The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dandi on June 30, 2013, 12:20:41 PM
-
Since according to DU mythology, Zimmerman "started the whole confrontation" the minute he got out of his truck that night with the intention of "stalking" Martin, and that gave Martin free licence to assault him in the name of "self-defense", does that mean as soon as Z set foot outside the vehicle Martin could have ran back at him and jumped him and started pounding his head into the street? Obviously so, since so many of you swear by all that is (un)holy at DU that is the starting point, the moment in which the confrontation began and when he became a de facto "threat" to young Messr. Martin. Anything that happened after that point was solely Z's fault. If not, why not?
Or how about halfway across the street on the way to the sidewalk? Or when he set foot on the sidewalk? Or twenty feet down the sidewalk? Or hell, as soon as he opened the door of his truck to get out? According to you, he was threat from the get-go, justifying a physical assault on him. So again, why wouldn't St. Trayvon Of Skittles be in the right?
If Z had stayed in his truck that night, yes, in hindsight the event probably wouldn't have happened. But if literally thousands of other actions by either party had come about it would have gone down differently, too. You see, the law, and common sense, requires more than some far-removed coulda-woulda-shoulda set of alternate scenarios be realized in order to allow someone the freedom to take actions without being attacked in the name of "self-defense" (the self-defense you say Martin was exercising). The fact is, it is neither illegal nor immoral to be suspicious of someone in your neighborhood. It is neither illegal nor immoral to carry a gun with the proper documentation. It is neither illegal nor immoral to get out of a vehicle. It is neither illegal nor immoral to cross a street. It is neither illegal nor immoral to walk down a sidewalk in your own neighborhood. And it is neither illegal nor immoral to follow someone at a distance for a short period in order to keep an eye on their location long enough for the police to arrive so you can report their position to them. However, you have built it up in your minds that all of those activities are both illegal and immoral, and that even absent any other overt threat, would be justification for a person headed home and within a short distance of their front door to turn back and assault the person following them.
Maybe that's justifiable in a prison camp in Pyongyang or a weapons bazaar in Mogadishu or a slum in Tirana but not in a civilized country. We don't beat people up just for following for a minute in a heavily populated suburban neighborhood. Not in any stretch of the law or imagination is that justifiable behavior.
Now if Z threatened Martin, laid his hands on him, brandished his gun, tried to impede his progress home or the like, then yes, that's an entirely different ballgame, but at this point, evidence of any of that exists only in your fevered imaginations, along with what your declarations of what his mindset was that night, running the full gamut from mere prejudice against young black men to a full blown pathological desire to murder a Black in cold blood and get away with it.
None of those are facts in evidence, they're not even well-founded opinions based on the information at hand, but somehow you expect the full weight of law and the justice system to act on them and lock up a citizen for a quarter century based on what "you know". The law doesn't work that way, or at least it's not supposed to. It requires a more proximal cause of a death than exiting one's truck in your own neighborhood. It requires more evidence of a threat than following someone on a public sidewalk for thirty seconds. Yet you're convinced it doesn't.
Come and explain to me how all this works in your world.
-
I shall answer on behalf of the chickenshit DUmmies who dare not answer your questions.
It's very simple, Zimmerman is a creepy ass cracker, and Saint Skittles is a black, therefore innocent by default, youth. That alone proves that the cracker had racist tendencies and is at fault 100%. Just the fact that the cracker was obviously racist, backed up by evidence from the edited MSNBC tapes, makes him at fault no matter what else happened that night.
-
If it had been Jorge Rodriguez this case would have never been picked up by the msm.
That. Is. All.
-
When the DU lurkers get around to answering your question/questions, I have one for them.
Why do they consistently refer to George Zimmerman by his last name, but use the first names 'Trayvon' and 'Rachel'. I'm sure they (the DUmmies) don't/didn't know any one of the three, so why the familiarity with two of them.
-
When the DU lurkers get around to answering your question/questions, I have one for them.
Why do they consistently refer to George Zimmerman by his last name, but use the first names 'Trayvon' and 'Rachel'. I'm sure they (the DUmmies) don't/didn't know any one of the three, so why the familiarity with two of them.
Probably the same reasons they use that softly lighted, almost airbrushed-looking photo of a younger Martin in a hoodie whenever a pic of him is needed, and the ones of Zimmerman that look like a mug shot.
-
Probably the same reasons they use that softly lighted, almost airbrushed-looking photo of a younger Martin in a hoodie whenever a pic of him is needed, and the ones of Zimmerman that look like a mug shot.
Exactly.
-
When the DU lurkers get around to answering your question/questions, I have one for them.
Why do they consistently refer to George Zimmerman by his last name, but use the first names 'Trayvon' and 'Rachel'. I'm sure they (the DUmmies) don't/didn't know any one of the three, so why the familiarity with two of them.
I have a question for them too. They've started saying that Zimmermann executed Trayvon--in cold blood. Executed, over and over they say it.
It reminds me of Honey Bunny from Pulp Fiction. The actress who played Honey Bunny probably did research on the role at DU.
(http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i475/Delmar59/pulphoney_zps5e2ea1d4.jpg) (http://s1095.photobucket.com/user/Delmar59/media/pulphoney_zps5e2ea1d4.jpg.html)
Any of you f*****g pricks move, and I'll execute every motherf*****g last one of ya!