• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Martin Never Touched The Gun [W:270/289]

What if...? said:
I think they were fighting over the gun from the get.

How many movies have you seen where people.are fighting over a gun and only a wrist is involved.
Click to expand...

If it were only about wrist control, you may have a point. But there was more involved then that.. >Including a broken nose, wounds to the back of Z's head probably requiring stitches and other various wounds. If I were in a fight for a gun, I would concentrate on the gun.
 
Furiounova said:
Rotfl!!!! I don't think the prosecution will have a tough time showing why GZ is not a credible witness.

allow me to rephrase one more time:

There is absolutely no independent evidence TM ever saw or touched the gun prior to being shot.
Click to expand...

Why don't we just rephrase for the final times and say:

"Furiounova will not accept any evidence in George Zimmerman's favor"

That seems to be the clear direction you're going in.
 
Furiounova said:
"State scientists checked several parts of the 9 mm handgun: its grip, trigger, slide and holster. They found Zimmerman's DNA and that belonging to other unidentifiable people but none that matched Trayvon, records show."
George Zimmerman new evidence Trayvon Martin - Orlando Sentinel

This will make it very hard for GZ to claim TM saw his gun and was going for it because if that were true, he surely would have been able to at least touch it. The fact the evidence shows he never did helps prove he never knew GZ had a gun until seconds before he was dead.

When GZ gets convicted I will be sure to send him a Get Well Soon card saying:

"It was all God's plan."
Click to expand...

Your premise is flawed...
 
Furiounova said:
Rotfl!!!! I don't think the prosecution will have a tough time showing why GZ is not a credible witness.

allow me to rephrase one more time:

There is absolutely no independent evidence TM ever saw or touched the gun prior to being shot.
Click to expand...

Right .. no evidence of DNA or fingerprints.

If George is telling the truth, Trayvon would never have known GZ had a gun since TM was sitting on him and GZ was wearing his IWB holster behind his hip.
 
buck said:
If it were only about wrist control, you may have a point. But there was more involved then that.. >Including a broken nose, wounds to the back of Z's head probably requiring stitches and other various wounds. If I were in a fight for a gun, I would concentrate on the gun.
Click to expand...

George scalp lacerations never required stictches.. They were just soap and water injuries according to the EMTs and his doctor.
 
Donahue said:
Why don't we just rephrase for the final times and say:

"Furiounova will not accept any evidence in George Zimmerman's favor"

That seems to be the clear direction you're going in.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no independent evidence TM ever saw or touched the gun prior to being shot.
 
Furiounova said:
Nice try at deflection.

Apparently GZ supporters need a referesher course. He claimed the reason he shot TM is that TM saw the gun and tried to grab it from him. Considering the indisputable fact there is no evidence he ever saw or touched the gun, that with be a hurdle for GZ's defense.

Another aspect is the gunshot range. From all the evidence it looks like GZ was pulling on TM's shirt when the gun was fired which is why on the shirt it was contact range but on his chest it was intermediate range. If the gun had been in contact with TM's chest there is a good chance that his DNA should have been somewhere on the gun. I think the reason there isn't any is because the shirt acted as a shield between his chest and the gun.
Click to expand...

As always, you 1.) assert lack of evidence of something then proves the opposite - meaning lack of proof there are no Martians on earth proves there are in your contortions to find a conviction, which is only has a ludicrous as your continual making your logic based upon an assertion of guilt that stands unless a Defendant can prove beyond any dout that he is innocent.

The prosecution's case isn't as desperate as your's is against GZ.
 
buck said:
If it were only about wrist control, you may have a point. But there was more involved then that.. >Including a broken nose, wounds to the back of Z's head probably requiring stitches and other various wounds. If I were in a fight for a gun, I would concentrate on the gun.
Click to expand...

But if you're strong enough you can control the gun hand and strike with the free hand.
 
joko104 said:
As always, you 1.) assert lack of evidence of something then proves the opposite - meaning lack of proof there are no Martians on earth proves there are in your contortions to find a conviction, which is only has a ludicrous as your continual making your logic based upon an assertion of guilt that stands unless a Defendant can prove beyond any dout that he is innocent.

The prosecution's case isn't as desperate as your's is against GZ.
Click to expand...

Why don't you link the post where I said this proves GZ is guilty? You can't because I never said that. This is just you claiming Sharon said something she didn't say and you don't have a single shred of integrity to be honest about it.

Also, don't ever "like" any of my posts on any thread. Ever. It is embarrassing as hell when someone like you approves of a post of mine. I mean, REALLY embarrassing.
 
Furiounova said:
Why don't you link the post where I said this proves GZ is guilty? You can't because I never said that. This is just you claiming Sharon said something she didn't say and you don't have a single shred of integrity to be honest about it.

Also, don't ever "like" any of my posts on any thread. Ever. It is embarrassing as hell when someone like you approves of a post of mine. I mean, REALLY embarrassing.
Click to expand...

Well, ok, if that's what you REALLY REALLY want. :cool:
 
Furiounova said:
Another aspect is the gunshot range. From all the evidence it looks like GZ was pulling on TM's shirt when the gun was fired which is why on the shirt it was contact range but on his chest it was intermediate range. If the gun had been in contact with TM's chest there is a good chance that his DNA should have been somewhere on the gun. I think the reason there isn't any is because the shirt acted as a shield between his chest and the gun.
Click to expand...

Or it is evidence that GZ had one hand on TM's shirt trying to push him off him as TM moved up and down slamming GZ's head into the ground - and GZ could only swing his gun at GZ while TM was in the up position.

That if the gun was against TM's chest there would be DNA evidence on the gun is more of your Star Trek naivity about DNA evidence gathering and availability.
 
What if...? said:
But if you're strong enough you can control the gun hand and strike with the free hand.
Click to expand...

Ah, so Martin was not just a bean-pole pip-squeak or whatever the T supporters keep calling him. Honestly, I don't care how strong I may be, if I see a gun, that would become my primary concern and is what I would concentrate on (with both hands). That would become the most important thing there is, to me. Your experience certainly may differ.
 
buck said:
Ah, so Martin was not just a bean-pole pip-squeak or whatever the T supporters keep calling him. Honestly, I don't care how strong I may be, if I see a gun, that would become my primary concern and is what I would concentrate on (with both hands). That would become the most important thing there is, to me. Your experience certainly may differ.
Click to expand...

Then why wasn't the gun TM's primary concern?
 
joko104 said:
Or it is evidence that GZ had one hand on TM's shirt trying to push him off him as TM moved up and down slamming GZ's head into the ground - and GZ could only swing his gun at GZ while TM was in the up position.

That if the gun was against TM's chest there would be DNA evidence on the gun is more of your Star Trek naivity about DNA evidence gathering and availability.
Click to expand...


In the reenactment video GZ never shows he was grabbing TM's shirt. He claimed he pinned one of TM's hands down then used his other hand to fire the gun.

If you cared about the evidence you would have known this.
 
Furiounova said:
Then why wasn't the gun TM's primary concern?
Click to expand...

Because, as Z indicated in his reenactment, T didn't see it until right near the end when he went for the gun. So, you have just managed to provide even more support for Z's story. T was busy beating on Z (broken nose, wounds to the head) and not intersted in the gun - until he saw it (and went for it) just before the shot rang out.
 
Furiounova said:
Go ahead and link it. God knows you won't admit making another blatantly false claim.
Click to expand...

I was replying to your demanding I never give "likes" for your messages. It won't be easy, but ok, I won't.

You're not Sharon. She's a big girl. She can argue this if she wants to.
 
Furiounova said:
In the reenactment video GZ never shows he was grabbing TM's shirt. He claimed he pinned one of TM's hands down then used his other hand to fire the gun.

If you cared about the evidence you would have known this.
Click to expand...

Actually, if everything happened in the exact same instant, you'd have a point.
 
Furiounova said:
"State scientists checked several parts of the 9 mm handgun: its grip, trigger, slide and holster. They found Zimmerman's DNA and that belonging to other unidentifiable people but none that matched Trayvon, records show."
George Zimmerman new evidence Trayvon Martin - Orlando Sentinel

This will make it very hard for GZ to claim TM saw his gun and was going for it because if that were true, he surely would have been able to at least touch it. The fact the evidence shows he never did helps prove he never knew GZ had a gun until seconds before he was dead.

When GZ gets convicted I will be sure to send him a Get Well Soon card saying:

"It was all God's plan."
Click to expand...
We already know that Mr. Zimmerman was successful at stopping @No_Limit_Nigga's attempted murder. What's this thread about? That Mr. Zimmerman should go to prison for successfully defending himself?

Props to Mr. Zimmerman for not letting a street rat even touch his weapon.
 
Jerry said:
We already know that Mr. Zimmerman was successful at stopping @No_Limit_Nigga's attempted murder. What's this thread about? That Mr. Zimmerman should go to prison for successfully defending himself?

Props to Mr. Zimmerman for not letting a street rat even touch his weapon.
Click to expand...

I love it when GZ supporters dance on TM's grave. Just helps prove that as a group, no class at all.
 
Furiounova said:
For the fans of hair splitting, allow me to rephrase:

There is absolutely no evidence TM saw or touched the gun prior to being shot.
Click to expand...

There is "evidence". GZ stated TM saw the gun.

Is it your stance that you expect DNA or other physical evidence be transfered to an object when someone looks at it?

Not sure how you can disprove GZ statement that TM did not see the gun.
 
buck said:
Because, as Z indicated in his reenactment, T didn't see it until right near the end when he went for the gun. So, you have just managed to provide even more support for Z's story. T was busy beating on Z (broken nose, wounds to the head) and not intersted in the gun - until he saw it (and went for it) just before the shot rang out.
Click to expand...

So you want us to believe he was on top of GZ, he saw the gun, but never had a chance to grab it? Thank God you are not GZ's lawyer. He'd win an appeal for ineffective council.

GZ claimed that when TM saw it he told GZ he was going to die and then he went for it. The gun was in an IWB. It was dark. It is a small black gun. I love how you guys claim TM had lightning quick reflexes which is how he was able to get the better of GZ but when it comes to the gun he was very very slow. Lol..
 
mike2810 said:
There is "evidence". GZ stated TM saw the gun.

Is it your stance that you expect DNA or other physical evidence be transfered to an object when someone looks at it?

Not sure how you can disprove GZ statement that TM did not see the gun.
Click to expand...

GZ needs the jury to find him as a credible witness. Considering how many times he has lied and changed his story, the prosecution will have a field day tearing him up on cross.

There is no independent evidence proving TM saw the gun or touched it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom