Trayvon Martin - George Zimmerman

[Tres3]

George Zimmerman is back in the news. This time he was arrested for an alleged assault on his new girlfriend who he got pregnant. One would think after getting away with his life by defending himself that Zimmerman would be thankful that he was alive or not permanently injured, find a job, and keep a low profile. This is not his first brush with the law since his trial ended.

You cannot cure stupid!

Meanwhile Trayvon's mother is on the handout, I mean lecture, circuit speaking against "Stand Your Ground", even though Zimmerman's attorneys did not use that as a defense. Go figure!

Tres3.

[Boston]

Ha, ha, ha! Beautiful!

Thank you SO much Boston. You just made my day! Funny that you should mention pussy, because this reply marks you out as the biggest pussy on the forum. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! People overuse the acronym LOL, but I am properly, genuinely Laughing Out Loud!

1. This thread is under Other Topics / Chit Chat.
2. My last post had nothing to do with "the little fatboy", as you so charmingly put it. Although it does relate to the bigger debate. Did you even read any of the linked-to article?
3. Are you really that insecure in your beliefs that you're not capable of debating them?
4. LOFL!



P.S. If your answer to 3 is 'no' or your answer to 4 is 'yes', why the hell did you waste your (and my) time in posting your pussy reply?

Thank you for talking to me davie w. Oops. Caps not working.

[DavieW]

I will be the first to vote to drop this thread. Who cares about the little fatboy and his history? I thought this forum has to do about pussy.

Ha, ha, ha! Beautiful!

Thank you SO much Boston. You just made my day! Funny that you should mention pussy, because this reply marks you out as the biggest pussy on the forum. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! People overuse the acronym LOL, but I am properly, genuinely Laughing Out Loud!

1. This thread is under Other Topics / Chit Chat.
2. My last post had nothing to do with "the little fatboy", as you so charmingly put it. Although it does relate to the bigger debate. Did you even read any of the linked-to article?
3. Are you really that insecure in your beliefs that you're not capable of debating them?
4. LOFL!



P.S. If your answer to 3 is 'no' or your answer to 4 is 'yes', why the hell did you waste your (and my) time in posting your pussy reply?

[Boston]

"American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?"

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...control-porter

*awaits typical "all those statistics are made up by pinko commies" riposte*.

*yawn*.

I will be the first to vote to drop this thread. Who cares about the little fatboy and his history? I thought this forum has to do about pussy.

[DavieW]

"American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?"

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...control-porter

*awaits typical "all those statistics are made up by pinko commies" riposte*.

*yawn*.

[Runner Up]

Yeah, that's right, sure, whatever you say, makes a lot of sense. The ONLY legitimate function.*

And this is why it's totally pointless talking politics on this forum! If you're not a gun-toting, god-fearing Republican you must be a looney-bin, commie-loving Democrat. The hilarious thing is that you appear to have about as much individuality as a molecule of water!* I've mentioned my general political persuasion on this very thread - I've been a Conservative voter all my life - but because I don't agree with arming civilians, rather than take part in an interesting discussion about it, you've got to trot out the party line and tell me I'm a "socialist in favour of violating individual rights"? You couldn't be any more wrong!

There's just no polite way of saying this -blah blah

You libertines always have a plan to change a mans real instincts. Now if you can uninvent the gun and assure me that all criminals have turned in their guns I will agree with you. Not really...because a knife deserves to be confronted with a gun too. BTW.....youtube homemade guns....they are easy to make and work the same.

My gun saved me from a Peruvian on my balcony at 11:00 at night in Fredericksburg VA. HE is dead...he had a gun.

[Spirit Rider]

Some words to the wise. Shooting Advice from various Concealed Carry Instructors. If you own a gun, you will appreciate this.

D; Never let someone or something that threatens you get inside arms length.

I have to disagree with this one. Replace with "Never let someone or something that threatens you get inside 7 yards without reacting.

Reference Tueller drill. Which shows that an average assailant with a knife can close 21 feet in less than 1.5 seconds.

Even a balding, fat, out of shape, old fart I might be familiar with was able to close the distance in 1.3 seconds. Luckily after a one week I was able to draw and hit center of mass is less than one second.

Lesson, don't let someone in a threating manner get closet than 20 feet before drawing your weapon and less than 10 feet before stopping the threatening activity.

[Big Boss Man]

Maybe because of recent events, Folsum Prison Blues has been stuck in my head all week.

"When I was just a baby my mama told me. Son,
Always be a good boy, don't ever play with guns.
But I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
When I hear that whistle blowing, I hang my head and cry."

These young guys are really screwing up their lives.

[Tres3]

Some words to the wise. Shooting Advice from various Concealed Carry Instructors. If you own a gun, you will appreciate this.

A; Guns have only two enemies Rust and Politicians.

B; Its always better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

C; Cops carry guns to protect themselves, not you.

D; Never let someone or something that threatens you get inside arms length.

E; Never say "I've got a gun." If you need to use deadly force, the first sound they hear should be the safety clicking off.

F; The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes, and the response time of a .357 is 1400 feet per second.

G; The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win. Cheat if necessary.

H; Make your attacker advances through a wall of bullets. You may get killed with your own gun, but he'll have to beat you to death with it, because it will be empty.

I; If you're in a gun fight:

1/ If you're not shooting, you should be loading;.

2/ If you're not loading, you should be moving;.

3/ If you're not moving, you're dead.

J; In a life and death situation, do something. It may be wrong, but do something!

K; If you carry a gun, people call you paranoid. Nonsense! If you have a gun, what do you have to be paranoid about?

L; You can say 'stop' or 'alto' or any other word, but a large bore muzzle pointed at someone's head is pretty much a universal language.

M; You cannot save the planet, but you may be able to save yourself and your family.

Tres3.

[Esten]

Why does not New York enforce the laws on the books?

Surely you didn't just make this up. No doubt there is some degree of non-enforcement, but show us what data you have on this, so we can understand the extent of the problem.

Meanwhile here's an article you might be interested in:
NYPD announces 250 illegal firearms seized, 19 arrested in gun ring that stretched into South
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.1430629

[Don B]

Yeah, that's right, sure, whatever you say, makes a lot of sense. The ONLY legitimate function.*


And this is why it's totally pointless talking politics on this forum! If you're not a gun-toting, god-fearing Republican you must be a looney-bin, commie-loving Democrat. The hilarious thing is that you appear to have about as much individuality as a molecule of water!* I've mentioned my general political persuasion on this very thread - I've been a Conservative voter all my life - but because I don't agree with arming civilians, rather than take part in an interesting discussion about it, you've got to trot out the party line and tell me I'm a "socialist in favour of violating individual rights"? You couldn't be any more wrong!

There's just no polite way of saying this - but you just don't seem to be very bright. I'm really sorry if you have some kind of learning disability - I don't want to come across as condescending, but I'm not so stupid as to paint the world as only red or blue and to assume that that's the way everyone thinks. I don't have any agenda, other than to try and enjoy my life without screwing up anyone elses and to try and treat others as I'd like to be treated. And that's bloody tough enough! At times I'm fcuking rubbish at it. I'm a self-confessed xenophobe - living in Saudi Arabia and Argentina will do that to anyone I reckon! I don't like myself for it, but at least I can present an argument as to why I'm like it that has some logic to it. Whereas I'm yet to hear any kind of logical argument as to why you should discriminate against anyone because of the colour of their skin.

I like a political debate and I've got good friends at both extremes of the spectrum, although more who fit in several places somewhere along the spectrum, but it appears that nobody's interested in a debate here, just jingoistic, political mud-slinging. Frankly I find it rather pathetic.

Read this thread from the beginning. I wanted to talk about the case. I asked a number of questions. They were rarely ever answered. I was just bombarded with increasingly abusive political rhetoric. Even when they were answered, it was never done just factually - one side had to add in an accusation of 'socialist' with the other side playing the 'race' card. If nobody could think of an answer which they could add a barb to, the question just got ignored. I had several PMs telling me I was wasting my time, but I persevered - and waddya know, I was wasting my time!

You should try setting aside YOUR political agenda once in a while and actually have a discussion about something using only logic and facts. You might find it interesting......






.....ha, ha, ha, ha! Sorry! Only joking!*







*See, it's bloody difficult to not be condescending when faced with such intractable stupidity! Sorry about that.

You seem to have overlooked a point I made some time ago, this forum argues about particulars and not ideas, concepts or causes. This entire thread has focused on the actions of the two involved when what should have been questioned was why this case made national headlines. Certainly you are bright enough to see the poverty pimps in action using it to push their agenda.

For the record, sonny, I have been around a hell of a lot longer than you or anybody else in this forum and have observed first hand the loss of first one right then another. As far as my political affiliations I first voted in the 1952 Republican primary, my candidate, Robert A. Taft, lost and the Republicans have been disappointing me ever since. I continue to vote for them as a rule because the alternate is worse. Philosophically I am neither a progressive (liberal) or a conservative but an Objectivist. "See, it's bloody difficult to not be condescending when faced with such intractable stupidity! Sorry about that" Yes it is but I tried not to be.

Don B.

[DavieW]

Then do I understand that you agree that the only legitimate function of government is the protection of individual rights?

Yeah, that's right, sure, whatever you say, makes a lot of sense. The ONLY legitimate function.*

Or on the other hand are you with those in this forum that are in favor of violating individual rights in order to further their socialist agenda?

And this is why it's totally pointless talking politics on this forum! If you're not a gun-toting, god-fearing Republican you must be a looney-bin, commie-loving Democrat. The hilarious thing is that you appear to have about as much individuality as a molecule of water!* I've mentioned my general political persuasion on this very thread - I've been a Conservative voter all my life - but because I don't agree with arming civilians, rather than take part in an interesting discussion about it, you've got to trot out the party line and tell me I'm a "socialist in favour of violating individual rights"? You couldn't be any more wrong!

There's just no polite way of saying this - but you just don't seem to be very bright. I'm really sorry if you have some kind of learning disability - I don't want to come across as condescending, but I'm not so stupid as to paint the world as only red or blue and to assume that that's the way everyone thinks. I don't have any agenda, other than to try and enjoy my life without screwing up anyone elses and to try and treat others as I'd like to be treated. And that's bloody tough enough! At times I'm fcuking rubbish at it. I'm a self-confessed xenophobe - living in Saudi Arabia and Argentina will do that to anyone I reckon! I don't like myself for it, but at least I can present an argument as to why I'm like it that has some logic to it. Whereas I'm yet to hear any kind of logical argument as to why you should discriminate against anyone because of the colour of their skin.

I like a political debate and I've got good friends at both extremes of the spectrum, although more who fit in several places somewhere along the spectrum, but it appears that nobody's interested in a debate here, just jingoistic, political mud-slinging. Frankly I find it rather pathetic.

Read this thread from the beginning. I wanted to talk about the case. I asked a number of questions. They were rarely ever answered. I was just bombarded with increasingly abusive political rhetoric. Even when they were answered, it was never done just factually - one side had to add in an accusation of 'socialist' with the other side playing the 'race' card. If nobody could think of an answer which they could add a barb to, the question just got ignored. I had several PMs telling me I was wasting my time, but I persevered - and waddya know, I was wasting my time!

You should try setting aside YOUR political agenda once in a while and actually have a discussion about something using only logic and facts. You might find it interesting......






.....ha, ha, ha, ha! Sorry! Only joking!*







*See, it's bloody difficult to not be condescending when faced with such intractable stupidity! Sorry about that.

[DavieW]

I agree, but now, according to DavieW, if you don't suffer from white guilt, and if you don't see racial motives behind everything, and if you're simply tired of the professional race pimps, then you're a racist.

Where on earth are you getting that from? You're just making stuff up now!

And I had you down as one of the more intelligent players in this debate. Doh!

[Don B]

Judging by the majority of the posters on this thread, he's right, and has every reason to!
Never seen so much nasty, horrible, racist drivel in my entire life. Now I understand why nobody ever says anything when TL spouts his hate-filled tirades about 'indians'...this place is populated almost entirely by racist bigots and it took this thread for them all to crawl out of the woodwork and show their true colours!

Then do I understand that you agree that the only legitimate function of government is the protection of individual rights?

Or on the other hand are you with those in this forum that are in favor of violating individual rights in order to further their socialist agenda?

Don B.

[Jackson]

Out of every 100 cries of "Racism" you hear, 99 are motivated by nothing other than politics. IMHO.

I agree, but now, according to DavieW, if you don't suffer from white guilt, and if you don't see racial motives behind everything, and if you're simply tired of the professional race pimps, then you're a racist.