Chef Jim Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 If some nutjob would have done something rash, like say, burn the old people's house down and injured them, would Spike Lee have been criminally liable? Well if that had happened and he wasn't liable I'd recommend we send a group of white/white/white/white/white people to burn HIS house down.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 That'a just not fair. Rep. Brown attended and spoke at several rallies for..........what's her name. People here, especially the ones that were screaming for justice for Martin, should go back and read the first 3-4 pages of this thread. It will not only point out the evolution of a thread but make it very obvious how lynch mobs get started. It's pretty hard to re-evaluate your position with any true meaning when you've just hung someone. Stretched necks don't return to form because you changed your mind. So, believing that the DoJ should get involved and investigate because it looks like an obvious hate crime is a lynching? I'm sure it makes sense in your head. But really, it's not even remotely the same thing.
Chef Jim Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 So, believing that the DoJ should get involved and investigate because it looks like an obvious hate crime is a lynching? I'm sure it makes sense in your head. But really, it's not even remotely the same thing. No I think the "lynching" comes from the bolded part. Please explain from what you know of the case where you came up with the fact that it's obviously a hate crime.
3rdnlng Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 So, believing that the DoJ should get involved and investigate because it looks like an obvious hate crime is a lynching? I'm sure it makes sense in your head. But really, it's not even remotely the same thing. Your words below: Bigfatbillsfan Rookie Group: Members Posts: 462 Joined: 07-December 11 Posted 21 March 2012 - 11:18 AM Rob, on 21 March 2012 - 10:58 AM, said: The worst thing about that is that most people have no idea how patently absurd it is or why it's absurd. I don't find it absurd that Holder would get involved with the case when it seems that a cold blooded killer is going to get away with murder. It would be one thing if he was standing hs ground, it's another for him to go chasing
DC Tom Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 No I think the "lynching" comes from the bolded part. Please explain from what you know of the case where you came up with the fact that it's obviously a hate crime. Your words below: Bigfatbillsfan Rookie Group: Members Posts: 462 Joined: 07-December 11 Posted 21 March 2012 - 11:18 AM Rob, on 21 March 2012 - 10:58 AM, said: The worst thing about that is that most people have no idea how patently absurd it is or why it's absurd. I don't find it absurd that Holder would get involved with the case when it seems that a cold blooded killer is going to get away with murder. It would be one thing if he was standing hs ground, it's another for him to go chasing You great big meanies. Where's your compassion? Think Of The Children!!!!
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 Your words below: Bigfatbillsfan Rookie Group: Members Posts: 462 Joined: 07-December 11 Posted 21 March 2012 - 11:18 AM Rob, on 21 March 2012 - 10:58 AM, said: The worst thing about that is that most people have no idea how patently absurd it is or why it's absurd. I don't find it absurd that Holder would get involved with the case when it seems that a cold blooded killer is going to get away with murder. It would be one thing if he was standing hs ground, it's another for him to go chasing Where do you get the idea that thinking Holder should get involved with the case because it seems like a cold blooded killer is going to get away with it is a lynching? Holder getting involved with a case is an investigation, not a lynching. I don't think the word seems would be used by a person planning to lynch someone. Can you give me a list of lynching that started with the DoJ doing an investigation?
bbb Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 How many times do cold blooded killers call the cops right before they do their cold blooded killing?
3rdnlng Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 Where do you get the idea that thinking Holder should get involved with the case because it seems like a cold blooded killer is going to get away with it is a lynching? Holder getting involved with a case is an investigation, not a lynching. I don't think the word seems would be used by a person planning to lynch someone. Can you give me a list of lynching that started with the DoJ doing an investigation? Damn you are dense. Do you know the difference between literal and figurative? A bunch of you guys figuratively lynched Zimmerman by jumping to conclusions. I'll give you some credit for sticking around and admitting that you have re-evaluated the situation, while the rest of the lynch mob has pretty much disappeared. BTW, the State of Florida got involved and is handling the investigation.
Chef Jim Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 How many times do cold blooded killers call the cops right before they do their cold blooded killing? You know that is a great point. "I'm going to kill this !@#$ and I'm going to make sure the cops are here just in case anything goes wrong!"
3rdnlng Posted March 30, 2012 Posted March 30, 2012 How many times do cold blooded killers call the cops right before they do their cold blooded killing? Don't you remember when Hannibal Lecter called Clarisse and told her he was having a friend over for dinner?
GG Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Don't you remember when Hannibal Lecter called Clarisse and told her he was having a friend over for dinner? I think the proper quote was, "I'm having a friend for dinner"
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Damn you are dense. Do you know the difference between literal and figurative? A bunch of you guys figuratively lynched Zimmerman by jumping to conclusions. I'll give you some credit for sticking around and admitting that you have re-evaluated the situation, while the rest of the lynch mob has pretty much disappeared. BTW, the State of Florida got involved and is handling the investigation. Oh, thank god you give me some credit since what I live for is credit from people like you. (caution, sarcasm included) Yes, I know the difference between literal and figurative. And your analogy still doesn't work. If I were calling for his immediate incarceration or killing without an investigation it would be a figurative lynching.
3rdnlng Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Oh, thank god you give me some credit since what I live for is credit from people like you. (caution, sarcasm included) Yes, I know the difference between literal and figurative. And your analogy still doesn't work. If I were calling for his immediate incarceration or killing without an investigation it would be a figurative lynching. Zimmerman's life is changed forever, guilty of anything or not. People spouting the same words as you used have caused that. Calling him a cold blooded killer without knowing the facts is flat out wrong and you as much as admitted it. The damage has been done though.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Zimmerman's life is changed forever, guilty of anything or not. People spouting the same words as you used have caused that. Calling him a cold blooded killer without knowing the facts is flat out wrong and you as much as admitted it. The damage has been done though. Had he not made the choice to follow and most likely confront Martin he would not have had to kill him and his life would be no different than it is today. I agree that jumping to conclusions was wrong, but I have never called for his jailing or killing. What I, myself, have called for is further investigation since it looked like the Sanford police botched the case and a person who killed an unarmed kid was going to get away with murder. Did I ever say I stand with Sharpton or the New Black Panthers? Because I don't and I disavow the hate speech they've been spreading around the nation the past couple of weeks. They've lost their case that this was a killing based on the sole reason of race and it's time for them to back down and let the state of Florida finish their investigation. However, now that the racial issue has been put to bed on this board the more important aspect of the case is the "stand your ground" law that made this whole thing possible. Which one of them was the one standing their ground? These laws need to be looked at a little closer and tweaked to make sure a situation like this can't happen again.
Doc Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I think the proper quote was, "I'm having an old friend for dinner"
3rdnlng Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Had he not made the choice to follow and most likely confront Martin he would not have had to kill him and his life would be no different than it is today. I agree that jumping to conclusions was wrong, but I have never called for his jailing or killing. What I, myself, have called for is further investigation since it looked like the Sanford police botched the case and a person who killed an unarmed kid was going to get away with murder. Did I ever say I stand with Sharpton or the New Black Panthers? Because I don't and I disavow the hate speech they've been spreading around the nation the past couple of weeks. They've lost their case that this was a killing based on the sole reason of race and it's time for them to back down and let the state of Florida finish their investigation. However, now that the racial issue has been put to bed on this board the more important aspect of the case is the "stand your ground" law that made this whole thing possible. Which one of them was the one standing their ground? These laws need to be looked at a little closer and tweaked to make sure a situation like this can't happen again. So, this is no longer about race and it's about the Stand Your Ground Law? Would you agree that maybe the Sanford Police may not have botched the investigation? Obviously the DoJ has no business getting involved now, eh? Could Zimmermann have turned around and went back to his car once the dispatcher advised him to? Do you think that the Sanford Police are so stupid that they wouldn't look to see where Zimmerman's vehicle was in relation to the shooting spot? Do you think it is not only possible but at least a 50/50 chance that Zimmerman is not in any way at fault? Will Zimmerman have to have feature altering surgery and a name change to have a chance at a lengthy life? Do you feel that your attitude and rhetoric was just a part of what may be an unrighteous travesty for Zimmerman? Now do you see why you didn't need to stretch his neck to in affect lynch him?
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 So, this is no longer about race and it's about the Stand Your Ground Law? Would you agree that maybe the Sanford Police may not have botched the investigation? Obviously the DoJ has no business getting involved now, eh? Could Zimmermann have turned around and went back to his car once the dispatcher advised him to? Do you think that the Sanford Police are so stupid that they wouldn't look to see where Zimmerman's vehicle was in relation to the shooting spot? Do you think it is not only possible but at least a 50/50 chance that Zimmerman is not in any way at fault? Will Zimmerman have to have feature altering surgery and a name change to have a chance at a lengthy life? Do you feel that your attitude and rhetoric was just a part of what may be an unrighteous travesty for Zimmerman? Now do you see why you didn't need to stretch his neck to in affect lynch him? Did you ever think that if he didn't tail Martin (especially after a dispatcher said he didn't need to) he never would have put himself in a position where he would have to kill someone? Did you ever stop to think that Martin may have been the one standing his ground? Did you ever think that maybe a name change and facial altering surgery may not be such a bad deal since he happens to still be alive. I bet Martin would have been happy to get off with that deal compared to what he got.
janicks Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I haven't read every post in this thread, but I can't believe the overall sentiment that seems to be here. It seems that the general feeling in this thread is sympathy for Zimmerman, hatred for the media, and a lack of understanding of why this might be a big deal or why anyone cares. Is there not a single black person who post at TBD? Or at least has a friend who is black? The black community hears a story of an unarmed black kid walking through a neighborhood, eating skittles, talking to his girlfriend on his phone, then ends up shot and killed and nobody understands how this can stir up emotions within a community that has plenty of members who have behaved perfectly well throughout their lives but still have countless stories of harrassment that their white counterpart wouldn't have? For some there is a justifiable lack of trust of law enforcement and the justice system and this incident just rips open old wounds. I'm no legal expert, but there seems to me that there is enough evidence that this should have been brought to trial. And my sympathies are directed to the dead kid who didn't have a gun. And besides all this, Zimmerman outweighed the kid by 100 pounds. If you claim that you were getting your ass kicked by a 16 year old that you outweigh by 100 pounds then you deserve to go to jail. Because you are a !@#$ing kitty.
3rdnlng Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Did you ever think that if he didn't tail Martin (especially after a dispatcher said he didn't need to) he never would have put himself in a position where he would have to kill someone? Did you ever stop to think that Martin may have been the one standing his ground? Did you ever think that maybe a name change and facial altering surgery may not be such a bad deal since he happens to still be alive. I bet Martin would have been happy to get off with that deal compared to what he got. So, you don't answer even one question and repeat this theory that he followed him after the "clerk" dispatcher advised him not to? How do you know that he didn't turn around and go back to his vehicle? Aren't you even a little curious to want to know where Zimmerman's car was in relation to the shooting? Do you have any intellectual curiosity about this at all, or are you just following the left's mantra?
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 I haven't read every post in this thread, but I can't believe the overall sentiment that seems to be here. It seems that the general feeling in this thread is sympathy for Zimmerman, hatred for the media, and a lack of understanding of why this might be a big deal or why anyone cares. Is there not a single black person who post at TBD? Or at least has a friend who is black? The black community hears a story of an unarmed black kid walking through a neighborhood, eating skittles, talking to his girlfriend on his phone, then ends up shot and killed and nobody understands how this can stir up emotions within a community that has plenty of members who have behaved perfectly well throughout their lives but still have countless stories of harrassment that their white counterpart wouldn't have? For some there is a justifiable lack of trust of law enforcement and the justice system and this incident just rips open old wounds. I'm no legal expert, but there seems to me that there is enough evidence that this should have been brought to trial. And my sympathies are directed to the dead kid who didn't have a gun. And besides all this, Zimmerman outweighed the kid by 100 pounds. If you claim that you were getting your ass kicked by a 16 year old that you outweigh by 100 pounds then you deserve to go to jail. Because you are a !@#$ing kitty. This has been explained to them for about 30 pages now. Not to mention I've seen plenty of stories in the media making Zimmerman into some sort of folk hero. This whole situation is tragic. So, you don't answer even one question and repeat this theory that he followed him after the "clerk" dispatcher advised him not to? How do you know that he didn't turn around and go back to his vehicle? Aren't you even a little curious to want to know where Zimmerman's car was in relation to the shooting? Do you have any intellectual curiosity about this at all, or are you just following the left's mantra? No we don't know do we? And how do you know that the investigation was done correctly? You don't. But I don't know how he could have ended up shooting the kid in a side yard if he was walking back to his car. Lets wait and see what the investigation turns out. But I have a feeling no matter how this turns out there are going to be some blurred lines on who was standing their ground.
Recommended Posts