• 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!

George Zimmerman sues Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren over tweets honouring Trayvon Martin

Lord of Planar said:
Innocent people don't plan a sneak attack, and commit first degree assault
Click to expand...
Innocent people, minding their own business in their parent’s neighborhood, should not be followed/harassed by a gun toting wannabe vigilante.

Martin was a kid being followed by a grown man. He had every right and reason to confront Zimmerman, verbally. That Martin may have put his hands on Zimmerman first isn’t okay. That doesn’t make Zimmerman’s killing Martin acceptable.

Bottom line, irrefutable fact, had Zimmerman backed off when advised to do so, Martin would still be alive today.

Lord of Planar said:
Just where is your thinking at anyway?.
Click to expand...
Incoherent babble.

Lord of Planar said:
I think you should learn the English language better. Saying a person does not need to do something is not telling them they shouldn't, or not to. It is just saying it isn't necessary.
Click to expand...
My English fine. Yours, on the other hand, is shaky.

As for the dispatcher’s comment to Zimmerman, it was clear that she was advising him not to follow Martin. She’d already told Martin that officers were on the way and was trying to diffuse any potential confrontation. Anyone who reads the entire 911 phone call transcript should understand that.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Innocent people, minding their own business in their parent’s neighborhood, should not be followed/harassed by a gun toting wannabe vigilante.

Martin was a kid being followed by a grown man. He had every right and reason to confront Zimmerman, verbally. That Martin may have put his hands on Zimmerman first isn’t okay. That doesn’t make Zimmerman’s killing Martin acceptable.

Bottom line, irrefutable fact, had Zimmerman backed off when advised to do so, Martin would still be alive today.


Incoherent babble.


My English fine. Yours, on the other hand, is shaky.

As for the dispatcher’s comment to Zimmerman, it was clear that she was advising him not to follow Martin. She’d already told Martin that officers were on the way and was trying to diffuse any potential confrontation. Anyone who reads the entire 911 phone call transcript should understand that.
Click to expand...

Believe as you wish.
 
bongsaway said:
In my mind, when you stalk someone you can't claim self defense and yet he did and since martin was dead he couldn't contest zimmerman's story.

But hey, feel free to keep defending zimmerman. You folks on the right seem to be attracted to this kind of person.
Click to expand...

Please define "stalk". “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Sorry, dude, but not only does your mind not conform to the law in many states, but it's contrary to actual trial facts.
 
Royal PITA said:
[*]When Martin saw Zimmerman sitting in his truck, he initially moved toward Zimmerman then broke and ran.
[*]Suspecting a criminal, Zimmerman gave chase.
[*]Zimmerman lost Martin and was returning to his truck as he arranged to meet the police on the phone.
Click to expand...
The above are all lies. Your lies. You have zero proof. Stop lying.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
The above are all lies. Your lies. You have zero proof. Stop lying.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into a typically LW emotional schoolyard spat with you. The facts back up everything I posted. The transcript of the Zimmerman-Dispatch conversation is fact. You're the one who posted fiction about the events. Now you are, IMO, emotionally out of control by screaming false accusations.

I'm content the sane, mature and educated readers of this thread can tell the difference between you and me.
 
Citizen said:
So then you must agree that it was wrong for trump to comment on the Kaepernick controversy and the confrontation between the Native American and that Kentucky kid
Click to expand...

If one were to agree that it was "wrong" for Obama to pick sides re Zimmerman/Martin, then it would also be wrong for Trump to pick sides re: Sandmann and the Native American guy.

However, even given that premise, I would not think it wrong for Trump to comment on Kaepernick's public gesture, which carries a critique of society and so opens itself to opposing critiques.
 
Royal PITA said:
Please define "stalk". “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Sorry, dude, but not only does your mind not conform to the law in many states, but it's contrary to actual trial facts.
Click to expand...

Oh, and we all know how fair trials can be depending on the person. One white guy with a gun and one dead black guy and of course it was the black guy's fault he got killed by the guy stalking him.

I understand the difference between follow and stalk and when the cops told zimmerman to stop following martin and he didn't, it turned into stalking and one dead black kid.
 
bongsaway said:
Oh, and we all know how fair trials can be depending on the person. One white guy with a gun and one dead black guy and of course it was the black guy's fault he got killed by the guy stalking him.

I understand the difference between follow and stalk and when the cops told zimmerman to stop following martin and he didn't, it turned into stalking and one dead black kid.
Click to expand...

Now you are accusing the jury of being racist?

Do you have any evidence to back that up?
 
American said:
Time for Democrats to help us relive the incident that Obama used to vastly worsen the racial divide in America.
Click to expand...



"Obama made me us do it!"

:lamo
 
I wonder how many posts out of 338 are about the tweets and the lawsuits that spawned this thread. Five? Ten?
 
Royal PITA said:
I'm not going to get into a typically LW emotional schoolyard spat with you. The facts back up everything I posted. The transcript of the Zimmerman-Dispatch conversation is fact. You're the one who posted fiction about the events. Now you are, IMO, emotionally out of control by screaming false accusations.

