Stevie Wonder

[Matty]

Refuses to come to Florida anymore. That'll damn sure teach us a thing or two! Yep!

[Chris]

Great musician though...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhw_zbvxvb4

I wonder, on balance, how the economics on that works. No more shows in FL, bigger liberal audience? Ah, he's probably so rich he doesn't care.

[Common]

Refuses to come to Florida anymore. That'll damn sure teach us a thing or two! Yep!

Good, I wont miss him just like I wouldnt miss limbaugh if he left and never came back. WHO CARES.

[Matty]

Good, I wont miss him just like I wouldnt miss limbaugh if he left and never came back. WHO CARES.



I don't,, cause you know why? CCR is a coming! :)

[Cigar]

Politics and Music don't go together ... but I'm sure Stevie can't see that ... :smiley_ROFLMAO:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UbDoOkO624I/TCdJhzz_joI/AAAAAAAABU4/DuoaVlqFyWE/s1600/stevie_wonder__hotter_than_july.jpg

[Mister D]

He's always smiling. Did the verdict make him frown? :sad:

[Cigar]

Little known fact about Stevie Wonder:

Stevie was the first Musician / Producer to digitally master an entire album from studio to wax, using Sony Technology.

[jillian]

Refuses to come to Florida anymore. That'll damn sure teach us a thing or two! Yep!

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.

[Chris]

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.

http://i.snag.gy/FzXWg.jpg

[jillian]

http://i.snag.gy/FzXWg.jpg

Only the oblivious think race had nothing to do with it

but whatever makes you feel better, troll.

[Chris]

Only the oblivious think race had nothing to do with it

but whatever makes you feel better, troll.

Only racists play the race card.

[Mainecoons]

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.

From Jacksonville, FL

When the race of the suspect is known,
what is the race of the victim?
• 93% “Black on black” murder

http://www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office/docs/electronic--press-room-home-page/long-term-murder-study.aspx

Looks like it's a good place for a black to be killed by another black.

Good call, Jillian. :rofl:

[Cigar]

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.

Don't worry ... I know a lot of people in Florida ... they are making sure that will not be a problem ever again

The problem with targeting and following a person, is that you don't always over your own six.

This is an easy problem to fix

[Cigar]

From Jacksonville, FL

When the race of the suspect is known,
what is the race of the victim?
• 93% “Black on black” murder

http://www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office/docs/electronic--press-room-home-page/long-term-murder-study.aspx

Looks like it's a good place for a black to be killed by another black.

Good call, Jillian. :rofl:

I don't know ... I'm sure your expert on Chicago knows different :laugh:

[Cigar]

Only racists play the race card.

true ... I'm sure everyone learns racism from someone or through an racial experience

[Captain Obvious]

20 years ago - yeah, it would have been a statement. Now, not so much.

One thing I've learned is to keep - or at least try to keep politics out of my personal life.

It's too complicated to complicate it more than it should be.

[Chris]

true ... I'm sure everyone learns racism from someone or through an racial experience

Where do you think jillian learned it?

[Mister D]

20 years ago - yeah, it would have been a statement. Now, not so much.

One thing I've learned is to keep - or at least try to keep politics out of my personal life.

It's too complicated to complicate it more than it should be.

Trying to make himself relevant, I suppose.

[oceanloverOH]

I don't,, cause you know why? CCR is a coming! :)

No great loss....Stevie's music isn't my cup of tea. And yeah, CCR IS COMING! You'll have to tell us all about the concert........

[jillian]

20 years ago - yeah, it would have been a statement. Now, not so much.

One thing I've learned is to keep - or at least try to keep politics out of my personal life.

It's too complicated to complicate it more than it should be.

people with influence believe in using that influence.

i know i would if i were in a position to exert influence on the issues that matter to me.

but i wonder why so many denigrate it.... we all use our voices here and change nothing. i suspect each of us would make ourselves heard publicly if we could.

or you could just acknowledge why people of color would be upset with the verdict and acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country.

[Mister D]

Who doesn't acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country? Well, besides the diversity cultists.

[Captain Obvious]

Trying to make himself relevant, I suppose.

How's that working for the Dixie Chicks? Or Nugent?

[Mister D]

How's that working for the Dixie Chicks? Or Nugent?

Exactly. STFU and entertain us.

[ptif219]

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.

I would say Chicago is the place to stay away from

[Common]

people with influence believe in using that influence.

i know i would if i were in a position to exert influence on the issues that matter to me.

but i wonder why so many denigrate it.... we all use our voices here and change nothing. i suspect each of us would make ourselves heard publicly if we could.

or you could just acknowledge why people of color would be upset with the verdict and acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country.

I want to address just your last sentence Jillian, I readily admit racial issues exist in this country and the problem is a two way street now not one. Blacks are just as much to blame for racial strife today as whites and they are far more blatantly racist. The problem is blacks and white supporters just cant bring themselves to ever admit that and that makes for more racial tension and a wider divide.
THIS IS NOT just a white thang anymore

[Chris]

Who doesn't acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country? Well, besides the diversity cultists.

You mean racist issues.

[Mister D]

You mean racist issues.

I suppose that depends on what she is talking about. Methinks the issues in question will, when presented, be grossly distorted and/or one sided.

[GrassrootsConservative]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X00XdLhFLSg

[Matty]

Well, it's safe there for you, apparently not for black males. Surely you understand that.



go back and stand next to your medicine cabinet.

[Chris]

people with influence believe in using that influence.

i know i would if i were in a position to exert influence on the issues that matter to me.

but i wonder why so many denigrate it.... we all use our voices here and change nothing. i suspect each of us would make ourselves heard publicly if we could.

or you could just acknowledge why people of color would be upset with the verdict and acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country.

Having a public soapbox is not different than having a bully pulpit or membership on a forum, I like Stevie but it's just his opinion and carries no more weight than any other unsubstantiated opinion.

[Chris]

go back and stand next to your medicine cabinet.

In front of.

Well, I fin’ly started thinkin’ straight
When I run outa things to investigate
Couldn’t imagine doin’ anything else
So now I’m sittin’ home investigatin’ myself!
Hope I don’t find out anything . . . hmm, great God!

--Bob Dylan

[countryboy]

Only the oblivious think race had nothing to do with it

but whatever makes you feel better, troll.
Well, if that ain't the pot calling the kettle a creepy ass cracker, nothing is.

[Mr Happy]

Only the oblivious think race had nothing to do with it

but whatever makes you feel better, troll.

There is a reason I have him on ignore ya know...;o)

[Mr Happy]

How's that working for the Dixie Chicks? Or Nugent?

You don't believe in the first amendment?

Woody Guthrie, Dylan and Springsteen have made careers out of songs with political messages and American culture is the better for it IMO...

[ptif219]

You don't believe in the first amendment?

Woody Guthrie, Dylan and Springsteen have made careers out of songs with political messages and American culture is the better for it IMO...

Yeah we know they are liberal hacks

[Chris]

There is a reason I have him on ignore ya know...;o)

Because you wish to remain ignorant? Nice clown face, btw, here, give him a hat: <;o).

[Chris]

You don't believe in the first amendment?

Woody Guthrie, Dylan and Springsteen have made careers out of songs with political messages and American culture is the better for it IMO...

Dylan is not a political musician in the least. He's a performer, that's all. Guthrie, yes, definitely. Springsteen, dunno, never liked or listened to him.

[RosieS]

There is a reason I have him on ignore ya know...;o)

Me too. He harasses by repeating the same crapola again and again. You are positively missing nothing.

Willow's harassment is just plain silly. Easy to overlook.

Plonk Chris, Jillian. Just do it! LOL

Regards from Rosie

[ptif219]

Me too. He harasses by repeating the same crapola again and again. You are positively missing nothing.

Willow's harassment is just plain silly. Easy to overlook.

Plonk Chris, Jillian. Just do it! LOL

Regards from Rosie

You make no sense.If it is silly and easy to overlook why put him on ignore?

[Mr Happy]

Me too. He harasses by repeating the same crapola again and again. You are positively missing nothing.

Willow's harassment is just plain silly. Easy to overlook.

Plonk Chris, Jillian. Just do it! LOL

Regards from Rosie

Jillian is a good friend of mine and is not even remotely like him. She just doesn't suffer fools.

Chris...I really don't know where to start, but I would be taking up valuable bandwidth and wasting peoples' time if I even attempted to start...

[Mr Happy]

You make no sense.If it is silly and easy to overlook why put him on ignore?

Because the gap between the posts he makes is now smaller.....:smiley:

[Mr Happy]

Yeah we know they are liberal hacks

I disagree. Excellent song writers. In the case of Dylan, his voice could be better...

[countryboy]

Jillian is a good friend of mine and is not even remotely like him. She just doesn't suffer fools.

Chris...I really don't know where to start, but I would be taking up valuable bandwidth and wasting peoples' time if I even attempted to start...
By "fools", you mean anyone who is not a flaming lib. Right? [/RHETORICAL]

[Mr Happy]

By "fools", you mean anyone who is not a flaming lib. Right? [/RHETORICAL]

Well, she's no fan of Al Sharpton, so you tell me...

[countryboy]

Well, she's no fan of Al Sharpton, so you tell me...
That doesn't make sense. I guess she doesn't like the competition. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-confused005.gif

[Mr Happy]

That doesn't make sense. I guess she doesn't like the competition. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-confused005.gif

No, she knows the difference between a shill and the real deal..

[Chris]

Me too. He harasses by repeating the same crapola again and again. You are positively missing nothing.

Willow's harassment is just plain silly. Easy to overlook.

Plonk Chris, Jillian. Just do it! LOL

Regards from Rosie

Nice try, rosie. My encounter with you amounted to yesterday you posting some lies about adderall and Zimmerman and me debunking your lies with your own sources. It matters little to me that you ignore my continued eposure of your lies and racism.

[Chris]

Jillian is a good friend of mine and is not even remotely like him. She just doesn't suffer fools.

Chris...I really don't know where to start, but I would be taking up valuable bandwidth and wasting peoples' time if I even attempted to start...

So now happy is caught in a lie that he ignores me, lol.

Do you really think I care that you dislike me? *yawn*

[jillian]

I want to address just your last sentence Jillian, I readily admit racial issues exist in this country and the problem is a two way street now not one. Blacks are just as much to blame for racial strife today as whites and they are far more blatantly racist. The problem is blacks and white supporters just cant bring themselves to ever admit that and that makes for more racial tension and a wider divide.
THIS IS NOT just a white thang anymore

well, can you understand why a black person might feel some hostility about the verdict? at being told that every one of their sons is a suspect?

i think there are race baiters on both sides.... people who profit by riling up their people. but as long as even good black kids are searched for no reason, feared even when there's no reason to fear them... and shot (a la amadou diallo) or victimized (a la abner louima or emmett till or james byrd). there's a lot of room for misunderstanding and mistrust. which is why the lack of sensitivity doesn't help... the condemning and slandering of the memory of the young man is atrotious. i can see not think ing he should have been convicted... although i think he should have, if the case was tried properly,, been convicted of manslaughter). what i can't see is the celebration of this kid's death by so many on this board. it is not helpful to anyone's cause.

[jillian]

Because you wish to remain ignorant? Nice clown face, btw, here, give him a hat: <;o).

thinking you know anything would be ignorant.

and he absolutely has you on ignore. he was talking abut you... not to you,

run along, troll... and do stop with your insane ad homs.

[keymanjim]

well, can you understand why a black person might feel some hostility
Does Stevie Wonder know that he's black?

[Chris]

thinking you know anything would be ignorant.

and he absolutely has you on ignore. he was talking abut you... not to you,

run along, troll... and do stop with your insane ad homs.

Echo trolling again, jill? Whether happy's clownish remark was to or about me he's not ignoring me. Do you ever get anything right, lefty.

[jillian]

Does Stevie Wonder know that he's black?

you think stevie wonder is clayton bigsby?


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=chappelle show blind black kkk&amp;source=web&amp;cd=2&amp;ved=0CDAQtwIwAQ&amp;url=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DexNWAvlNYdM&amp;ei=Nh vmUbWNN7ij4APa-IGgCA&amp;usg=AFQjCNGwRcg00XqrcRObAqpLYHoHpgdY1g&amp;sig2= Ud-xOS950zrIzW8Qi_XFRQ&amp;bvm=bv.49405654,d.dmg

[Common]

well, can you understand why a black person might feel some hostility about the verdict? at being told that every one of their sons is a suspect?

i think there are race baiters on both sides.... people who profit by riling up their people. but as long as even good black kids are searched for no reason, feared even when there's no reason to fear them... and shot (a la amadou diallo) or victimized (a la abner louima or emmett till or james byrd). there's a lot of room for misunderstanding and mistrust. which is why the lack of sensitivity doesn't help... the condemning and slandering of the memory of the young man is atrotious. i can see not think ing he should have been convicted... although i think he should have, if the case was tried properly,, been convicted of manslaughter). what i can't see is the celebration of this kid's death by so many on this board. it is not helpful to anyone's cause.

Yes I fully understand why black people would feel hostilty about the verdict, I felt hostility along with millions of white people over the OJ simpson verdict, but I and they accepted it without Rioting in the Street calling for the murder of simpsons and his family and calling for the AG to retry him, His kids didnt have to go into hiding. Put this in perspective jillian, there was NO evidence to convict zimmerman as charged none according to florida law. I do believe he could have avoided this incident. Know what though jillian I never saw a crime that couldnt have been avoide NOT A SINGLE ONE in my career. Its easy to back seat drive its not easy to poo poo away the evidence.
Ill say this again, I do not believe zimmerman willfully set out to murder martin, I do believe martin could have avoided this just as well as zimmerman. Martin started the physical altercation that led to his death. There is zero evidence this was racially motivated in anyway.
The prosecution threw it all at zimmerman and had nothing. Their own witness's turned out helping the defense just by their own testimony. Zimmerman was over charged and over prosecuted and rightfully found innocent.

[Matty]

Only the oblivious think race had nothing to do with it

but whatever makes you feel better, troll.




so why don't you tell us why hispanics hate blacks? we'll wait.

[Matty]

Me too. He harasses by repeating the same crapola again and again. You are positively missing nothing.

Willow's harassment is just plain silly. Easy to overlook.

Plonk Chris, Jillian. Just do it! LOL





Regards from Rosie





So let's get this straight, you drag yourself over here, been here maybe two days and you already feel harassed? That's really awesome! you best get busy on that damn ignore button. There must be a choir somewhere you can preach to.

[countryboy]

No, she knows the difference between a shill and the real deal..
She doesn't know the difference between her ass, and a hole in the ground.

[jillian]

She doesn't know the difference between her ass, and a hole in the ground.

rightwing hacks really shouldn't throw stones.

[Matty]

you think stevie wonder is clayton bigsby?


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=chappelle show blind black kkk&amp;source=web&amp;cd=2&amp;ved=0CDAQtwIwAQ&amp;url=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DexNWAvlNYdM&amp;ei=Nh vmUbWNN7ij4APa-IGgCA&amp;usg=AFQjCNGwRcg00XqrcRObAqpLYHoHpgdY1g&amp;sig2= Ud-xOS950zrIzW8Qi_XFRQ&amp;bvm=bv.49405654,d.dmg



so humorless. Stevie Wonder has never seen his skin.

[countryboy]

rightwing hacks really shouldn't throw stones.
Rightwing hack? Evidence? Direct quotes maybe? Naw.....

[jillian]

so humorless. Stevie Wonder has never seen his skin.

clayton bigsby is hysterical.

and stevie wonder was born sighted. he lost his vision shortly after birth.

and i'd rather make fun of racism than denigrate someone for being offended by this horrible case and the actual racists who cheer for the white guy's "victory".

a normal person would say there was no victory here.... a mother's son was murdered because he was walking while black.... whether that met the level of culpability of the murder charge or not does not change what actually occurred.

so, willow, buy a sense of humor. because i thought it was funny as....

fwiw, bill cosby and whoopi goldberg and al sharpton hated clayton bigsby.

*edit* and it was one of your fellow right-wingers who asked the question "does stevie wonder know he's black". that is what i was making fun of. perhaps your concerns should be better expressed to the real racists.

[Matty]

clayton bigsby is hysterical.

and stevie wonder was born sighted. he lost his vision shortly after birth.

and i'd rather make fun of racism than denigrate someone for being offended by this horrible case.


you think he remembers seeing his skin shortly after birth, and secondly he won't be missed here in Florida and oh btw there are 29 other states with stand your ground laws so he's really limiting himself. I'm sure Detroit sure loves him trouble is it looks like Hiroshima in Detroit. And thirdly he has every right to be offended. It's very adult of liberals to bray for a trial and then when it's over and they didn't get their way to continue braying from the rooftops about unfairness. Typical And fourthly I can still voice an opinion on his choices. That's how it works here in Florida.

[Matty]

I hope Jillian boycotts Florida too, I hope she convinces Debbie Wasserman Schultz to do the same and take Grayson too.

[Matty]

It's 7AM down here in Florida, the warm gentle sun is shining, I'm going out to the pool and take a swim and contemplate my sins for being born white in America.

[Mister D]

so humorless. Stevie Wonder has never seen his skin.

That's probably why he is always smiling. :grin:

[Cigar]

It's 7AM down here in Florida, the warm gentle sun is shining, I'm going out to the pool and take a swim and contemplate my sins for being born white in America.

Don't forget your MR Happy Sunblock :wanker:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4864919129492358&pid=1.7&w=144&h=165&c=7&rs=1

[Agravan]

what i can't see is the celebration of this kid's death by so many on this board. it is not helpful to anyone's cause.
Please point out the posts where anyone is celebrating, besides the obvious satire ones that were posted a couple of days back in response to your "celebrating" BS.

[Chris]

Yes I fully understand why black people would feel hostilty about the verdict, I felt hostility along with millions of white people over the OJ simpson verdict, but I and they accepted it without Rioting in the Street calling for the murder of simpsons and his family and calling for the AG to retry him, His kids didnt have to go into hiding. Put this in perspective jillian, there was NO evidence to convict zimmerman as charged none according to florida law. I do believe he could have avoided this incident. Know what though jillian I never saw a crime that couldnt have been avoide NOT A SINGLE ONE in my career. Its easy to back seat drive its not easy to poo poo away the evidence.
Ill say this again, I do not believe zimmerman willfully set out to murder martin, I do believe martin could have avoided this just as well as zimmerman. Martin started the physical altercation that led to his death. There is zero evidence this was racially motivated in anyway.
The prosecution threw it all at zimmerman and had nothing. Their own witness's turned out helping the defense just by their own testimony. Zimmerman was over charged and over prosecuted and rightfully found innocent.

The only reason anyone should feel hostile is because of the way the media, politicians, pundits, those like jillian and her crew have infused and inflamed their racism into the case.


and i'd rather make fun of racism than denigrate someone for being offended by this horrible case.

You've have to abandon your own racist views first.

[Venus]

people with influence believe in using that influence.i know i would if i were in a position to exert influence on the issues that matter to me.but i wonder why so many denigrate it.... we all use our voices here and change nothing. i suspect each of us would make ourselves heard publicly if we could.or you could just acknowledge why people of color would be upset with the verdict and acknowledge the racial issues that exist in this country.

Most people do acknowledge racial issues, racial tension and racial divide, however it's impossible to have an honest conversation when you scream racist anytime something is said you don't like.

I linked the following piece because I feel it fits into what is going on now.

http://online.wsj.com/article/best_of_the_web_today.html

Shut Up and Speak Honestly

Holder urges candor. Does he mean it?


But an honest conversation requires more than honesty. It requires a willingness to engage constructively with people who hold views with which one disagrees, or that one finds disagreeable. In that regard, Cohen measures up while his detractors fall short.

If America is a "nation of cowards," it is likely because many people with views similar to Cohen's prefer to avoid the subject rather than endure the unpleasantness and potential serious repercussions that come with the accusation of racism. Holder's call for honest conversation would have some force if he exhorted fellow liberals and fellow blacks to be sensitive to the reasons for these inhibitions.

Absent that, it's more lecture than conversation.

[Mister D]

I don't avoid the conversation. That makes me a few enemies but the truth is more important than being liked.

[Venus]

I don't avoid the conversation. That makes me a few enemies but the truth is more important than being liked.

IMO

The word racist is starting to lose all meaning because it is thrown out all the time.

[Mister D]

IMO

The word racist is starting to lose all meaning because it is thrown out all the time.

It lost its meaning a long time ago. Now it just refers to any view on race or a topic that involves race that progressives don't like. It's not as meaningless as "fascist" but it's getting there.

[Chris]

It requires a willingness to engage constructively with people who hold views with which one disagrees, or that one finds disagreeable.

The market place of ideas is much like the free market, a voluntary exchange whereby everyone gains and wealth of ideas is generated. There are any number of people here, of any political stripe, with whom one can engage constructively win/win, and any number, of either stripe, who only engage in they win/you lose.

[ptif219]

Because the gap between the posts he makes is now smaller.....:smiley:

You mean his facts you can't disprove

[Venus]

It lost its meaning a long time ago. Now it just refers to any view on race or a topic that involves race that progressives don't like. It's not as meaningless as "fascist" but it's getting there.

agreed

[ptif219]

I disagree. Excellent song writers. In the case of Dylan, his voice could be better...

They should then stay out of politics and entertain

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/07/17/bruce-springsteen-dedicates-song-trayvon-martin-during-ireland-concer#ixzz2ZJX72iQS

[jillian]

They should then stay out of politics and entertain

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/07/17/bruce-springsteen-dedicates-song-trayvon-martin-during-ireland-concer#ixzz2ZJX72iQS

except for clint eastwood, right?

[Mister D]

except for clint eastwood, right?

Nope. Him too.

[jillian]

Rightwing hack? Evidence? Direct quotes maybe? Naw.....

res ipsa loquitur

[Chris]

agreed

Actually I disagree. From dictionary.com:

rac·ist [rey-sist] Show IPA
noun
1.
a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.
adjective
2.
of or like racists or racism: racist policies; racist attitudes.

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2.
a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.
hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.


That is what I see in some of jillian's and rosie's posts.

[Chris]

res ipsa loquitur

It just doesn't speak what you spew.

[ptif219]

except for clint eastwood, right?

The difference is Clint actually held a public office

[jillian]

I hope Jillian boycotts Florida too, I hope she convinces Debbie Wasserman Schultz to do the same and take Grayson too.

yes, how dare there be actual democrats in florida... the nerve.

and my family has property and business down there.... so not likely honey.

[jillian]

Most people do acknowledge racial issues, racial tension and racial divide, however it's impossible to have an honest conversation when you scream racist anytime something is said you don't like.

I linked the following piece because I feel it fits into what is going on now.

http://online.wsj.com/article/best_of_the_web_today.html

Shut Up and Speak Honestly

Holder urges candor. Does he mean it?


But an honest conversation requires more than honesty. It requires a willingness to engage constructively with people who hold views with which one disagrees, or that one finds disagreeable. In that regard, Cohen measures up while his detractors fall short.

If America is a "nation of cowards," it is likely because many people with views similar to Cohen's prefer to avoid the subject rather than endure the unpleasantness and potential serious repercussions that come with the accusation of racism. Holder's call for honest conversation would have some force if he exhorted fellow liberals and fellow blacks to be sensitive to the reasons for these inhibitions.

Absent that, it's more lecture than conversation.


first, thank you for an actual response. i appreciate it.
second, your link froze my work computer twice so i can't open it. i am curious about who wrote the article, though.
finally, i disagree. i don't believe society has to pander to the base fears of its lowest common denominator. i don't think anyone has to "understand" kkk'ers or skin heads; i don't think anyone has to "understand" muslims who blow up stuff; i don't think anyone has to "understand" people who bash gays or child abusers or spouse abusers or any number of other things. i don't have to understand neo-nazis or anyone else whose behavior is simply unacceptable in a diverse society.

i think the only way to deal with fear and ignorance is education.... and punishing those who act on their fear and ignorance inappropriately.

i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it.

where i won't have any understanding is why someone who was purportedly "afraid" got out of his car and followed.... with a loaded gun with no safety.

that is being a vigilante...

is it lecturing to say that arab terrorism is unacceptable?

is it lecturing to say that girls not being allowed to be educated b/c of religious extremism is unacceptable?

[Chris]

first, thank you for an actual response. i appreciate it.
second, your link froze my work computer twice so i can't open it. i am curious about who wrote the article, though.
finally, i disagree. i don't believe society has to pander to the base fears of its lowest common denominator. i don't think anyone has to "understand" kkk'ers or skin heads; i don't think anyone has to "understand" muslims who blow up stuff; i don't think anyone has to "understand" people who bash gays or child abusers or spouse abusers or any number of other things. i don't have to understand neo-nazis or anyone else whose behavior is simply unacceptable in a diverse society.

i think the only way to deal with fear and ignorance is education.... and punishing those who act on their fear and ignorance inappropriately.

i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it.

where i won't have any understanding is why someone who was purportedly "afraid" got out of his car and followed.... with a loaded gun with no safety.

that is being a vigilante...

And yet you fail to respond to what venus posted but instead wander about in the muddle of your own opinions and cognitive dissonance, this a real gem: "i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it."

[jillian]

It just doesn't speak what you spew.

stop projecting. :cuckoo:

[jillian]

The difference is Clint actually held a public office

no...the difference is he says what you want.

[Chris]

stop projecting. :cuckoo:

Another made up baseless opinion. I like you when you cookoo though. It's appropriate, every hour, on the hour, cookoo your racist tweet.

[jillian]

And yet you fail to respond to what venus posted but instead wander about in the muddle of your own opinions and cognitive dissonance, this a real gem: "i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it."

should i have wandered about in the muddle of your opinions?

nutbar.

[Chris]

should i have wandered about in the muddle of your opinions?

nutbar.

At least mine are based on fact and not fiction and prejudice.

Did you drop your nutbar lunch snack, jill?

[Venus]

first, thank you for an actual response. i appreciate it.
second, your link froze my work computer twice so i can't open it. i am curious about who wrote the article, though.
finally, i disagree. i don't believe society has to pander to the base fears of its lowest common denominator. i don't think anyone has to "understand" kkk'ers or skin heads; i don't think anyone has to "understand" muslims who blow up stuff; i don't think anyone has to "understand" people who bash gays or child abusers or spouse abusers or any number of other things. i don't have to understand neo-nazis or anyone else whose behavior is simply unacceptable in a diverse society.

i think the only way to deal with fear and ignorance is education.... and punishing those who act on their fear and ignorance inappropriately.

i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it.

where i won't have any understanding is why someone who was purportedly "afraid" got out of his car and followed.... with a loaded gun with no safety.

that is being a vigilante...


thanks for the actually response, I appreciate it

I'm sorry the piece froze your computer, if you would like to read the entire piece let me know and I'll post it in pieces. Author: James Taranto

No one, not me or the author, is asking you to understand, explain or pander to the extremist in our nation. Be it the KKK, black panthers, ELF, neo-nazis, so on and so forth. Ya can't. I don't understand the extremist so I know I can't have a clear, honest and calm conversation with them or about them.

This is where we disagree. Anytime you have asked me to clarify something I've said, I have. You on the other hand have been asked repeatly why you believe Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after he was told not to. What don't you understand about it? I'm not trying to be dick, I truely want to know. That's how conversations work, intelligent conversations. I might not be able to change your mind or you mine but at least we understand each other without resorting to racist and troll name calling.

This isn't the first time you have said this kind of self defense is vigilante justice. Why is it? Do you think we should take all self defense laws off the books? Does your reasoning (whatever reasoning that may be) only apply to people under the age of 18? More gun control laws? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Common]

first, thank you for an actual response. i appreciate it.
second, your link froze my work computer twice so i can't open it. i am curious about who wrote the article, though.
finally, i disagree. i don't believe society has to pander to the base fears of its lowest common denominator. i don't think anyone has to "understand" kkk'ers or skin heads; i don't think anyone has to "understand" muslims who blow up stuff; i don't think anyone has to "understand" people who bash gays or child abusers or spouse abusers or any number of other things. i don't have to understand neo-nazis or anyone else whose behavior is simply unacceptable in a diverse society.

i think the only way to deal with fear and ignorance is education.... and punishing those who act on their fear and ignorance inappropriately.

i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it.

where i won't have any understanding is why someone who was purportedly "afraid" got out of his car and followed.... with a loaded gun with no safety.

that is being a vigilante...

is it lecturing to say that arab terrorism is unacceptable?

is it lecturing to say that girls not being allowed to be educated b/c of religious extremism is unacceptable?

He wasnt afraid when he got out of the car and he never said that jillian and he got out of the car because martin was out of his sight. He became afraid when Martin jumped him knocked him to the ground broke his nose and was banging his head on the ground.

[junie]

The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law

[Mister D]

He wasnt afraid when he got out of the car and he never said that jillian and he got out of the car because martin was out of his sight. He became afraid when Martin jumped him knocked him to the ground broke his nose and was banging his head on the ground.


Listening to these people you wonder why Z didn't just shoot the "child" from a distance and walk away.

[Venus]

first, thank you for an actual response. i appreciate it.
second, your link froze my work computer twice so i can't open it. i am curious about who wrote the article, though.
finally, i disagree. i don't believe society has to pander to the base fears of its lowest common denominator. i don't think anyone has to "understand" kkk'ers or skin heads; i don't think anyone has to "understand" muslims who blow up stuff; i don't think anyone has to "understand" people who bash gays or child abusers or spouse abusers or any number of other things. i don't have to understand neo-nazis or anyone else whose behavior is simply unacceptable in a diverse society.

i think the only way to deal with fear and ignorance is education.... and punishing those who act on their fear and ignorance inappropriately.

i know why zimmerman called the cops. i disagree, but i understand it.

where i won't have any understanding is why someone who was purportedly "afraid" got out of his car and followed.... with a loaded gun with no safety.

that is being a vigilante...

is it lecturing to say that arab terrorism is unacceptable?

is it lecturing to say that girls not being allowed to be educated b/c of religious extremism is unacceptable?


And if your going to carry wouldn't you want it loaded? And would you please tell us what "no safety" means and why you find it important. Thanks

[Chris]

The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law

The case was tried on basis of self defense not stand your ground.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.

Self defense requires attempt at retreat. That oped is confused.

[junie]

The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law




^ people need to get past the minutia of this one particular case and realize the real reason people like SW are not letting this issue go...

[Chris]

^ people need to get past the minutia of this one particular case and realize the real reason people like SW are not letting this issue go...


The case was tried on basis of self defense not stand your ground.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.

Self defense requires attempt at retreat. That oped is confused.

[junie]

The case was tried on basis of self defense not stand your ground.



Self defense requires attempt at retreat. That oped is confused.



no, you're obviously confused but what else is new? lol


what part of getting past the minutia of this one particular case do you not grasp...?

[jillian]

thanks for the actually response, I appreciate it

I'm sorry the piece froze your computer, if you would like to read the entire piece let me know and I'll post it in pieces. Author: James Taranto

No one, not me or the author, is asking you to understand, explain or pander to the extremist in our nation. Be it the KKK, black panthers, ELF, neo-nazis, so on and so forth. Ya can't. I don't understand the extremist so I know I can't have a clear, honest and calm conversation with them or about them.

This is where we disagree. Anytime you have asked me to clarify something I've said, I have. You on the other hand have been asked repeatly why you believe Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after he was told not to. What don't you understand about it? I'm not trying to be dick, I truely want to know. That's how conversations work, intelligent conversations. I might not be able to change your mind or you mine but at least we understand each other without resorting to racist and troll name calling.

This isn't the first time you have said this kind of self defense is vigilante justice. Why is it? Do you think we should take all self defense laws off the books? Does your reasoning (whatever reasoning that may be) only apply to people under the age of 18? More gun control laws? Inquiring minds want to know.

thanks re taranto... i figured it was a conservative pundit. i can probably get the whole article on my home computer. if i can't, i'll let you know.

perhaps you didn't see those posts, but i've said repeatedly why i thought zimmerman followed. he didn't want the "a-holes... to get away with it" anymore. he was a wanna be cop and wanted to be a hero. it's what he told the 911 operator and i believe he meant it when he said it.

i don't think it was any more noble than that.

i have no doubt that he thought trayvon martin was 'up to no good'. i never once question the authenticity of that particular emotion even though i wouldn't have responded the same way. that might be cultural... i live in nyc... black people (or any other color person) in a hoodie just looks like running gear to me.... unless someone is driving in their car. then it looks like they're trying to keep from being i.d.'d (again ... no matter what color they are). i should also point out that i work for a big black dude who was born in the deep south when lynchings were a way of life... and blacks had to be obsequious and yes'm, and 'no sir' just not to get killed (sound familiar?). then he moved to bed stuy where the cops would beat them for waiting for the bus home from school. he took a particular offense to this case... not the verdict... he understood that... but the situation.

my belief is zimmerman had no business following. he had already called the cop. and as i said above, he thought he'd "get" one of "them" so they didn't "get away with it".

my guess? he wanted to hold the kid at gunpoint until the cops came. i don't think he went after him intending to shoot him. but i do think he was reckless.

and... if, as really makes sense, zimmerman, who is not law enforcement... tried to detain martin... why would martin stay? why would he answer questions? he didn't know this man from adam. the man had no authority over him... probably did seem like a 'creepy cracker'... following him, like so many young black men get followed... for just walking around.... and he probably did get scared or annoyed or some measure of each.

would zimmerman have stood there if trayvon martin demanded it? or would he have told him to piss off? words then get exchanged... like the big babies so many men are, a scuffle ensues.... the only problem is zimmerman has a gun under his butt... martin probably didn't even know it was there.... until he saw it and started to scream.... until the shot.

btw, if i were the prosecutor, that's probably the picture i'd have painted for the jury... not the half-assed job they did where they didn't even bother prepping their witnesses. (and yes, i know there is a lot of surmise in that narrative... but there was a lot of surmise in zimmerman's too).

[Chris]

no, you're obviously confused but what else is new? lol


what part of getting past the minutia of this one particular case do you not grasp...?

I demonstrated where the oped you sources is confused in leaving out the requirement to retreat.

Where I am I confused, junie? Demonstrate it. Can't? Figures, you make things up.

When are you going to get past it, junie? Don't you first have to deal with the minutia of facts and testimony and verdict?

[junie]

The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law




That oped is confused.


:rollseyes: that article explained the crux of the matter and although written prior to the trial, still explains the crux of people like SW's sincere concern...





How 'duty to retreat' became 'stand your ground'

By Jeffrey Bellin, Special to CNN


updated 7:30 PM EDT, Wed March 21, 2012



Editor's note: Jeffrey Bellin (http://www.law.smu.edu/Faculty/Full-Time-Faculty/Bellin.aspx), an assistant professor of law at Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, formerly served as a federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS


Jeffrey Bellin: Until recently, Florida's self-defense law included a "duty to retreat"
In 2005, Florida overrode law enforcement objections, adopted a "stand your ground" rule
Bellin says that even on a sidewalk, people may defend themselves with deadly force
He says "Stand your ground" may ultimately decide outcome of Trayvon Martin shooting

[Venus]

thanks re taranto... i figured it was a conservative pundit. i can probably get the whole article on my home computer. if i can't, i'll let you know.

perhaps you didn't see those posts, but i've said repeatedly why i thought zimmerman followed. he didn't want the "a-holes... to get away with it" anymore. he was a wanna be cop and wanted to be a hero. it's what he told the 911 operator and i believe he meant it when he said it.

i don't think it was any more noble than that.

i have no doubt that he thought trayvon martin was 'up to no good'. i never once question the authenticity of that particular emotion even though i wouldn't have responded the same way. that might be cultural... i live in nyc... black people (or any other color person) in a hoodie just looks like running gear to me.... unless someone is driving in their car. then it looks like they're trying to keep from being i.d.'d (again ... no matter what color they are). i should also point out that i work for a big black dude who was born in the deep south when lynchings were a way of life... and blacks had to be obsequious and yes'm, and 'no sir' just not to get killed (sound familiar?). then he moved to bed stuy where the cops would beat them for waiting for the bus home from school. he took a particular offense to this case... not the verdict... he understood that... but the situation.

my belief is zimmerman had no business following. he had already called the cop. and as i said above, he thought he'd "get" one of "them" so they didn't "get away with it".

my guess? he wanted to hold the kid at gunpoint until the cops came. i don't think he went after him intending to shoot him. but i do think he was reckless.

and... if, as really makes sense, zimmerman, who is not law enforcement... tried to detain martin... why would martin stay? why would he answer questions? he didn't know this man from adam. the man had no authority over him... probably did seem like a 'creepy cracker'... following him, like so many young black men get followed... for just walking around.... and he probably did get scared or annoyed or some measure of each.

would zimmerman have stood there if trayvon martin demanded it? or would he have told him to piss off? words then get exchanged... like the big babies so many men are, a scuffle ensues.... the only problem is zimmerman has a gun under his butt... martin probably didn't even know it was there.... until he saw it and started to scream.... until the shot.

btw, if i were the prosecutor, that's probably the picture i'd have painted for the jury... not the half-assed job they did where they didn't even bother prepping their witnesses. (and yes, i know there is a lot of surmise in that narrative... but there was a lot of surmise in zimmerman's too).


Thanks, I'm going to need a minute or two before I can respond. You have a lot going on here.

It may not be until later in the evening before I can respond, I have a few things I need to get done.

[Chris]

:rollseyes: that article explained the crux of the matter and although written prior to the trial, still explains the crux of people like SW's sincere concern...

Good, now you've finally got the whole picture.

[junie]

Good, now you've finally got the whole picture.



lol good lord, by what delusion did you conclude that i hadn't already? :loco:

[Chris]

lol good lord, by what delusion did you conclude that i hadn't already? :loco:

Based on what your initial post left out and I pointed out missing, junie.

[countryboy]

res ipsa loquitur
In other words, you got nuthin'. It's okay, sometimes people run their mouths before their brain is engaged. Usually not as a rule, but it happens.

[jillian]

lol good lord, by what delusion did you conclude that i hadn't already? :loco:

yes, but trolling and posting nothing but ad homs makes him feel better about himself.

[Mr Happy]

They should then stay out of politics and entertain

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/07/17/bruce-springsteen-dedicates-song-trayvon-martin-during-ireland-concer#ixzz2ZJX72iQS

There's an amendment to your Constitution. The first one. Read it. Learn....

[Chris]

yes, but trolling and posting nothing but ad homs makes him feel better about himself.

Why do you have this incessant need to lie, jill?

Junie posted an explanation of self-defense that did not include the need to try to retreat. I pointed out the error. It's as simple as that. How is that trolling, how that ad hom? How is this anything but you lying, incessantly.

[junie]

Why do you have this incessant need to lie, jill?

Junie posted an explanation of self-defense that did not include the need to try to retreat. I pointed out the error. It's as simple as that. How is that trolling, how that ad hom? How is this anything but you lying, incessantly.


lol far be it from me to point out that uh actually my initial post did in fact include duty to retreat...


post 93?



The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinio...our-ground-law (http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law)

[Chris]

lol far be it from me to point out that uh actually my initial post did in fact include duty to retreat...


post 93?



The tragic killing of Trayvon Martin and the initial decision by the police not to arrest George Zimmerman for that killing have focused public attention on Florida's "stand your ground" law. According to police, Zimmerman claims self-defense, but many observers can't understand how a grown man with a gun can plausibly claim that he was forced to kill a teenager armed only with some candy.


If that's the law of self-defense in Florida (and elsewhere), these observers argue, the law needs to change.


The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."


This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.
In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinio...our-ground-law (http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law)

Yes, there's mention of the question of retreat but it's been bound in as a part of the definition of self-defense for centuries.

It's not a question, as the confused OP author thinks, it's a fact. FL's law still does include the requirement for retreat.

If you were really interested in discussion, you'd engage instead of playing games.

[Mr Happy]

Junie/Jill

Put him on ignore. You'll thank me for it....;o)

[Chris]

Junie/Jill

Put him on ignore. You'll thank me for it....;o)

Hiya, ;o), you forgot your hat again: *<:o)

Putting someone on ignore and not actually ignoring them is ignorant.

[jillian]

Hiya, ;o), you forgot your hat again: *<:o)

Putting someone on ignore and not actually ignoring them is ignorant.

too rough for you to figure out he sees our responses TO you....

you were told that last night. having trouble absorbing the concept?

[junie]

Hiya, ;o), you forgot your hat again: *<:o)

Putting someone on ignore and not actually ignoring them is ignorant.


ever the master of the obvious...

[Chris]

too rough for you to figure out he sees our responses TO you....

you were told that last night. having trouble absorbing the concept?

Putting someone on ignore and not actually ignoring them is ignorant.

[Chris]

ever the master of the obvious...

Agree, it is obvious, putting someone on ignore and not actually ignoring them is ignorant, the clownish happy ought to master the obvious.

[junie]

Yes, there's mention of the question of retreat but it's been bound in as a part of the definition of self-defense for centuries.

It's not a question, as the confused OP author thinks, it's a fact.



:afro: lol right...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0eVf3ynZbw

[Chris]

:afro: lol right...

Right, unable to discuss.

[bladimz]

It lost its meaning a long time ago. Now it just refers to any view on race or a topic that involves race that progressives don't like. It's not as meaningless as "fascist" but it's getting there.A correction here: replace "progressivest" with "some".

[Mister D]

A correction here: replace "progressivest" with "some".

ok

[roadmaster]

Refuses to come to Florida anymore. That'll damn sure teach us a thing or two! Yep! Then he shouldn't go anymore. Too many respectful black men around here and refuse to buy into this hate the media and hate groups are pushing.

[bladimz]

Just a quick question, and i don't mean to be gross, but does anyone here know if there was an exit wound on Martin's body?

[roadmaster]

Just a quick question, and i don't mean to be gross, but does anyone here know if there was an exit wound on Martin's body? I know but not going to talk about it. The young man is dead. Could have happened to many of us when we were younger and thought we were invisible.

[Venus]

thanks re taranto... i figured it was a conservative pundit. i can probably get the whole article on my home computer. if i can't, i'll let you know.

perhaps you didn't see those posts, but i've said repeatedly why i thought zimmerman followed. he didn't want the "a-holes... to get away with it" anymore. he was a wanna be cop and wanted to be a hero. it's what he told the 911 operator and i believe he meant it when he said it.

i don't think it was any more noble than that.

i have no doubt that he thought trayvon martin was 'up to no good'. i never once question the authenticity of that particular emotion even though i wouldn't have responded the same way. that might be cultural... i live in nyc... black people (or any other color person) in a hoodie just looks like running gear to me.... unless someone is driving in their car. then it looks like they're trying to keep from being i.d.'d (again ... no matter what color they are). i should also point out that i work for a big black dude who was born in the deep south when lynchings were a way of life... and blacks had to be obsequious and yes'm, and 'no sir' just not to get killed (sound familiar?). then he moved to bed stuy where the cops would beat them for waiting for the bus home from school. he took a particular offense to this case... not the verdict... he understood that... but the situation.

my belief is zimmerman had no business following. he had already called the cop. and as i said above, he thought he'd "get" one of "them" so they didn't "get away with it".

my guess? he wanted to hold the kid at gunpoint until the cops came. i don't think he went after him intending to shoot him. but i do think he was reckless.

and... if, as really makes sense, zimmerman, who is not law enforcement... tried to detain martin... why would martin stay? why would he answer questions? he didn't know this man from adam. the man had no authority over him... probably did seem like a 'creepy cracker'... following him, like so many young black men get followed... for just walking around.... and he probably did get scared or annoyed or some measure of each.

would zimmerman have stood there if trayvon martin demanded it? or would he have told him to piss off? words then get exchanged... like the big babies so many men are, a scuffle ensues.... the only problem is zimmerman has a gun under his butt... martin probably didn't even know it was there.... until he saw it and started to scream.... until the shot.

btw, if i were the prosecutor, that's probably the picture i'd have painted for the jury... not the half-assed job they did where they didn't even bother prepping their witnesses. (and yes, i know there is a lot of surmise in that narrative... but there was a lot of surmise in zimmerman's too).



Why does it matter who wrote it? Correct me if I'm wrong but conservatives should be included in the honest discussion on race relations in this country.

I get why you think or believe the way you do, but I don't understand how you came to that conclusion. That was the issue.

A few things we agree on. Zimmerman might have thought Martin was up to no good considering what had gone on in the community with break ins and a home invasion. Zimmerman did say the things he said. Course I don't understand when wanting to become a cop or prosecutor became a bad thing??? Anyway, I agree that we all bring our own experiences to any given situation we are in. I probably wouldn’t have reacted the same way Zimmerman did but I will tell you that I watch anyone walking around my neighborhood, especially if I don't know who they are. I would have called 911 but we don't have a neighborhood watch.

The differences.

Your guess or you believe that Zimmerman only wanted to hold Martin at gun point until the cops arrived. Off the top of my head I have a couple of question for you.

Let's go with your theory that Zimmerman continued to following Martin after he was told not to...right? Not what I believe that but we'll go with it.

Why didn't Zimmerman have his gun out? Again, correct me if I'm wrong but if you carry a weapon and intend to hold someone until the cops arrive wouldn't you get the gun out before the first punch was thrown? Before you’re on your back getting a beat down? Wouldn't a wanna be cop do that? I mean a wanna be doesn't forget he has a weapon. He wouldn’t wait.

I have more question but they depend on your answer(s) to the above questions.

I can't really answer any of your questions because I don't believe that Martin was scared. I think Martin was a young punk who was going to teach the creepy ass cracker a lesson for having the balls to following him. I believe that Zimmerman stopped following Martin after he was told he didn't need to do that anymore. I do believe Zimmerman took his responsibilities seriously and probably more seriously than he should have. I don't believe that Zimmerman wanted to get Martin because he was black. I don't believe Zimmerman ever wanted to kill Martin. I can't even imagine what either family is going through and I pray to God I never do.

On to the prosecutor.

You don't think that the prosecutor or one of his team members bothered to interview his witnesses? Not one time? You don't think that the prosecutor ask his witnesses the questions he was going to ask on the stand? Do you think the witnesses answered differently on the stand than in the interview?

On a side note. How old is your boss?

I think I covered everything. Thanks for your patience jillian.

[jillian]

Just a quick question, and i don't mean to be gross, but does anyone here know if there was an exit wound on Martin's body?

Raimondo also described how he lifted Martin’s body to find the exit wound on the teen’s back. He said he asked bystanders for a plastic bag to help seal the wound. When more responders arrived later, they pronounced Martin dead. Raimondo said he was the one to cover Martin’s body with a blanket.
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/25/george-zimmerman-trial-live-blog-day-2

[Chris]

Just a quick question, and i don't mean to be gross, but does anyone here know if there was an exit wound on Martin's body?

"Raimondo also described how he lifted Martin’s body to find the exit wound on the teen’s back."

@ http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/25/george-zimmerman-trial-live-blog-day-2

Already answered.

Why'd you want to know?

[bladimz]

I know but not going to talk about it. The young man is dead. Could have happened to many of us when we were younger and thought we were invisible.
I'm not laughing at you, really, but i remember when i was a kid i would have said invisible without knowing about the word "invincible". I used to tell my brother that he couldn't hurt me because i was invisible.

Anyway, why won't you say? I'm just curious. I haven't heard anything about it.

[bladimz]

"Raimondo also described how he lifted Martin’s body to find the exit wound on the teen’s back."

@ http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/25/george-zimmerman-trial-live-blog-day-2

Already answered.

Why's you want to know?Just curious, is all.

[Chris]

Just curious, is all.
bladimz, a different version:


Earlier, Sanford police sergeant Anthony Raimondo described his futile efforts to save Martin, using a plastic grocery bag to try to seal the gunshot wound in the teenager's chest from which he heard bubbling caused by escaping air.

Raimondo, one of the first officers to arrive, said he found Martin lying face down with his hands under his body, and turned him over with the help of another officer so he could try mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.

"I breathed for Mr Martin, or tried to," he said, adding that he ignored the department's usual policy of using a protective mask because of the "rare and extraordinary" circumstances of the situation.

The bubbling sounds, he said, "meant that air was getting into or air was escaping from the chest in a manner it's not supposed to." He added he could not find an exit wound for the bullet, so he was unable to make an effective
seal with the plastic bags given to him by a resident.

"I put an emergency blanket over Mr Martin's body, it was respect for the deceased, to mitigate trauma for family members if they arrived on scene and to preserve any physical evidence on the body," he said.

@ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/25/zimmerman-trial-graphic-photos-trayvon-martin

[roadmaster]

I'm not laughing at you, really, but i remember when i was a kid i would have said invisible without knowing about the word "invincible". I used to tell my brother that he couldn't hurt me because i was invisible.

Anyway, why won't you say? I'm just curious. I haven't heard anything about it. We didn't say invincible in the south. Yes we all thought we couldn't be hurt. Just like me when I attacked a man with a gun pointing at me from his car. Could have easily been shot but at that time, I didn't care. Was it stupid looking back, yes.

[roadmaster]

Oh and why, I got mine first hand not from the papers.

[Private Pickle]

Stevie Wonder sucks...personally I never got his music and while a great musician, nothing special...

[roadmaster]

Stevie Wonder sucks...personally I never got his music and while a great musician, nothing special... I went to see him in concert once.

[Ravi]

Yes, there's mention of the question of retreat but it's been bound in as a part of the definition of self-defense for centuries.

It's not a question, as the confused OP author thinks, it's a fact. FL's law still does include the requirement for retreat.

If you were really interested in discussion, you'd engage instead of playing games.
No it doesn't

[Mainecoons]

Once again, you demonstrate your ignorance:


Andrew F. Branca, the author of The Law of Self Defense, has noted that Florida is not necessarily unique in enacting a stand-your-ground law; similar measures are on the books in about 30 states. Attorney Branca explained the stand-your-ground law (http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/the-marissa-alexander-case-wasnt-about-stand-your-ground-either//#more) as follows:“Traditionally, it was required that you take advantage of a safe avenue of retreat, if such was reasonably available to you, before using deadly force in self-defense. This was what is referred to as a generalized duty to retreat. It always had exceptions, such as the Castle Doctrine which lifts the duty when you are in your home.
“The ‘stand-your-ground’ law expands the scope of the Castle Doctrine beyond your home to every place you have a right to be. So, even if there were a safe avenue of retreat reasonably available to you, you no longer have a legal duty to attempt to make use of it before using deadly force in self-defense.
“The duty to retreat itself, however, only applies where safe retreat is possible. If there is no safe avenue of retreat, there is no duty. If there is no duty, the ‘stand-your-ground’ statute that relieves you of that duty is irrelevant.”

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/855138/stand-your-ground-law-invoked-by-white-and-black-defendants-in-florida-report/#ddekdzUToDOig62M.99

Note this piece confirms that blacks in FL benefit from stand your ground the most.

[Chris]

No it doesn't

You're confusing self-defense and stand your ground. Self-defense for centuries has included retreat, stand your ground obviates that. Zimmerman's defense was based on self-defense, not stand your ground.

[junie]

You're confusing self-defense and stand your ground. Self-defense for centuries has included retreat, stand your ground obviates that.


Zimmerman's defense was based on self-defense, not stand your ground.


no shit. how many times are you going to repeat that? :loco:


http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/14615-Stevie-Wonder?p=328153&viewfull=1#post328153

[Chris]

no shit. how many times are you going to repeat that? :loco:


http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/14615-Stevie-Wonder?p=328153&viewfull=1#post328153

As many times as someone like marie says the opposite.

As many times as you post a source that questions whether retreat should be part of FL self-defense law.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/smilies/newsmilies/loco.gif: repeating an action like you and marie and jillian do is a good definition of that.

[junie]

I demonstrated where the oped you sources is confused in leaving out the requirement to retreat.

Where I am I confused, junie? Demonstrate it. Can't? Figures, you make things up.

When are you going to get past it, junie? Don't you first have to deal with the minutia of facts and testimony and verdict?



wtf is wrong with you? :loco:

that was the TITLE of the article and the whole POINT of what i posted:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/14615-Stevie-Wonder?p=328153&viewfull=1#post328153



at first i gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were confused but your persistence shows how you're a deliberately dishonest broker.




How 'duty to retreat' became 'stand your ground'

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law

[Chris]

wtf is wrong with you? :loco:

that was the TITLE of the article and the whole POINT of what i posted:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/14615-Stevie-Wonder?p=328153&viewfull=1#post328153



at first i gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were confused but your persistence shows how you're a deliberately dishonest broker.




How 'duty to retreat' became 'stand your ground'

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law


How 'duty to retreat' became 'stand your ground'

You ask what's wrong with me and then repost that?

Duty to retreat is a part of self-defense not part of stand your ground. Your source is arguing it should be a part of SYG. If duty to retreat was added to SYG then SYG would be self-defense.

Hey, attack me personally all you like junie, it adds nothing except to expose your character.

[junie]

"I decided today that until the 'Stand Your Ground' law is abolished in Florida, I will never perform there again," he told the audience. "As a matter of fact, wherever I find that law exists, I will not perform in that state or in that part of the world."


Though the "stand your ground" law arguably was not a factor in Zimmerman's acquittal, it was a much-discussed potential motivation for Zimmerman's actions on the night of Feb. 26, 2012, when he and Martin had their deadly encounter.


Stevie Wonder says he'll boycott 'stand your ground' states
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/showbiz/stevie-wonder-florida-boycott/index.html

[junie]

Holder took aim at "stand your ground" laws like the one in Florida that have expanded the right to respond with deadly force if attacked outside the home.

Those laws "try to fix something that was never broken" and "senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods," he said.


"By allowing -- and perhaps encouraging -- violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety," Holder said in his first public comment on legislation that more than 30 states have passed in some form.



http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/politics/zimmerman-holder/index.html

[Chris]

O'Mara also said SYG goes too far.

[countryboy]

Holder took aim at "stand your ground" laws like the one in Florida that have expanded the right to respond with deadly force if attacked outside the home.

Those laws "try to fix something that was never broken" and "senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods," he said.


"By allowing -- and perhaps encouraging -- violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety," Holder said in his first public comment on legislation that more than 30 states have passed in some form.



http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/politics/zimmerman-holder/index.html

Thats all well and good, and SYG may very well be a bad law. But what does that have to do with the Martin/Zimmerman case?

[junie]

No it doesn't


lol i know!




The law of self-defense is at its core about reasonableness. If a person reasonably perceives a serious threat of harm, and uses reasonable force to meet that threat, the law justifies even deadly force, and it does so even if it turns out that the perceived threat was illusory.


People have differing views of what's reasonable and, as a consequence, self-defense laws (which vary by jurisdiction) have always attempted to further define the concept. Until very recently, Florida's definition of reasonableness, as in many states, incorporated a longstanding principle, the "duty to retreat."



The "duty to retreat" also made it easier for prosecutors to prove that a killing was not in self-defense. The facts that can be proven are often murky (particularly when of the two people who know what happened, one is the defendant and the other is dead) and prosecutors could often, by pointing to a defendant's failure to retreat, obtain a conviction even without establishing the precise facts.


In American jurisdictions there has long been an exception to the duty to retreat called the "Castle Doctrine." As then-Judge (and later U.S. Supreme Court Justice) Benjamin Cardozo explained in 1914: "It is not now and never has been the law that a man assailed in his own dwelling is bound to retreat. If assailed there, he may stand his ground and resist the attack. He is under no duty to take to the fields and the highways, a fugitive from his own home."



In recent times, "stand your ground" (http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/20/us/florida-teen-shooting-law/index.html)laws extended this concept in many states beyond the home to any place where a person might lawfully be found, such as a bar or a public sidewalk. Florida's version enacted in 2005 (over the objection of many in law enforcement) is one of the most far reaching.


The law states that a person "who is attacked" anywhere he is lawfully present has "no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm."

[junie]

In speaking out against "Stand Your Ground" self-defense laws (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/16/19506188-holder-speaks-out-against-stand-your-ground-laws-after-zimmerman-verdict?lite) this week, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized legislation that has been enacted in some two dozen states and has been backed by powerful gun lobbyists since the first such law was passed in Florida in 2005.


Stand Your Ground laws — sometimes referred to as "Shoot First" laws by detractors — change the legal definition of self-defense for citizens who feel they are being confronted with deadly force or imminent danger. They have been part of the public discussion around the George Zimmerman trial; although the legal team arguing on behalf of the man who was found not guilty of shooting Trayvon Martin did not ask for an immunity hearing under the law, the instructions given to the jury borrowed language from the statute.


Normally, a citizen has a duty to retreat when confronted with what they perceive to be deadly force. The Stand Your Ground doctrine mostly removes that, meaning citizens who feel threatened are no longer required to try to quell a situation first before having the right to use deadly force in self-defense.


With major support from the National Rifle Association under a Republican state legislature during Gov. Jeb Bush's administration, Florida became the first state to enact a Stand Your Ground law on Oct. 1, 2005. Since then, Stand Your Ground law has been invoked in more than 200 cases in Florida where charges were dismissed or defendants were acquitted or not charged at all, according to The Tampa Bay Times (http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/data).


There are three parts to Florida's Stand Your Ground law (http://floridastandyourground.org/). It states that a person is presumed to have reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when using defensive force if an intruder has broken into his or her home or vehicle and is justified in using force; it states that a person does not have a duty to retreat if he or she believes death or bodily harm is imminent; and it provides immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.


What made it such radical legislation was the automatic presumption of reasonable fear. Inside Florida homes and cars, it overrode previous self-defense laws that required proof that an individual felt a reasonable enough level of fear to use self-defense.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/18/19522874-florida-had-first-stand-your-ground-law-other-states-followed-in-rapid-succession

[Common]

Stevie is going to have a problem half the country has stand your ground laws and there are more in the making.
The very democratic states wont get stand your ground of course but I think more states than not will have it in the next few years.

[Cigar]

Somehow ... I'm betting people will start rethinking this ... when MF'ers start Shooting Back and Shooting First and Shooting as a Group. :wink:

[Chris]

You're back to confusing self-defense and stand your ground, junie.

As countryboy asked, "what does that have to do with the Martin/Zimmerman case?" Do you have an answer, or do you like to just repeat yourself? http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/smilies/newsmilies/loco.gif

[Venus]

Stevie is going to have a problem half the country has stand your ground laws and there are more in the making.
The very democratic states wont get stand your ground of course but I think more states than not will have it in the next few years.


I think it's at 30 states that have SYG laws.

Stevie can perform whereever whenever he chooses, I don't really care.

I would go see him but I would also get up and leave if he starting preaching to me. I'm there for the music not the opinion

[countryboy]

You're back to confusing self-defense and stand your ground, junie.

As countryboy asked, "what does that have to do with the Martin/Zimmerman case?" Do you have an answer, or do you like to just repeat yourself? :loco:
I'm guessing the latter. :wink:

[Cigar]

Stevie is going to have a problem half the country has stand your ground laws and there are more in the making.
The very democratic states wont get stand your ground of course but I think more states than not will have it in the next few years.



When you have over a $100M Net Worth at age 63 ... do you really give a shit about your next concert in the United States? :wink:

[countryboy]

When you have over a $100M Net Worth at age 63 ... do you really give a shit about your next concert in the United States? :wink:
Not if you're only in it for the money.

[junie]

You're back to confusing self-defense and stand your ground, junie.

As countryboy asked, "what does that have to do with the Martin/Zimmerman case?" Do you have an answer, or do you like to just repeat yourself?



and your continuous disingenuous posting is sickening... :loco:




^ people need to get past the minutia of this one particular case and realize the real reason people like SW are not letting this issue go...



what part of getting past the minutia of this one particular case do you not grasp...?

[junie]

Stevie is going to have a problem half the country has stand your ground laws and there are more in the making.
The very democratic states wont get stand your ground of course but I think more states than not will have it in the next few years.





Here are several other notable Stand Your Ground differences by state, as well as some court cases where it's been applied:


Texas: A person can only use Stand Your Ground if they have the right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, and has not provoked the person against whom the deadly forced is used.

In November 2007, Joe Horn, 61, of Pasadena, Texas, saw two burglars break into his neighbors' home, according to The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/13/us/13texas.html?_r=0). He grabbed his shotgun and called 911, offering to the 911 operator, "I've got a shotgun; do you want me to stop them?" Despite the emergency operator telling him no, he allegedly went over and killed the two men. Horn claimed self-defense and wasnot indicted when he went before a grand jury (http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5278638&page=1#.UebTtY3VAuc).


North Carolina: Exceptions to the use of deadly force as listed in North Carolina's law are against police officers or law enforcement, bailbondsmen and landlords. Stand Your Ground passed in North Carolina in 2011.


Kansas: Kansas' Stand Your Ground law specifies the person can't be engaged in illegal activity while defending him or herself. The law, enacted in 2006, has rarely been applied in Kansas, The Wichita Eagle notes (http://www.kansas.com/2012/03/31/2278573/reasonableness-the-key-to-kansas.html).

Louisiana: Byron Thomas, 21, of Lafourche Parish, La. (http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20120223/HURBLOG/120229817?p=all&tc=pgall), was cleared by a grand jury in the death of 15-year-old Jamonta Miles in February 2012 because he claimed he acted in self-defense when he shot an SUV the boy was in. The two may have been in rival gangs, according to Louisiana's HoumaToday.com (http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20120223/HURBLOG/120229817?p=all&tc=pgall); Thomas fired on the vehicle after getting into an argument while trying to buy marijuana. Louisiana's Stand Your Ground law passed in 2006.


Arizona: In April 2012, Cordell Jude, 22, was driving in Phoenix when Daniel Adkins Jr. walked in front of him with his dog. "Watch it!" Jude yelled to Adkins, who was mentally disabled, according to USA TODAY. Adkins then swung what looked like a pipe in the air and Jude shot and killed him — the pipe-like object turned out to just be a dog leash (http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/29/us/stand-your-ground). Jude claimed self-defense; he remained free for three months, but now faces second-degree murder charges and is set to go to trial next month, according to the Maricopa County Sheriff's office. The Arizona Stand Your Ground law passed in 2010.


Oklahoma: In 2010, Carl England of Tulsa was shot in the chest and killed after attacking another man he accused of breaking into his daughter's apartment. His killer, Pernell Jefferson, 37, was not charged with the murder, due to Stand Your Ground, but is serving a six-year sentence on a weapons charge, according to The Associated Press (http://news.yahoo.com/tulsa-police-shootings-may-revenge-223547590.html). Oklahoma enacted its Stand Your Ground law, which closely mirrors Florida's, in 2006.


Georgia: John McNeil hired Brian Epp, a construction company owner, to build a new house for him in Cobb County, Ga., in 2005. In December 2005, McNeil's son got into an argument in the backyard with Epp, who allegedly pulled out a pocketknife. Upon hearing this, McNeil rushed home and fired a warning shot with his gun, reported Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2012/04/11/when_stand_your_ground_fails). But Epp charged toward him, allegedly reaching for his pocket knife again. McNeil fired another shot, this time hitting Epp in the head and killing him. In 2006, despite the state passing a Stand Your Ground law earlier in the year, McNeil was sentenced to life in prison, which was later reduced after he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of manslaughter.


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/18/19522874-florida-had-first-stand-your-ground-law-other-states-followed-in-rapid-succession

[Common]

Somehow ... I'm betting people will start rethinking this ... when MF'ers start Shooting Back and Shooting First and Shooting as a Group. :wink:

Cigar any law can have down sides. Take for example New Jersey where I have family and where I lived after I retired.
If someone breaks in your home in the middle of the night and walks in your bedroom is standing over you, you better not shoot him because if you do its you getting arrested along with him if hes still alive
My one son in law is a jersey cop and A mother of 3 ran home to her parents house at 2am afraid of her boyfriend. She had broken up with him and he kept breaking in her house. He told her if she called police he would kill her.
He came to her fathers house and was banging on the sliding doors, her father 63 yrs old told him do not come through that door im armed and I will shoot you. They had called 911 the BF broke the glass on the sliding door and rushed into the room the father shot him once and killed him. My son in law was first to respond. He had to arrest the father a 63 yr old black man. He did not want to but he had no choice with jersey law. The BF was unarmed but the father had no way he could have physically dealt with the guy.
Screw THAT, any person that breaks into someone house needs to know they may meet a gun in the process.

[Chris]

and your continuous disingenuous posting is sickening... :loco:

Why do you say that? Substantiate your opinion, will ya? It has no meaning otherwise. BTW, sorry you're sick, hope you get well soon.

[Cigar]

Not if you're only in it for the money.

Educate yourself http://www.biography.com/people/stevie-wonder-9536078 :wink:

[countryboy]

Educate yourself http://www.biography.com/people/stevie-wonder-9536078 :wink:
What more do I need to know? Stevie is apparently a racist. Very disappointing. I've always loved his music.

[Cigar]

What more do I need to know? Stevie is apparently a racist. Very disappointing. I've always loved his music.

Don't worry ... Stevie going to miss you ... with all 6 Bullets :tongue:

[Venus]

The Department of Justice has established an email address to send tips about profiling and we need to step up to the plate. I’ve passed on my tip and you should do the same. The email address is: Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov. Here’s the information I offered…

To Whom It May Concern,
I understand that you’re looking for information revealing profiling behavior in the Martin/Zimmerman case.
I would refer you to the testimony of Rachel Jeantel, where she indicated that Martin was referring to a “creepy ass cracka” which, according to her testimony and to an interview with Piers Morgan, is a derogatory reference to a homosexual. That profiling could well be what caused Martin to lay in wait and attack Mr. Zimmerman, breaking his nose and knocking him to the pavement where he told Zimmerman that he was “going to die” and began smashing his head into the pavement.
Such homophobic behavior is intolerable and should be investigated. Where did Mr. Martin learn that sort of behavior? What can be done to stop that sort of behavior in young people like Mr. Martin?
Thank you for investigating this unacceptable behavior and for searching for the root cause of this prejudice that led to him profiling Mr. Zimmerman.
–
Michael Becker

[ptif219]

no...the difference is he says what you want.

You mean he held office and stands for what he says. Democrats do not stand for what they say. look at Obama back peddling on Obamacare.

[ptif219]

There's an amendment to your Constitution. The first one. Read it. Learn....

There are consequences though and criticism is just part of that

[Matty]

wtf is wrong with you? :loco:

that was the TITLE of the article and the whole POINT of what i posted:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/14615-Stevie-Wonder?p=328153&viewfull=1#post328153



at first i gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were confused but your persistence shows how you're a deliberately dishonest broker.




How 'duty to retreat' became 'stand your ground'

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/21/opinion/bellin-stand-your-ground-law




So if one's "duty to retreat" fails and one ends up dead I guess that'll be okay with Al Sharpton and yourself yes?

[ptif219]

They don't care about Black murders in Chicago. They are just racist hypocrites playing politics

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/07/20/2-dead-6-wounded-in-shootings-friday-night/

[Matty]

funny innit? ole Junie can't or won't answer the pertinant questions about when "duty to retreat fails"

[junie]

funny innit? ole Junie can't or won't answer the pertinant questions about when "duty to retreat fails"



lol oh you really need me to point out what's already been posted...?



This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.


In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.

[Matty]

lol oh you really need me to point out what's already been posted...?



This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly


force.







In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.









where was da mama with the baby murdered in his stroller supposed to retreat to? doyathink?

[Chris]

lol oh you really need me to point out what's already been posted...?



This principle required that someone who found themselves in a violent confrontation had to try to defuse the situation and retreat "to the wall" before resorting to deadly force.


In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.

Yes, we all know that, junie, it's self-defense.

So, given we all know that, yes, indeed, tell us what your point is, say something we don't all know. Be informative.

[Ransom]

In other words, deadly force was only permitted as a last resort. The basic idea was simple: If more people backed down, retreated or stepped aside, fewer people would be killed.

Deadly force was used as a last resort here and the jury ruled as such. Correct?

[Cigar]

Deadly force was used as a last resort here and the jury ruled as such. Correct?

Got it ... fist fights should end with a Gun fight, if only Trayvon knew that, we'd be all right with the outcome.

As long as everyone knows the rules, the game is easy to play.

[junie]

Deadly force was used as a last resort here and the jury ruled as such. Correct?



still can't get your mind past the minutia of one particular case?






Having Stand Your Ground laws is a bad idea because the law can too easily turn into a license to kill when bad blood, not fear, motivates the killing. But the big problem for the prosecution in the Zimmerman case wasn’t really Stand Your Ground. It was about a broader problem with the law of self-defense—showcasing an aspect of the law that this case urgently shows should change.



The evidence suggested that Martin was straddling Zimmerman at the moment Zimmerman drew his gun, so Zimmerman could not retreat. That’s why the central aspect of Stand Your Ground didn’t come into play. Instead, what really mattered was who started the fight. Zimmerman only gets to stand his ground, under the jury instruction the judge gave, if he was behaving lawfully in the first place—if he did not attack Martin. And this is a general principle of self-defense. All things being equal, people who start fights don’t get to end them with deadly force unless the victim clearly escalates things to that lethal level.



In Florida, as in most states—even the ones that don’t have Stand Your Ground—the prosecution in a criminal case has the burden to disprove self-defense, beyond a reasonable doubt, once the defendant produces some evidence of self-defense. If the other person is dead, and there are no witnesses, as long as you tell the police, “He started it and I thought he was reaching for a gun” you have created some evidence that you acted in self-defense. And at that point, prosecutors have the burden of proof to show otherwise. Zimmerman was acquitted because the state couldn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman started the fight.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...o_get_off.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/george_zimmerman_and_self_defense_why_it_was_too_e asy_for_him_to_get_off.html)

[Matty]

Got it ... fist fights should end with a Gun fight, if only Trayvon knew that, we'd be all right with the outcome.

As long as everyone knows the rules, the game is easy to play.




so you think it's okay to beat someone to death, you just cannot shoot them to death? that right?

[Chris]

Got it ... fist fights should end with a Gun fight, if only Trayvon knew that, we'd be all right with the outcome.

As long as everyone knows the rules, the game is easy to play.


Not what Ransom said, try again.

[Chris]

still can't get your mind past the minutia of one particular case?

And here we have junie interrupting yet another thread with whatever it is she's trying to argue.

[Ravi]

And here we have junie interrupting yet another thread with whatever it is she's trying to argue.

She made her point to the thread she responded to very well. You didn't post her point, just took a statement out of context to make a personal attack.

[Mainecoons]

Deadly force was used as a last resort here and the jury ruled as such. Correct?

Correct. And that is how the jury saw it. Zimmerman was in retreat and Martin couldn't let go of it. Wrong decision. The stage was set for this by a number of home break ins and invasions by young black males.

If blacks continue to commit these kinds of personal crimes way out of proportion to their numbers, they are going to be profiled by the general public. That's human nature and that is what is happening. And it will increase. Despite the best efforts of the leftist media to hide the reality of all these black flash mobs, they are increasing rapidly and the word is getting out by alternative means.

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/colin-flaherty/chicago-running-out-of-euphemisms/

[Cigar]

so you think it's okay to beat someone to death, you just cannot shoot them to death? that right?

... and somehow you thing he was getting beat to death, because Zimm said so.

He was getting his ass-kicked by a teenager and he didn't have the balls to backup following him.

Typical Coward ... who requires a Gun to be a Bad-Ass

[Chris]

She made her point to the thread she responded to very well. You didn't post her point, just took a statement out of context to make a personal attack.

I see you still have trouble distinguishing attacking the message from attacking the messenger. Clear the emotions away and you might see more clearly.

[bladimz]

so you think it's okay to beat someone to death, you just cannot shoot them to death? that right?Who was being beaten to death? Are we discussing the Zimmerman/Martin thing?

[bladimz]

The wonderful world of racial profiling:

http://goo.gl/6kj9JV

NYPD is mandated to "Stop & Frisk" all suspicious people, especially those wearing hoodies.

GZ is known to have had taken classes in law enforcement with a strong desire to serve as a police officer.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

[Mister D]

The wonderful world of racial profiling:

http://goo.gl/6kj9JV

NYPD is mandated to "Stop & Frisk" all suspicious people, especially those wearing hoodies.

GZ is known to have had taken classes in law enforcement with a strong desire to serve as a police officer.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

Conclusion: the PDs of very liberal cities profile. :grin:

[Ravi]

I see you still have trouble distinguishing attacking the message from attacking the messenger. Clear the emotions away and you might see more clearly.

Not at all. You attacked the messenger and ignored the message. You might be fooling yourself, but you aren't fooling anyone else.

[Chris]

Not at all. You attacked the messenger and ignored the message. You might be fooling yourself, but you aren't fooling anyone else.

Is that a mouse in your pocket?

You seem incapable of demonstrating where I attacked anyone, marie. Not that it's expected you would ever substantiate an opinion.

[Ravi]

There you go again. It's funny and sad all at the same time.

[Chris]

There you go again. It's funny and sad all at the same time.

There I go again what, marie? Be specific, substantiate, or leave it as just another false made up accusation.

[junie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3I41ULN2m0

[bladimz]

Conclusion: the PDs of very liberal cities profile. :grin:That's one conclusion that could be made, i suppose. Oh... i forgot to say that Florida also has the "stop & frisk" law in effect. Did Georgie know of the "stop&frisk", and did it have any influence in his decision to "stop and frisk" suspicious characters? Maybe.

[Matty]

Who was being beaten to death? Are we discussing the Zimmerman/Martin thing?



I have no idea wihat you're talking about, I'm talking about stand your ground vs duty to retreat.

[bladimz]

I have no idea wihat you're talking about, I'm talking about stand your ground vs duty to retreat.
Oh.

[Ransom]

Got it ... fist fights should end with a Gun fight, if only Trayvon knew that, we'd be all right with the outcome.

As long as everyone knows the rules, the game is easy to play.


The stand your ground law stood, so does Martins record already involved in the criminal justice system. Everyone has known the rules Cigar, quit playing like you didn't. You can't act the idiot all the time Cigar, we know you know better. Tighten up.

:moron:

[Ransom]

still can't get your mind past the minutia of one particular case?

Your post there is wrong. Not only was M on top, testimony from Z is that M went for his gun. Therefore Z was in fear for his life and regretfully had to take M's. Don't make stuff up junie, that's not permitted here.

[jillian]

The stand your ground law stood, so does Martins record already involved in the criminal justice system. Everyone has known the rules Cigar, quit playing like you didn't. You can't act the idiot all the time Cigar, we know you know better. Tighten up.

:moron:

What criminal act was Trayvon Martin committing when Zimmerman stalked and followed him?

denigrating the memory of a young man who was killed for no reason is pretty low

[keymanjim]

What criminal act was Trayvon Martin committing when Zimmerman stalked and followed him?

denigrating the memory of a young man who was killed for no reason is pretty low
I think he was smuggling guns to Mexican drug cartels.


No, wait. That was obama/holder.

[Chris]

:smiley_ROFLMAO:

[Ransom]

What criminal act was Trayvon Martin committing when Zimmerman stalked and followed him?

denigrating the memory of a young man who was killed for no reason is pretty low

No crime was committed by either. And rather than 'stalk' as you keep assuming, Trayvon was profiled. By behavior. In a world where we are reminded daily to be vigilant. To look for the out of the ordinary. Z's phone record states he is profiling someone who is acting suspicious, on drugs or something. The police dispatcher asked Z to specifically profile this individual asking black or Latino, Z responds with he looks black. I remind you Jillian, the police dispatcher brought race into the equation.

Dispatch said they didn't need Z to follow thus was on his way back to his car when assaulted by M. Punched, head slammed into the ground, threatened with death, and then had M go for his gun....that he was legally carrying, and under the circumstances and Florida law, permitted to use.

[Ransom]

What criminal act was Trayvon Martin committing when Zimmerman stalked and followed him?

denigrating the memory of a young man who was killed for no reason is pretty low

And you denigrate the totality of crime and murder and misery in this nation Jillian. This incident was whipped up by the media, it had every political spin you could put on it, it allows loudmouths like Sharpton and Jackson to spout off, you try to use it as some moral high ground issue....please.

[Mister D]

And you denigrate the totality of crime and murder and misery in this nation Jillian. This incident was whipped up by the media, it had every political spin you could put on it, it allows loudmouths like Sharpton and Jackson to spout off, you try to use it as some moral high ground issue....please.

Spot on.

[ptif219]

What criminal act was Trayvon Martin committing when Zimmerman stalked and followed him?

denigrating the memory of a young man who was killed for no reason is pretty low

We don't know. He was caught in Miami with burglary tools and Jewelry he could not explain. He may have been casing his next job

[jillian]

We don't know. He was caught in Miami with burglary tools and Jewelry he could not explain. He may have been casing his next job

you DO know... he was unarmed with skittles.

as for burglary tools... you mean the screwdriver?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

bummer he didn't have it on him when he was stalked and followed. maybe he could have defended himself.

[keymanjim]

you DO know... he was unarmed with skittles.

as for burglary tools... you mean the screwdriver?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

bummer he didn't have it on him when he was stalked and followed. maybe he could have defended himself.
Do you think he would have taken the time from BEATING ZIMMERMAN'S HEAD INTO THE CONCRETE to take out his screwdriver?

[ptif219]

you DO know... he was unarmed with skittles.

as for burglary tools... you mean the screwdriver?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

bummer he didn't have it on him when he was stalked and followed. maybe he could have defended himself.

He also assaulted Z. You keep telling the lies we have come to expect it from you

[Chris]

you DO know... he was unarmed with skittles.

as for burglary tools... you mean the screwdriver?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

bummer he didn't have it on him when he was stalked and followed. maybe he could have defended himself.

"Instead the officer reported he found women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a “burglary tool,” according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald."

Your source has turned hostile witness to your opinion.

[zelmo1234]

you DO know... he was unarmed with skittles.

as for burglary tools... you mean the screwdriver?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

bummer he didn't have it on him when he was stalked and followed. maybe he could have defended himself.

Still waiting for that Stalking Evidence?

Until then I guess we bring this back!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlEnboQ0WSU

[Trinnity]

None are so blind as those who will not see, Stevie. <pfft>

[Mr Happy]

We don't know. He was caught in Miami with burglary tools and Jewelry he could not explain. He may have been casing his next job

He was not caught with a burglary tool at all. As for the jewellery, he was never arrested about it...

[roadmaster]

He was not caught with a buglary tool at all. As for the jewellery, he was never arrested about it... Correct because they didn't want to and refused to look into it. His mother had kicked him out of her home not once but three times. Many teens rebel and she just couldn't handle him. But yes he did have a burglary tool in his backpack and they also found one ditched where he had walked at the scene of the crime.

[Mr Happy]

Correct because they didn't want to and refused to look into it. His mother had kicked him out of her home not once but three times. Many teens rebel and she just couldn't handle him. But yes he did have a burglary tool in his backpack and they also found one ditched where he had walked at the scene of the crime.

He had a screwdriver in his backpack at school. Could have been a burglary tool. Thing is, none of us know...

[roadmaster]

He had a screwdriver in his backpack at school. Could have been a burglary tool. Thing is, none of us know... You are not allowed to bring screwdrivers into school and his was a big one. We are not talking about the small ones to work on things.

[Mr Happy]

You are not allowed to bring screwdrivers into school and his was a big one. We are not talking about the small ones to work on things.

Meh, I stand by my statement. Could have been a weapon, then again he might have liked tinkering with things. That aside, that doesn't make him the local hood....

[roadmaster]

Meh, I stand by my statement. Could have been a weapon, then again he might have liked tinkering with things. That aside, that doesn't make him the local hood.... They should have traced the items he had in his backpack. It's not normal for teen guyd to have wedding rings and other expensive jewelry especially woman's . His mom knows in her heart which I have nothing against his mom that something was not right. I don't blame her, she was hoping his dad could help him and set him on the right path.

[jillian]

Meh, I stand by my statement. Could have been a weapon, then again he might have liked tinkering with things. That aside, that doesn't make him the local hood....

yeah, but for some reason, the right feels the need to defend this situation.

one would think that, at very least, they'd be saying, "oh, what a sad situation. we feel for all involved". or would acknowledge that there wasn't any reason to follow him. but they aren't... they somehow need to defend it by saying disgusting things about a young man who was killed for no reason.

i'm sure they're very proud.

[Chris]

He was not caught with a burglary tool at all. As for the jewellery, he was never arrested about it...

That's what police described it as, burglary tool. IIRC, they didn't arrest because the school didn't want the embarrassment. Could've saved his life right there.

[Chris]

yeah, but for some reason, the right feels the need to defend this situation.

one would think that, at very least, they'd be saying, "oh, what a sad situation. we feel for all involved". or would acknowledge that there wasn't any reason to follow him. but they aren't... they somehow need to defend it by saying disgusting things about a young man who was killed for no reason.

i'm sure they're very proud.

Perhaps the right doesn't think with their emotions.

Explain, if you can, how facts are disgusting? To me, they are mere facts. You see disgust, it's not in the facts.

[countryboy]

yeah, but for some reason, the right feels the need to defend this situation.

one would think that, at very least, they'd be saying, "oh, what a sad situation. we feel for all involved". or would acknowledge that there wasn't any reason to follow him. but they aren't... they somehow need to defend it by saying disgusting things about a young man who was killed for no reason.

i'm sure they're very proud.
Are you saying no one on the right has expressed sympathy for the Martin family?

Why would we acknowledge there was no reason to follow him, when there is no evidence he did? Furthermore, if your neighborhood had experienced a rash of burglaries, why would it be wrong to follow a suspicious character? Dangerous maybe. But wrong?

[Mainecoons]

I have a ton of sympathy for the Martin family. I am sorry they and their son bought into the liberal "dream" of victimization, entitlement, disdain for education and racism. I'm sorry they couldn't keep their own marriage together and provide a stable home for Trayvon. I'm sorry they couldn't keep their son off of drugs or teach him how to communicate like a civilized person instead of like a street thug. I'm sorry that Trayvon was put on a path to the grave by poor parenting and the popular "black" culture.

I'm sorry for Trayvon, his parents, and much of the black population of America who have been ensnared in the trap of white, paternalistic liberalism.

[Chris]

Sympathy for the Martins is not the politicization of their loss.

[jillian]

Are you saying no one on the right has expressed sympathy for the Martin family?

Why would we acknowledge there was no reason to follow him, when there is no evidence he did? Furthermore, if your neighborhood had experienced a rash of burglaries, why would it be wrong to follow a suspicious character? Dangerous maybe. But wrong?

is that what i said? no.

the right is destroying the memory of their son with half truths and disgusting rhetoric

there has to be some acknowledgment that zimmerman had no reason to follow the kid. and the fact that the right has made him their icon because he DID, indicates serious societal issues which need to be addressed....

and not by talking abut a screwdriver being 'burglery tools' or him doing some pot so he deserved to be a target so the 'a_holes' wouldn't "get away with it".

[Chris]

is that what i said? no.

the right is destroying the memory of their son with half truths and disgusting rhetoric

there has to be some acknowledgment that zimmerman had no reason to follow the kid. and the fact that the right has made him their icon because he DID, indicates serious societal issues which need to be addressed....

and not by talking abut a screwdriver being 'burglery tools' or him doing some pot so he deserved to be a target so the 'a_holes' wouldn't "get away with it".


the right is destroying the memory of their son with half truths and disgusting rhetoric

Which you keep claiming but never demonstrate. Rhetoric empty as Obamas suit and chair.

For example, you blame the right for calling a screwdriver a burglary tool but that is absolutely false, it was the police who called it that, as your own source demonstrated.

[RosieS]

I have a ton of sympathy for the Martin family. I am sorry they and their son bought into the liberal "dream" of victimization, entitlement, disdain for education and racism. I'm sorry they couldn't keep their own marriage together and provide a stable home for Trayvon. I'm sorry they couldn't keep their son off of drugs or teach him how to communicate like a civilized person instead of like a street thug. I'm sorry that Trayvon was put on a path to the grave by poor parenting and the popular "black" culture.

I'm sorry for Trayvon, his parents, and much of the black population of America who have been ensnared in the trap of white, paternalistic liberalism.


Try the facts instead of made up bullcrap. Sybrina Fulton was a teacher at Miami Jackson High before joining the Community Redevelopment Agency.

Tracy Martin was a truck driver.

Those facts show your made up bullcrap to be lies and libel.

Lies are necessary to fulfill a racist agenda concerning blacks. Trayvon Martin's mother, in particular, was well educated and both parents did not espouse victimization and entitlement. They were working people.

The most disgusting thing is that Treyvon Martin was murdered due to being racially profiled as criminal.when the murderer had a worse criminal record.and Treyvon was never arrested for anything at all.

His murderer was set free by white women who also racially profiled or gave in to those ignorant jurors who did.

I suppose it to be impossible to overcome your ignorance of the real black culture because you have never been anywhere near a predominately black area and never will be. Too much of a coward.

Cowards spout off about people they do not know but would never put their money where their mouth is and venture into black communities.

The agenda here is filthy, low down and scummy. You are sorry, all right.

Regards from Rosie

[Matty]

All these cries of racism are getting boring. Why did the prosecution agree to those jurors? The prosecutors must be racist too, they were all white ya know.

[zelmo1234]

He was not caught with a burglary tool at all. As for the jewellery, he was never arrested about it...

You are correct He was not arrested? Because the liberals in the schools system did not want their crime rates to look bad! So they covered for hi, had they actually let the law work he may be alive today!

[Matty]

Let's deal in facts. 73% of all black children are born out of wedlock and they don't have father's only sperm donors. 98% of blacks who are murdered are murdered by other blacks. The drop out rate is tremendous. Blacks are 13% of the population and commit 50% of the crime in the USA. Until the so called black leadership address these problems in the black communities the trends will continue. They won't address it though. Know why? They cowards.

[Mainecoons]

Gosh, where is our ever diligent moderator KC to ban Rosie for such a blatant personal attack? :rofl:

I see that I got your attention Rosie. Your post speaks volumes about you and your liberal racism. Thank you very much for it.

BTW, "educated" people can embrace the liberal paternalistic culture of black victimization, entitlement, ebonics, etc. You don't have to look further than Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson or Barack Obama for great examples.

[Chris]

Try the facts instead of made up bullcrap. Sybrina Fulton was a teacher at Miami Jackson High before joining the Community Redevelopment Agency.

Tracy Martin was a truck driver.

Those facts show your made up bullcrap to be lies and libel.

Lies are necessary to fulfill a racist agenda concerning blacks. Trayvon Martin's mother, in particular, was well educated and both parents did not espouse victimization and entitlement. They were working people.

The most disgusting thing is that Treyvon Martin was murdered due to being racially profiled as criminal.when the murderer had a worse criminal record.and Treyvon was never arrested for anything at all.

His murderer was set free by white women who also racially profiled or gave in to those ignorant jurors who did.

I suppose it to be impossible to overcome your ignorance of the real black culture because you have never been anywhere near a predominately black area and never will be. Too much of a coward.

Cowards spout off about people they do not know but would never put their money where their mouth is and venture into black communities.

The agenda here is filthy, low down and scummy. You are sorry, all right.

Regards from Rosie

The lie lies in your lying about lies. Maine said nothing about Martin's parents' occupation yet you do and claim he lied about it.


Treyvon Martin was murdered

Lie.


due to being racially profiled

Lie.


the murderer had a worse criminal record

Lie.


His murderer was set free by white women who also racially profiled or gave in to those ignorant jurors who did.

Lies.


Too much of a coward.

Name calling is just another form of lying.


The agenda here is filthy, low down and scummy.

True, but you got the wrong target.

[Chris]

All these cries of racism are getting boring. Why did the prosecution agree to those jurors? The prosecutors must be racist too, they were all white ya know.

And boorish.

[Alif Qadr]

Let's deal in facts. 73% of all black children are born out of wedlock and they don't have father's only sperm donors. 98% of blacks who are murdered are murdered by other blacks. The drop out rate is tremendous. Blacks are 13% of the population and commit 50% of the crime in the USA. Until the so called black leadership address these problems in the black communities the trends will continue. They won't address it though. Know why? They cowards.

For your either hypocritical, sinister or uninformed opinions and views in regard to the situations within areas which are predominately Black. There are people who address the issues that you have raised but you and your people always seek to misrepresent said people and the ignorant and wayward of Black people follow your words being that they seemingly love your wretched ways of existence, they continue in the ways of vasnity, immorality, waywardness and anti-righteousness. So in essence, you are witnessing the handiwork of yourselves and for the sake of your own insanity, you mock the very people who follow your lead. The lesson is that had you and yours not done what you have done and step out of the way, many of those whom you mock will complete a one hundred percent turn around. As for those who do not, you and they will suffer the same fate.

[zelmo1234]

Try the facts instead of made up bullcrap. Sybrina Fulton was a teacher at Miami Jackson High before joining the Community Redevelopment Agency.

Tracy Martin was a truck driver.

Those facts show your made up bullcrap to be lies and libel.

Lies are necessary to fulfill a racist agenda concerning blacks. Trayvon Martin's mother, in particular, was well educated and both parents did not espouse victimization and entitlement. They were working people.

The most disgusting thing is that Treyvon Martin was murdered due to being racially profiled as criminal.when the murderer had a worse criminal record.and Treyvon was never arrested for anything at all.

His murderer was set free by white women who also racially profiled or gave in to those ignorant jurors who did.

I suppose it to be impossible to overcome your ignorance of the real black culture because you have never been anywhere near a predominately black area and never will be. Too much of a coward.

Cowards spout off about people they do not know but would never put their money where their mouth is and venture into black communities.

The agenda here is filthy, low down and scummy. You are sorry, all right.

Regards from Rosie

WOW can't you just feel the love, compassion and tolerance of a liberal in this post!

So first, I do not know if the martins subscribe to the entitlement and racial preference system of not, so I will take your work!

Next Travon was not Murdered Period so that is lie number one! Next he was profiled for his actions, not his color, as a matter of fact, Zimmerman did not even know what color he was when he first called 911! Lie number 2

Number 3 if Travon had a Criminal record we would not know about it as it is sealed until you are an adult, and Zimmerman had some accusations?

1/2 truth!

YOu have stated that Zimm was set free because of race? First he is not white. Second you have no idea what the jury educations was, third this is textbook self defense! Not Murder, and Third, all that we do know about Martin is that he was or was quickly becoming a thug! we have that evidence!

Lies 3,4,and 5

Now lest talk about the ral black culture. do you mean the culture that the white mans has oppressed then and that they are entitled to everything without working, like many of your inner city populations have, or like my VP and Controller that have worked to better themselves and have become an outstanding success and roll models, and 2 of my most trusted friends and co workers! Not to mention

You see the mentality that others have the opportunity to keep you down is preached by the left, not the right, and they have a real desire and need to keep the black community oppressed! Because if they actually realize that the American dream is open to them as well????? liberalism is dead!

[Alif Qadr]

The lie lies in your lying about lies. Maine said nothing about Martin's parents' occupation yet you do and claim he lied about it.



Lie.



Lie.



Lie.



Lies.



Name calling is just another form of lying.



True, but you got the wrong target.

The wrong target? So I guess that Ms. Fulton and Mr. Martin are the correct targets for seeking justice in the name of their slain child?

[Chris]

For your either hypocritical, sinister or uninformed opinions and views in regard to the situations within areas which are predominately Black. There are people who address the issues that you have raised but you and your people always seek to misrepresent said people and the ignorant and wayward of Black people follow your words being that they seemingly love your wretched ways of existence, they continue in the ways of vasnity, immorality, waywardness and anti-righteousness. So in essence, you are witnessing the handiwork of yourselves and for the sake of your own insanity, you mock the very people who follow your lead. The lesson is that had you and yours not done what you have done and step out of the way, many of those whom you mock will complete a one hundred percent turn around. As for those who do not, you and they will suffer the same fate.

"but you and your people"

Pot kettle.

There's a black woman, Shahrazad Ali, who appears on Dr Drew who says things like that. There are other blacks on the panel who find her appalling.

[Chris]

The wrong target? So I guess that Ms. Fulton and Mr. Martin are the correct targets for seeking justice in the name of their slain child?

No, if I wasn't clear, let me clarify. The left, represented by rosie, jillian and others, target the right, making things up, when they should target themselves,. Martin's parents have nothing to do with it other than they and their son are being politicized by the left for their feel-good agendas.

[Mainecoons]

They don't want justice, they want retribution and they want to deny their responsibility for how their son turned out.

[Chris]

They don't want justice, they want retribution and they want to deny their responsibility for how their son turned out.

The parents? Mmm, there emotions are understandable. The faux emotions of the left, not. And that is all the left has. Like painting lipstick on a pig.

[Mainecoons]

Alif, what did we have here? A kid already apparently involved in burglary. Definitely a drug user, where did he get the money for that? And look at how he expressed himself, like some ghetto gang banger and black racist. Was he on course to a successful life? Or an early grave?

His mother threw him out of the house. You could say that this confirms that she didn't agree with the culture and mores he adopted. But then she acted like the reasons she threw him out had no bearing on how he ended up, which is nonsense.

Who helped him develop such negative traits? Why has the black community degenerated into widespread unwed birth, welfare dependency, contempt for education, "ebonics", crime against mainly each other, since Johnson and the Democrats passed the "Great Society" and then Nixon added to it?

When you develop a culture of victimization, entitlement, willingness to live in idleness on welfare, promiscuity, contempt for education and the personal habits of speech and behavior that lead to success, you get the black community in America today and you get an endless stream of Trayvons. Indeed while the racist prosecution of Zimmerman was proceeding, hundreds of Trayvons were killed by other Trayvons.

Do you honestly believe that if blacks separate themselves from society, all these destructive attitudes and behaviors will magically disappear?

No, they won't.

[jillian]

All these cries of racism are getting boring. Why did the prosecution agree to those jurors? The prosecutors must be racist too, they were all white ya know.

why was trayvon martin followed BUT FOR the color of his skin?

i think it's more racial insensitivity than "racism", but the wingers who think zimmerman is some kind of victim have real issues.

[Mister D]

Zimmerman was the victim of a mob demanding "justice". He's also a free man now thanks to that mob.

[countryboy]

why was trayvon martin followed BUT FOR the color of his skin?
How many times are you going to repeat the lie? Just curious.

[Mister D]

How many times are you going to repeat the lie? Just curious.

I love how it's now "racial insensitivity". :grin:

[Mainecoons]

Zimmerman was the victim of a mob demanding "justice". He's also a free man now thanks to that mob.

Ironically, if he had been tried on a charge where his complicity in this event could have been considered, he would very likely have been convicted.

[Venus]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425


A NEIGHBORHOOD IN FEAR
By the summer of 2011, Twin Lakes was experiencing a rash of burglaries and break-ins. Previously a family-friendly, first-time homeowner community, it was devastated by the recession that hit the Florida housing market (http://www.reuters.com/subjects/housing-market?lc=int_mb_1001), and transient renters began to occupy some of the 263 town houses in the complex. Vandalism and occasional drug activity were reported, and home values plunged. One resident who bought his home in 2006 for $250,000 said it was worth $80,000 today.


At least eight burglaries were reported within Twin Lakes in the 14 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, according to the Sanford Police Department. Yet in a series of interviews, Twin Lakes residents said dozens of reports of attempted break-ins and would-be burglars casing homes had created an atmosphere of growing fear in the neighborhood.

In several of the incidents, witnesses identified the suspects to police as young black men. Twin Lakes is about 50 percent white, with an African-American and Hispanic population of about 20 percent each, roughly similar to the surrounding city of Sanford, according to U.S. Census data.
One morning in July 2011, a black teenager walked up to Zimmerman's front porch and stole a bicycle, neighbors told Reuters. A police report was taken, though the bicycle was not recovered.

But it was the August incursion into the home of Olivia Bertalan that really troubled the neighborhood, particularly Zimmerman. Shellie was home most days, taking online courses towards certification as a registered nurse.

On August 3, Bertalan was at home with her infant son while her husband, Michael, was at work. She watched from a downstairs window, she said, as two black men repeatedly rang her doorbell and then entered through a sliding door at the back of the house. She ran upstairs, locked herself inside the boy's bedroom, and called a police dispatcher, whispering frantically.

"I said, 'What am I supposed to do? I hear them coming up the stairs!'" she told Reuters. Bertalan tried to coo her crying child into silence and armed herself with a pair of rusty scissors.

Police arrived just as the burglars - who had been trying to disconnect the couple's television - fled out a back door. Shellie Zimmerman saw a black male teen running through her backyard and reported it to police.

[junie]

Zimmerman was the victim of a mob demanding "justice". He's also a free man now thanks to that mob.



not really. :rollseyes: the real reason is the burden of proof required by the rule of the law...







Having Stand Your Ground laws is a bad idea because the law can too easily turn into a license to kill when bad blood, not fear, motivates the killing. But the big problem for the prosecution in the Zimmerman case wasn’t really Stand Your Ground. It was about a broader problem with the law of self-defense—showcasing an aspect of the law that this case urgently shows should change.



The evidence suggested that Martin was straddling Zimmerman at the moment Zimmerman drew his gun, so Zimmerman could not retreat. That’s why the central aspect of Stand Your Ground didn’t come into play. Instead, what really mattered was who started the fight. Zimmerman only gets to stand his ground, under the jury instruction the judge gave, if he was behaving lawfully in the first place—if he did not attack Martin. And this is a general principle of self-defense. All things being equal, people who start fights don’t get to end them with deadly force unless the victim clearly escalates things to that lethal level.



In Florida, as in most states—even the ones that don’t have Stand Your Ground—the prosecution in a criminal case has the burden to disprove self-defense, beyond a reasonable doubt, once the defendant produces some evidence of self-defense. If the other person is dead, and there are no witnesses, as long as you tell the police, “He started it and I thought he was reaching for a gun” you have created some evidence that you acted in self-defense. And at that point, prosecutors have the burden of proof to show otherwise. Zimmerman was acquitted because the state couldn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman started the fight.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...o_get_off.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/george_zimmerman_and_self_defense_why_it_was_too_e asy_for_him_to_get_off.html)

[Mister D]

Ironically, if he had been tried on a charge where his complicity in this event could have been considered, he would very likely have been convicted.

Agreed.

[Mister D]

not really. :rollseyes: the real reason is the burden of proof required by the rule of the law...

:facepalm:

Right. The state had no case because they overcharged Zimmerman.

[Chris]

why was trayvon martin followed BUT FOR the color of his skin?

i think it's more racial insensitivity than "racism", but the wingers who think zimmerman is some kind of victim have real issues.

And what evidence do you have of that, jill? Any? Rather, the evidence says he profiled Martin, in the dark, in the rain, under a hoodie, under eves, impossible to know his skin color, because he was acting suspicious. It was only when the dispatcher asked and Martin walked by and looked at him that Zimmerman identified him as black. We have the tape as evidence of this.

I think its racist racial oversensitivity of wingers who want to push a feel-good agenda.

[Chris]

not really. :rollseyes: the real reason is the burden of proof required by the rule of the law...

Do you object to the rule of law, jun? What's your opinion?

[Mainecoons]

Yes, Junie, would you prefer the Napoleanic system, guilty until and unless you are able to prove yourself innocent?

Do you know what that legal system is and why it has led to so much abuse by the countries that have it?

[Chris]

Yes, Junie, would you prefer the Napoleanic system, guilty until and unless you are able to prove yourself innocent?

Do you know what that legal system is and why it has led to so much abuse by the countries that have it?

Or the Chinese system of justice where suspected you're guilty for the utilitarian purpose of setting an example for society.

[junie]

Do you object to the rule of law, jun? What's your opinion?



as i have said repeatedly, people like stevie wonder are advocating for a change in the stand your ground laws with good reason, and people who care to understand what "the mob" are pushing for, need to get past the minutia of this one particular case. some people would rather smear the character of a dead young man who committed no crime, some would rather turn a blind eye and cry "race baiter" or "agenda whore" which seems like nothing more than an emotional projection to those who truly understand the legal ramifications involved, which clearly go beyond the minutia of this one particular case...