The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

@firefly,

Quote:

George Zimmerman has been arrested again, and this arrest has nothing to do with race, or "liberals", or Al Sharpton, or Obama, or the black community, or the media, or gun-haters, or "hoodlums" or "thugs".

the unrestrained expressed glee that he has been arrested however has everything to do with these people. We shall see if the arrest did, because if he was set up by a publicity seeker or a future paid screenplay subject then it did.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
George Zimmerman has been arrested again, and this arrest has nothing to do with race, or "liberals", or Al Sharpton, or Obama, or the black community, or the media, or gun-haters, or "hoodlums" or "thugs".
the unrestrained expressed glee that he has been arrested however
has everything to do with these people.

Yes. It tells us something about the psychology,
the enduring hatred, of liberals.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

I see, so you are arguing that you cant comprehend cartoons. Got it.

No, Hawkeye, you're the one who doesn't comprehend the cartoon, or it's connection to the comments I made.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/files/2013/11/zimmerman-cartoon-beeler-495x352.jpg

Where does that cartoon suggest anyone's opinion of Zimmerman has changed--which is the illogical connection you made.

I think the cartoon went right over your head. A lot of things seem to be going right over your head lately, judging by how disconnected your comments are from the posts or remarks you are responding to.

1 Reply

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Some of us would like to have a serious discussion about George Zimmerman's
latest run-in with the law. He's now accused of new crimes.

The old name and subject matter
"The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial"
got over 8O,OOO views and 32O pages of replies,
but guesswork over relatively minor future allegations, really ??
With no one having been injured ?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Our efforts in supporting Zimmy
were actually in support of FREEDOM that we ourselves can use
if it becomes necessary. Zimmy was carrying the flag of liberty for us.

When he allegedly pointed a shotgun at his unarmed girlfriend--in a situation where he did not report any significant fears or concerns for his own safety?

If you want to just keep harping on your 2nd Amendment rights, and your need to possess guns, there are other threads devoted to that issue.

Zimmerman is now charged with new crimes, which have nothing to do with those issues.

He is now accused of allegedly pointed a shotgun at his unarmed girlfriend--in a situation where he did not report any significant fears or concerns for his own safety.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

I think the cartoon went right over your head. A lot of things seem to be going right over your head lately, judging by how disconnected your comments are from the posts or remarks you are responding to.

of course you dont specify because laying down anything but an undefined broad insult would prove that you are full of ****. I see you claiming wild interpretations of cartoons as a natural progression from your practice of making up your own personal secret definitions for words that you use, it is a form a lying.

But lets talk about the cartoon. put up or shut up. the overriding sentiment is that a proud supporter of Zimmerman becomes instantly embarrassed at his support when he finds out that zimmerman has been arrested again. My question to you is who in reality is doing this? I know of no one.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

because if he was set up...

Was he "set-up" to remain in a locked and barricaded house, unwilling to allow the police in--while he calmly made his own 911 "my side of the story" call in which he voiced no significant concerns or fears about his own safety?

Blaming the victim is going to be much more difficult in this new legal case, because of Zimmerman's own actions that were evident to the police.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

but guesswork over relatively minor future allegations, really ??
With no one having been injured ?

These aren't future allegations, they are current.

And the charges aren't minor, they include a felony, and they could result in up to 18 years in prison.

Thank goodness, there wasn't a death to precipitate this arrest.

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

DAVID wrote:

I dunno if different colors freeze at different temperatures.

coldjoint wrote:

In this case self defense and fear for his life negate any color you wish to throw in.
And that is what should be taken away from this incident.

U raise an interesting point.
The way that the self defense statute of Florida has been written was unwise
insofar as it addresses the emotion ("fear") of a citizen
being related to his legal authority to fight back effectively.
The Legislature failed to consider the fact that when people
are put into positions of danger thay don 't necessarily KNOW it.
Tho thay might get killed, or near killed, thay are NOT necessarily afraid.
Winston Churchill spoke (from his own experience)
of "being shot at with no effect" as being exhilarating.
There was no evidence that Kennedy was afraid before Oswald's
first shot hit him. When someone took a potshot at me, I was not afraid;
not enuf time for that. I was merely observing events and drawing out my own gun.
Yet language in the Florida statute provides that experiencing fear
is a condition precedent to the right to kill in self defense.
If 2 men are together, subjected to the same lethal danger
one of them might be afraid and the other not. Shud it be
that only one of them has the right to fight back??

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

DAVID wrote:
I dunno if different colors freeze at different temperatures.
coldjoint wrote:
In this case self defense and fear for his life negate any color you wish to throw in.
And that is what should be taken away from this incident.
U raise an interesting point.
The way that the self defense statute has been written was unwise
insofar as it addresses the emotion ("fear") of a citizen
being related to his legal authority to fight back effectively.
The Legislature failed to consider the fact that when people
are put into positions of danger thay don 't necessarily KNOW it.
Tho thay might get killed, or near killed, thay are NOT necessarily afraid.
Winston Churchill spoke (from his own experience)
of "being shot at with no effect" as being exhilarating.
There was no evidence that Kennedy was afraid before Oswald's
first shot hit him. When someone took a potshot at me, I was not afraid;
not enuf time for that. I was merely observing events and drawing out my own gun.
Yet language in the Florida statute provides that experiencing fear
is a condition precedent to the right to kill in self defense.
If 2 men are together, subjected to the same lethal danger
one of them might be afraid and the other not. Shud it be
that only one of them has the right to fight back??

David

Nope!

What should happen is that you guys who are looking for an excuse to shoot and kill someone should be lobbying for a law that will allow gun owners to shoot anybody for any reason at any time.

Sounds like the logic light at the end of the tunnel you are travelling.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Blaming the victim is going to be much more difficult in this new legal case, because of Zimmerman's own actions that were evident to the police

the victim/abuser motif often breaks down in real life. in this case we have no idea who would be the victim and who would be the abuser. hopefully investigators get enough clarity to know if that scheme works in this case.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

The cartoon speaks for itself. Either you get it or you don't.

Quote:

from your practice of making up your own personal secret definitions for words that you use...

Now you sound paranoid--referring to "secret definitions". Laughing

If you were more literate, you would have no difficulty understanding the words I use, or their meaning, particularly in the context in which I use them. I have received not a single complaint from anyone else on this board, in the 9 years I have been here, that I make up my "own personal secret definitions for words" that I use, or that others have great difficulty accurately interpreting what I am saying. I communicate in rather standard English.

I, in fact, put great effort into making sure I am understood--I want my comments, and words, to be clearly understood, otherwise posting them would be meaningless.

Quote:

it is a form a lying...

That constant accusation on your part that I'm "lying" gets more and more absurd, given the fact you have never provided a specific example of my "lying"--an instance where I told a deliberate and intentional falsehood--unless you are making up your "own personal secret definition" for the word "lying". It's just the rather pathetical tired old attack you haul out whenever I refute one of your statements, in order to try to spare yourself embarrassment.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

The cartoon speaks for itself. Either you get it or you don't.

of course you dont want to talk about it, to do so would be to prove my point.

it is time for another diversionary insult from you Firefly, you gotta keep the conversation away from the need to prove your assertions, keep dancing like a butterfly.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

in this case we have no idea who would be the victim and who would be the abuser..

And, the fact that only one of them was arrested and charged, doesn't give you a clue? Laughing

The police felt they have a better idea than you do, so did the state, so did a judge.

You seem to be the only one left clueless, with "no idea" which one might be the person who violated the law.

I'll give you a hint--it's the one who is out on bail, wearing an electronic ankle monitor to track his whereabouts.

The other one, the complainant, hasn't been charged with violating any laws.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

And, the fact that only one of them was arrested and charged, doesn't give you a clue? Laughing

that is what the police are told to do, just arrest one of them and get the situation to the courts so that they can separate the two and investigate....ie end the conflicts. most often the police default to arresting the male, but that does not mean that the male is most at fault. we will see in time what the investigation reveals.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

If it is a she said he said issue and she was shopping around negative information on him to the higher bidding before hand I would not be surprise if the charges are drop in the very near future.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

That constant accusation on your part that I'm "lying" gets more and more absurd, given the fact you have never provided a specific example of my "lying"--an instance where I told a deliberate and intentional falsehood--unless you are making up your "own personal secret definition" for the word "lying". It's just the rather pathetical tired old attack you haul out whenever I refute one of your statements, in order to try to spare yourself embarrassment.

You are the last person the ordinary poster would accuse of using subterfuge, Firefly. Your posts are straightforward, illuminating and to the point. Of course posting on the Internet we attract our opponents and some will unjustly criticize just because they can and or feel you're in opposition to their ideology. Most reasonable posters, however, will be understanding; note I used the adjective "most."

Keep on doing what you're doing and if your critics are so inclined they could very well refuse to read your posts.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

If it is a she said he said issue and she was shopping around negative information on him to the higher bidding before hand I would not be surprise if the charges are drop in the very near future.

the DA does not need to produce anything till Jan, and I would expect them to not be in any rush to drop the charges. however, this case looks like a stinker, I doubt that it costs George anything more than aggravation and being without his guns for a spell.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

The police found Zimmerman, in possession of a shotgun, in a locked and barricaded house, her house, that he had thrown her out of, and he was unwilling to open the door for them. That's something they observed for themselves.

That alone told the police something. He was not voicing concerns or fears for his safety, and he refused to open the door for them.

Of course, such stalling behavior on his part might give him time to alter the crime scene, before the police got in...

Quote:

that is what the police are told to do, just arrest one of them and get the situation to the courts so that they can separate the two and investigate....

That's not something the police do routinely, and it was not done in the case of his September domestic violence incident with his estranged wife and her father--after 8 police units responded to that one. So your explanation rings hollow.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

If it is a she said he said issue and she was shopping around negative information on him to the higher bidding before hand I would not be surprise if the charges are drop in the very near future.

The allegation she might have been"shopping around negative information on him" is quite unrelated to the issue of whether he violated the law and is guilty of the current charges against him.

Her "information about him" might be quite accurate, in terms of the way he had been behaving prior to the day of his arrest. That she might have been communicating some of that information to a reporter--for three weeks before he was arrested-- doesn't mean it wasn't accurate information. And there was no monetary compensation for any of the things she allegedly told that reporter.

0 Replies

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know