Are you Team Trayvon or Team Zimmerman?

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Crafter_Man

Nice strawman.

You don’t seem to understand the difference between factual claims and opinions.
You claimed:

@Crafter_Man

4. Trayvon Martin was a thug. Had he not been killed by Zimmerman, he would have been a career criminal the rest of his life. Martin would have contributed nothing to society. His death is no loss. Just anther thug.

Those are factual claims. Which should have citeable reasoning.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

I’ll just leave this previous quote here. " Per that statute, provocation is not "mere words or conduct without force.“Gibbs v. State,789 So.2d 443, 444–45 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2001).”

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@BottledBlondJeanie

I’ll just leave this previous quote here. " Per that statute, provocation is not "mere words or conduct without force.“Gibbs v. State,789 So.2d 443, 444–45 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2001).”

So you’re saying I can scare the living crap out of you making you fear for your safety, but you have to wait till I actually hurt you to defend yourself?

ITT: George Lucas.

[elucidator]

I’m thinking its more about the old “fighting words” notion, that I can insult you to such a degree that you are justified in responding with violence.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

Can you try to keep up? That’s from a case interpreting the term “provoke” as it relates to the exception to self defense.

Google the case, read it. Lawyers and courts rarely use Black’s Law Dictionary, we tend lto use the controlling law, like case law.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

Sorry, that was to Mr. Revenge.

[elucidator]

No prob.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@elucidator

I’m thinking its more about the old “fighting words” notion, that I can insult you to such a degree that you are justified in responding with violence.

@BottledBlondJeanie

Can you try to keep up? That’s from a case interpreting the term “provoke” as it relates to the exception to self defense.

Google the case, read it. Lawyers and courts rarely use Black’s Law Dictionary, we tend lto use the controlling law, like case law.

Per the quote: " Per that statute, provocation is not “mere words or conduct without force.”

That is what I’m taking issue with. Do you have a definition of what “without force” means? Does reasonable perceived threat of force count as force?

I think given the situation even if Martin attacked, he had a reasonable fear of force against his safety.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Crafter_Man

My opinions only:

I have no doubt Martin attacked Zimmerman. I also believe Zimmerman felt his life was in danger.

You must have access to a lot more factual infomation than I have. All I’ve seen is a bunch of media bullshit and “leaked” stuff from sources.

That’s why I want to see a proper investigation done, by competent authorities. But I guess you already know all of the facts, so this is not important to you.

@Crafter_Man

Trayvon Martin was a thug. Had he not been killed by Zimmerman, he would have been a career criminal the rest of his life. Martin would have contributed nothing to society. His death is no loss. Just anther thug.

Again, you seem to have a lot more information about Mr. Martin than anyone else in the world. You must be basing this on accurate factual grounds, otherwise this would simply be disgusting character assassination based on nothing more than your personal biases and pathetic grasp of reality.

Since you seem to be a direct material witness and an expert character reference, I suggest you make your way to Florida ASAP, as you are clearly needed in the upcoming investigation.

[Acsenray]

@elucidator

I’m thinking its more about the old “fighting words” notion, that I can insult you to such a degree that you are justified in responding with violence.

I’ll say this once again. The fighting words doctrine relates to what kind of speech the government can punish. It does not justify a violent response.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

The Tao’s Revenge, I guess it isn’t clear at all so I’ll apologize. That cite and case are for Stoid. It’s applicable to Zimmerman’s use of deadly force.

[ElvisL1ves]

But … but he *needed *killin!

See, even if that nigger kid hadn’t done nothin’, he was still a punk or was going to grow up to be a welfare-suckin’ shiftless kind, so there’s no real loss, right? It kinda really needed to be done anyhow.

Now, if he’d been an actual human, like one of us, then the George Zimmermans and Crafter Mans would have some explaining to do. But it ain’t worth worryin’ over.

[VinylTurnip]

@Crafter_Man

Trayvon Martin was a thug. Had he not been killed by Zimmerman, he would have been a career criminal the rest of his life. Martin would have contributed nothing to society. His death is no loss. Just anther thug.

I congratulate you on having the courage of your convictions and saying plainly what several of your ideological brethren in this thread have only been honest enough to coyly hint at.

Now please go fellate any of your nearest shotguns, you repugnant fucking discharge of a human being.

[brazil84]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

. . .

I don’t engage with this poster because of his past strawmanning. I do see that he’s up to his old tricks again.

[ElvisL1ves]

@VinylTurnip

I congratulate you on having the courage of your convictions and saying plainly what several of your ideological brethren in this thread have only been honest enough to coyly hint at.

He still didn’t say “nigger”. Now *that *would have been honest.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@brazil84

I don’t engage with this poster because of his past strawmanning. I do see that he’s up to his old tricks again.

You’re a fucking liar. And a coward.

Here is what you edited out. How is that a strawman?

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

@brazil84

To me, if somebody chooses “no limit nigga” as a computer nickname, it suggest that this individual sees himself as aggressive and is proud of his affinity with African-American gangsta culture and all that entails – valuing cockiness, rebellion against authority, not shying away from violence, etc.

I would say that someone who calls himself “no limit nigga” is more likely than the average person to break the law; to get into a fight; to go to jail; to shoot someone or to get shot himself.

Anyway, I am skeptical that the phrase means absolutely nothing to you.

Just out of curiosity if someone is into making gang signs, and fascinated by graffiti artists, does that mean they have “affinity with African-American gangsta culture and all that entails”?

Since you won’t respond I’m going to keep asking this to rub your nose in what a coward you are.

[enomaj]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

Since you won’t respond I’m going to reply to every post you make in this thread rub your nose in what a coward you are.

We don’t need you to do that.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@enomaj

We don’t need you to do that.

It’s a perfectly reasonable question. However now that I’m not so angry at his cowardly libel, I can see why that wouldn’t be fair to the other posters.

So I’ll make it simple. Does anyone here feel I didn’t ask him a fair question?

If no one speaks up I’ll take it as a signal that his cowardice is recognized, and I’ll let it go.

[DianaG]

I think that it’s fair to assume that everyone here who isn’t just as full of shit as brazil is recognizes how full of shit brazil is.

[magellan01]

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

It’s a perfectly reasonable question. However now that I’m not so angry at his cowardly libel, I can see why that wouldn’t be fair to the other posters.

So I’ll make it simple. Does anyone here feel I didn’t ask him a fair question?

If no one speaks up I’ll take it as a signal that his cowardice is recognized, and I’ll let it go.

I think it was a rather weak question, actually. Right or wrong, he made a fair point with a pretty good explanation. You appear to then want him to own another position that, at best, is an extremely light version of the flavor of his position, without it being his actual position. I think most people, including him, would be of the mind that someone can be fascinated by graffiti art and “into making gang signs” (though I admit that I’m not really clear what that means) and not be a thug destined for prison or the graveyard.