I'm content the sane, mature and educated readers of this thread can tell the difference between you and me.
Click to expand...
Only an overly sensitive right wing weenie would view my comments as “emotionally out of control” and “screaming false accusations”. My comments were clear, succinct, and unemotional.

Apply some Desitin, grab your binkie and take some slow breaths.

Back to the subject being discussed; your blatant lies.

Facts -
1. I posted the transcript of Zimmerman’s 911 call, first.

2. None of your lies that I pointed out had anything to do with the transcript. Not sure why you keep pointing to the transcript as if you think it supports your assertions, because it doesn’t.

3. You’ve offered no evidence, at all, to support your assertions.

If you can stop shaking long enough, feel free to offer evidence (w/supporting links of course) of your assertions.

Thanks
 
Ouroboros said:
If one were to agree that it was "wrong" for Obama to pick sides re Zimmerman/Martin, then it would also be wrong for Trump to pick sides re: Sandmann and the Native American guy.

However, even given that premise, I would not think it wrong for Trump to comment on Kaepernick's public gesture, which carries a critique of society and so opens itself to opposing critiques.
Click to expand...

Yes, I thought you would say that. A president commenting on things you agree is OK. No matter how vulgar and unpresidential that comment may be
 
Citizen said:
Being on top of him does not mean that Trayvon caused the injuries. It does not mean that Trayvon jumped Zimmerman. It does not mean that Trayvon was a thug looking for trouble as you claim. All it means is that Trayvon was on top of him when Zimmerman shot him. You have no clue what happened. But give Zimmerman the white privileged card if you must
Click to expand...

Zimmerman is latino. Anyway, Martin slammed Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.
 
Royal PITA said:
If Zimmerman ran after Martin with his gun drawn, then Zimmerman was in the wrong. Since he didn't and only drew when he feared for his life as Martin was pounding his head into the ground, then Zimmerman was in the right.....just as a jury determined.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that at the moment Zimmerman was on his back losing a fight and possibly fighting for his life that he was justified in defending his life.... at that point. But everything I said in lead up to that point was a massive failure in reason on the part of Zimmerman. When he got out of the car in pursuit of Martin he was wrong to do that. Which ended up in the conclusion of the event him killing a guy who was not committing any crimes.

What the jury decided on was if Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force. What it didn't/couldn't decide is whether or not Zimmerman by his poor decisions was responsible for the outcome being what it was.

Try to look at it this way: We don't have Trayvon Martin's testimony because he is dead, but it could have been the case that when Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, that Trayvon was in fear of his own safety. A stranger purseing him at night where Martin was not doing anything illegal and had a right to be; could be that you Trayvon was "standing his ground"--- although in a very poorly advised way.

This is why off duty cops not in uniform will usually call in to have uniformed cops respond to situations where they observe something they believe may be a crime in progress. Having uniformed officer and black and white vehicles goes a long way in not having any misconceptions. Undercover cops will often call in a uniformed/marked patrol as well. Because how would most people react having some stranger just approaching them that way at night? And it could be that Trayvon perceived Zimmerman had lethal force.

I carry a conealed firearm often. I see MANY instances were I have a reasonable suspicion, but I keep myself and my weapon out of the situation. In many states that is a requirement for getting a concealed permit; that the weapon is for your PERSONAL protection, not as a means to inject yourself into law enforcement--- or private guard duty.
 
americanwoman said:
I am not surprised you chose my opinion that a road raging woman beater teenager killing asshole being a jackass as something to contradict.

Now prove your "great financial benefit" claim with evidence.
Click to expand...

Sandman sued and got millions. Now Zimmerman is suing. Its nice to see democrats get a taste of their own bitter medicine once in a while.
 
American said:
Zimmerman is latino. Anyway, Martin slammed Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.
Click to expand...

You don’t know that Martin slammed Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk and Zimmerman is a white Latino
 
bongsaway said:
Oh, and we all know how fair trials can be depending on the person. One white guy with a gun and one dead black guy and of course it was the black guy's fault he got killed by the guy stalking him.

I understand the difference between follow and stalk and when the cops told zimmerman to stop following martin and he didn't, it turned into stalking and one dead black kid.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the race cards. Of course, if it was one of the Trump's who shot Zimmerman, no doubt you'd keep playing those cards with Eric or Junior being "the white guy" and Zimmerman being the po' person of color, "the brown guy". Sad.

....and you still don't know what stalking means. You also have your facts wrong about Zimmerman's actions, but I suspect you're doing that on purpose.
 
American said:
Zimmerman is latino. Anyway, Martin slammed Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.
Click to expand...

According to the anti-gun LWers, he's "white". He's only Latino if he's protesting Trump, immigration laws or pitching for Bernie.
 
I'll just leave this here...


You know Zimmerman is trash when even the current GOP messiah thinks he's a piece of crap. What's even more amusing is same right wing dingbats who donated all of their government checks to support Zimmerman's "defense", are the ones who currently worship Trump. Even funnier considering Zimmerman's loser older brother is a Trump supporter, supporting a president who said his brother is a bad guy:lol:
 
bongsaway said:
Can you point out the part where I accused the jury of being racist?
Click to expand...

You said the jury got it wrong using this as your rationalization.

One white guy with a gun and one dead black guy and of course it was the black guy's fault he got killed by the guy stalking him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom