Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 There is negligent and criminal negligence. Do you know the difference? negligence is the result of being negligent you clown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 negligence is the result of being negligent you clown Which is not always criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Have some !@#$ing integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) That's not only a cop out which addresses neither part of my post, but also an outright admission that you're only willing to "discuss things" in echo chambers where everyone agrees with you. Respond to the !@#$ing post you coward. I've explained myself numerous times now, Zimmerman is not a cop,and If he wouldn't have gotten out of his car and went looking for Trayvon Martin , Martin would still be alive today. Its not that hard to understand, and you can get pissed all you want, it doesn't change my opinion your post is all over the place, not sure what you even want me to respond to retroactively? all we have is Zimmerman as a witness to a crime that wasn't commited, stop talking giberish and Ill try to respond back Edited July 3, 2013 by dog14787 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I've explained myself numerous times now, Zimmerman is not a cop,and If he wouldn't have gotten out of his car and went looking for Trayvon Martin , Martin would still be alive today. Its not that hard to understand, and you can get pissed all you want, it doesn't change my opinion your post is all over the place, not sure what you even want me to respond to retroactively? all we have is Zimmerman as a witness to a crime that wasn't commited, stop talking giberish and Ill try to respond back How many times do you have to be told, TM went out of his way to track down GZ and started a fight. GZ felt his life was in danger and after approx. 40 seconds of taking a beating he shot TM. It's a clear case of self defense. Even the lead investigator felt that GZ's story matched the evidence and eyewitness accounts and stated in open court that he believed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) I've explained myself numerous times now, Zimmerman is not a cop,and If he wouldn't have gotten out of his car and went looking for Trayvon Martin , Martin would still be alive today. Its not that hard to understand, and you can get pissed all you want, it doesn't change my opinion your post is all over the place, not sure what you even want me to respond to retroactively? all we have is Zimmerman as a witness to a crime that wasn't commited, stop talking giberish and Ill try to respond back TM was primarily responsible for his death. Just because GZ got out of his car, it didn't mean TM's only recourse was to attack him. Even more so since he was so close to his father's house and could have gone inside to safety. He chose to escalate it. But after TM chose to attack him, GZ had every right to defend himself by whatever means necessary. People make bad decisions all the time. Sometimes you get lucky and nothing happens, other times... Edited July 3, 2013 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 How many times do you have to be told, TM went out of his way to track down GZ and started a fight. GZ felt his life was in danger and after approx. 40 seconds of taking a beating he shot TM. It's a clear case of self defense. Even the lead investigator felt that GZ's story matched the evidence and eyewitness accounts and stated in open court that he believed him. We can confirm Zimmerman was pursuing Martin we do not have confirmation on Martin attacking Zimmerman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Dog, I want this pushed for chef- do you know the difference between negligent and criminal negligence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) Dog, I want this pushed for chef- do you know the difference between negligent and criminal negligence? I'll bite, criminal negligence is conduct that deviates from normal, reasonable standards of an ordinary person. It generally involves a disregard for human life/ safety of people. Edited July 3, 2013 by dog14787 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 We can confirm Zimmerman was pursuing Martin we do not have confirmation on Martin attacking Zimmerman. One more time. GZ started out following TM not to confront him or interrogate him as you so falsely claimed. He was keeping an eye on him in order to inform the police re his location when they arrived. He lost sight of him and after walking around the building to get an address he returned to a spot near his truck. Little did he know that TM, who had gotten all the way back to his father's place then for some reason decided to circle around and attack GZ. This was confirmed by the prosecutors "star witness". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I'll bite, criminal negligence is conduct that deviates from normal, reasonable standards of an ordinary person. It generally involves an indifference or disregard for human life or for the safety of people. Legalmatch.com copy and paste - definitely illustrates a strong working knowledge of the concepts and how simple everyday negligence varies from criminal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) dog**** is like Peter Pan saying over and over "I do believe in faries, I do, I do!" Edited July 3, 2013 by Wacka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) Legalmatch.com copy and paste - definitely illustrates a strong working knowledge of the concepts and how simple everyday negligence varies from criminal so what your saying is you had to research my answer, lol, brilliant well how about this then Sometimes the definition for criminal negligence requires failure to recognize unjustifiable risks associated with the conduct. Now it seems to me this is precisely the point I've been making... failure to recognise unjustifiable risks with the conduct... Edited July 3, 2013 by dog14787 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I'll bite, criminal negligence is conduct that deviates from normal, reasonable standards of an ordinary person. It generally involves an indifference or disregard for human life or for the safety of people. You !@#$ing turd brain. The question wasn't "What is criminal negligence?" It was "What's the difference between 'criminal negligence' and 'negligence'?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) so what your saying is you had to research my answer, lol, brilliant No, what I'm saying is it was blatantly obvious you didnt write it so i googled to see where you plagerized it from. And as I referenced and tom also pointed out, it still didnt answer the question or demonstrate you have any idea the answer. Edited July 3, 2013 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) No, what I'm saying is it was blatantly obvious you didnt write it so i googled to see where you plagerized it from. And as I referenced and tom also pointed out, it still didnt answer the question or demonstrate you have any idea the answer. right, I've just been making up the part about why I think Zimmerman was negligent, Edited July 3, 2013 by dog14787 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 TM was primarily responsible for his death. Just because GZ got out of his car, it didn't mean TM's only recourse was to attack him. Even more so since he was so close to his father's house and could have gone inside to safety. He chose to escalate it. But after TM chose to attack him, GZ had every right to defend himself by whatever means necessary. People make bad decisions all the time. Sometimes you get lucky and nothing happens, other times... Since when? Some White-Hispanic gets out of his car, you gotta give him a beatdown. It's the code, bra. Punk-ass cracka got what was comin' to him. Can't believe the B word shot the boy just for his Skittles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I've just been making up the part about why I think Zimmerman was negligent, No !@#$ing ****, bonehead. That's what everyone's been telling you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 You !@#$ing turd brain. The question wasn't "What is criminal negligence?" It was "What's the difference between 'criminal negligence' and 'negligence'?" and I don't have to prove my vocabulary to anyone puppet head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 and I don't have to prove my vocabulary to anyone puppet head No but words have meanings and when you make assertions based on those meanings.... Well.... I give up. You asked for respectful debate and I tried to productively discuss the issues at hand.... Woof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts