Didn’t say any such thing. If you listen carefully, you will discover that the words that come out of my mouth bear no resemblance to the words you put in there.
Fine. Then explain clearly why you think anything other than the legality of his actions should affect how Zimmerman should be treated by the courts, then I can clearly explain why you are wrong.
I’ll save you some time, I didn’t say any such thing.
My deepest apologies, I assumed this…
…was sarcasm. If it’s your genuine belief, we’re in agreement.
Well, see, that’s more in line with a parody than sarcasm. Having a bit of fun with friend **Bricker’s **well-known compulsion to drag any argument into the legal arena, where he has maximum advantage. Basically, its a form of Republican poker, where he gets seven cards, you get five, all yours are face up and he gets to draw twice.
Yes, look, everyone. Somehow – no one is sure just how – I contrived to drag the discussion of the police department’s handling of a case of homicide under Florida’s odious SYG law into a discussion of the legalities of the situation.
My apologies. Pease return the discussion to the police, the stand your ground law, and the arrest of Zimmerman, and away from the legalities where I steered it.
That only matters if your concerned with “winning” or “losing” (I’m not sure what it is you think you win on the internet, but whatever). If what you want is to be informed, then you want to discuss it with the person who knows the most, not the least - and if you’re discussing a legal issue, a lawyer is a pretty good person to do it with (even if you feel bad because they know more than you).
Are you worried that he will be so disheartened that he will cease to share his information and viewpoint? The boy ain’t delicate, I don’t pick on people who can’t defend themselves.
Fair enough.
Because they aren’t a puss? If someone attacks you with fists which are generally non lethal and you attack back with a gun which is generally lethal then you may be within the law to kill them but you are certainly no part of a man. THAT is the shame I mentioned. With a fist fight both parties live to fight another day. It lacks all honor to kill someone without a weapon. I’m not real sure I can explain manhood to anyone who thinks escalating a fist fight into a onesided gunfight is anything but a scared little puss move so I’ll quit now.
So, there’s this ill tempered mofo in my life. All I gotta do, go to Florida and get one of those concealed carry thingys. How hard can it be? Zimmerman got one, and he’s a dildo. Lure my brother in…the ill tempered mofo down to Florida, piss him off, and when he takes a swing at me, I plug him, because I’m in fear of my life! Pop goes the weasel, adios, motherfucker!
Day-um! I can get some mileage out of this situation! Though maybe if I do it more than once or twice, they might catch on…
Er - that doesn’t suggest who did the attacking
Given what we verifiably know about what happened that night, who do you think is more likely to be the attacker?
a) Trayvon ran to get away from George
b) George got out of his truck to follow him
c) Trayvon was scared enough to try to get away
d) George was gungho enough to follow him down a back lane.
What is the most likely explanation on who started something again?
Well, the guy on drugs! We already have expert testimony that he looked like he was on drugs, an autopsy that showed massive traces of marijuana, what more do you need? Besides, who else walks all the way to the 7-11 in the rain to buy Skittles and Peace Tea who isn’t ripped to the tits?
That’s possibly the most idiotic thing I’ve read in any of these threads, which is really saying something. Imagine for a moment that it’s someone you care about who’s attacked - your brother or son, for example. They’ve been punched to the ground, and are having their head beaten against the concrete. A likely outcome of this is that they will suffer brain damage, possibly severe. Imagine further that you end up being the one caring for them, presumably for the rest of your life. Will it be a comfort to you that they could have avoided this, but were too “manly” to do so?
If you really think so, you’re a clueless moron of the highest order.
So, if it was Lucy Zimmerman, everything is cool ?
If this is a legalities-only discussion (because we all have to obey Rand Rover’s fiats on what threads are about or for whatever reason) then it’s still valid to question whether the enforcement and interpretation of self-defense law in Florida is consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and the various civil rights laws. There seems to be a disturbing pattern emerging across the various cases in terms of racially disparate enforcement. On top of that, it seems unlikely that there would be no statutory ground whatsoever for the Florida appelate system and/or the federal government to intervene if Florida effectively legalized murder, racial component or no.
Zimmy couldn’t dass to risk T’s fisks. It’s “Bang!” and it’s “Croak,” understand?
Yes, those are certainly valid questions.
As to the first, I’m not aware of any particular racial group that has seen a disparate impact since the enactment of the SYG law, but that’s a relatively meaningless observation, since I haven’t seen any data. Have you? Is there such an impact?
As to the second, I’m not aware of any room for the federal government to intervene in a matter of state law when state law immunizes certain conduct such as this. I can’t think of any way it could be done, nor am I aware of any time it’s been done before.
The Florida appellate system is another matter. They could strike down the SYG law.
Except they haven’t. But they could.
And this just in…
Several George Zimmerman witnesses change their accounts
Offered without comment.