not even come into play here.

You do not predicate the rightness or wrongness of following and getting out of the vehicle based on the latter violent actions of criminal.
As we know that criminal could have made it home and did nothing, leaving Zimmerman waiting for the police.
Whether he acted out criminally or not has absolutely nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of following or getting out.
 
TheGoverness said:
You are 100% wrong on this point. You can try to act like you aren't, but that doesn't change the fact that you are.
Click to expand...

As you were already proven 100% wrong, your comment only applies to you.
 
Excon said:
Addled thoughts do not substitute for rational argument.

Your reply is the typical irrational posting of one who can make no valid response to the what was said in the first place. Go figure, huh?

Trayvon was in the wrong here, not Zimmerman. I know you don't like that but your feelings are irrelevant to the facts.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't know a fact if it shot you in the face. The fact remains that this thread wouldn't exist if you didn't feel put off by people who refuse to refer to George as a saint.
 
rocket88 said:
You wouldn't know a fact if it shot you in the face.
Click to expand...
No, that clearly would be you.


rocket88 said:
The fact remains that this thread wouldn't exist if you didn't feel put off by people who refuse to refer to George as a saint.
Click to expand...
Put off? Saint? Fact?
Hilarious.
Again showing your comment only applies to you and that fantasy land you are grabbing your delusional comments from.


As you are here in this thread, why don't you refute the information provided? Huh?
Oh that's right, you can't because what was pointed out was factual.

Obviously your opposition comes from not liking the fact that I wont allow false information to be spread. Too bad.


Trayvon acted out in a criminal violently manner causing Zimmerman to justly act in self defense.
You did not like that factual information then and you still don't like it. Too bad.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
And the Trayvon case has a lot to do with race:
Click to expand...
Only on the part of ignorant folks making false claims of racism.


GhostlyJoe said:
Zimmerman followed Trayvon because he resembled an archetype of a young, black criminal.
Click to expand...
Wrong!
Zimmerman followed Trayvon because Trayvon acted suspiciously by looking into homes while nonchalantly walking raining.


GhostlyJoe said:
Trayvon had the right to defend himself and his family from what he perceived as a threat, and there's plenty of evidence to support that he confronted Zimmerman out of concern for his own safety.
Click to expand...
1. Trayvon was not in a situation that required him to defend himself, let alone concern for his family.
That statement is nothing more than exaggerated nonsense.
2. Their is a no evidence that he confronted Zimmerman over any such concern.

What is known by the available evidence is that Trayvon was out of sight of Zimmerman and that Zimmerman was headed back to his vehicle when Trayvon came out of nowhere and attacked him from his left rear.
These facts only leaves two possible scenarios. Either Trayvon chose to return from where he was safe or he purposely laid in wait. In both instances indicating a deliberate act of aggression on Trayvon's part.





TheGoverness said:
But that's all I'm going to converse with you on this.

Because the last thing I want to do is waste my time taking to a very condensing, dishonest and downright rude individual.
Click to expand...
No, it is because you were 100% wrong and dishonest.
 
Excon said:
The issue regarding the sale of Zimmerman's gun has lead to many untrue comments regarding the incident that brought about his killing of Trayvon.


This thread is intended to be the place to have those "Off-Topic" discussions instead of derailing any other topic.


It is an untrue for the following reasons.
1. Though he had at one time wanted to be a police officer he had since changed his mind and did not want to be one. This was clearly recorded and on the record.
That makes your statement factually untrue. He was not a wannabe.
Calling the police on a suspicious person and trying to keep tabs on him so that they may point that person out to the police when they arrive are the actions of a citizen and not acting as, or like the police, or in other words, not those of a wannabe. Again showing your statement is factually untrue in that regard.

2. He was never told to "Stand down" as you falsely stated.
a. A call-taker made a suggestion that they did not need him to follow.
A suggestion, let alone by a person who has no authority, is in no way being told to "stand down".

b. More importantly, he did follow the suggestion and actually traveled in a different direction than Trayvon had.
Trayvon went South while Zimmerman went East passing by the area Trayvon had gone.​




You have no idea what he was actually planning to do on his way home.

Instead of trying to get out of the rain, Trayvon was seen up on the grass looking into the homes.
That is suspicious behavior and it prompted Zimmerman to call the police.


The walking home from the store part no longer applied.
Zimmerman went East past the area where Trayvon went South.
It was only upon Zimmerman returning past the area where Trayvon had headed off in a different direction did Trayvon then come out of "nowhere" and confront Zimmerman from his rear left.
There are only two possible scenarios in which that could have happened.
1. Trayvon laid in wait and only came out once Zimmerman had passed him the second time as he returned to his vehicle.
2. Trayvon had made it far enough out of Zimmerman's sight down that path that he was very close to home but instead decided to return to confront Zimmerman and approached him from his rear left.
They both suggest planning the attack that followed. Coming at Zimmerman from his rear to accomplish that attack is what makes it an ambush.​


1. At no point did the "Police" tell him not to engage. A call-taker made a suggestion that they did not need him to follow.
2. As for your "and instead listened" comment. It also shows that you do not know what you are talking about.
Zimmerman acknowledged the request and instead of continuing to follow Trayvon to the South, he walked East past the area Trayvon had gone.

So to sum it up.
Zimmerman was given a suggestion that he did not have to follow.
The suggestion was not made by the Police or anyone in authority, but by a call-taker.
It was also a suggestion that he did follow.




Wrong.
The Zimmerman case and OJ case are totally different.
There is no indication that Nicole was involved in committing any crime against the other person and causing them to legally defend their self with lethal force.
Click to expand...

The OJ jury and the Zimmerman jury were similar in many respects, just a different color.

Each jury nullified the indictment for the benefit of their defendant.

That's how the two cases were similar, other than both defendants were clearly guilty, but got off.
 
Riveroaks said:
The OJ jury and the Zimmerman jury were similar in many respects, just a different color.

Each jury nullified the indictment for the benefit of their defendant.

That's how the two cases were similar, other than both defendants were clearly guilty, but got off.
Click to expand...
Wrong as well as hilarious.
And as this is about Zimmerman try addressing the actual facts of that case and not making up bs to believe like other folks have done.
 
Excon said:
Only on the part of ignorant folks making false claims of racism.



Wrong!
Zimmerman followed Trayvon because Trayvon acted suspiciously by looking into homes while nonchalantly walking raining.


1. Trayvon was not in a situation that required him to defend himself, let alone concern for his family.
That statement is nothing more than exaggerated nonsense.
2. Their is a no evidence that he confronted Zimmerman over any such concern.

What is known by the available evidence is that Trayvon was out of sight of Zimmerman and that Zimmerman was headed back to his vehicle when Trayvon came out of nowhere and attacked him from his left rear.
These facts only leaves two possible scenarios. Either Trayvon chose to return from where he was safe or he purposely laid in wait. In both instances indicating a deliberate act of aggression on Trayvon's part.





No, it is because you were 100% wrong and dishonest.
Click to expand...

You've made it clear that all that matters in your mind is Zimmerman's perception. And Zimmerman has made it abundantly clear that his perception is skewed. The world will be a safer place once Zimmerman is finally behind bars where he belongs. It's just a shame that more people will likely have to suffer at his hands thanks to our flawed and uneven justice system.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
You've made it clear that all that matters in your mind is Zimmerman's perception.
Click to expand...
Lame deflection as well as wrong.
You are the one who made it about your flawed perceptions. (i.e.: What matters in your mind) though those perceptions do not match with reality.
So again.
It was not your false perception that Trayvon's race had something to do with being followed, it was Trayvon's actions which were suspicious. Causing Zimmerman to call the Police and to follow until they arrived.

Trayvon's actions.
Not your lame assertion of Trayvon resembling an archetype of a young, black criminal.


GhostlyJoe said:
And Zimmerman has made it abundantly clear that his perception is skewed.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
Those are your convoluted perceptions, not reality.


Trayvon was not anywhere in sight when Zimmerman walked by the cut-through the first time.
Trayvon was gone and could have chose to remain where he was without acting out in a criminally violent manner.
But he didn't and his choice lead to his death.


GhostlyJoe said:
The world will be a safer place once Zimmerman is finally behind bars where he belongs.
Click to expand...
Another lame and convoluted sense of reality.
Figures.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
You've made it clear that all that matters in your mind is Zimmerman's perception. And Zimmerman has made it abundantly clear that his perception is skewed. The world will be a safer place once Zimmerman is finally behind bars where he belongs. It's just a shame that more people will likely have to suffer at his hands thanks to our flawed and uneven justice system.
Click to expand...

Do you take yourself seriously?
 
americanwoman said:
The wrong thing I can think of is that because of his unnecessary action of taking action when he did not need to, someone ended up dead. You don't think that's wrong but I do.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, and Zimmerman clearly condemned Martin as a "****ing punk" among other things. Zimmerman had no respect for Martin when he stepped out of the truck. Zimmerman made a lot of assumptions, exercised bad judgement, and somebody ended up dead because of it.
 
SheWolf said:
I agree with you, and Zimmerman clearly condemned Martin as a "****ing punk" among other things. Zimmerman had no respect for Martin when he stepped out of the truck. Zimmerman made a lot of assumptions, exercised bad judgement, and somebody ended up dead because of it.
Click to expand...
Not one thing you said is correct.

And you only agree because your opinion is not based in reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom