Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 33 of 33
  1. #31
    StealDragon's Avatar
    StealDragon is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    NCC-1701
    Posts
    13,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Following a guy but not actually accosting him is not a confrontation, going back to the person who is "stalking" you and getting up in his grill however, IS causing a confrontation.
    So stalking someone is perfectly okay in your mind? O_o Just a natural thing that people do? Slowly trailing someone in a SUV and then parking it and following that person around in the shadows on a rainy night?

    You cannot be serious if you think thats okay.

    Stalking is an antagonistic action. Even if Trayvon threw the first punch, if stalking is the action that starts the wheels in motion the person doing the stalking cannot claim self defense. How you don't see that is beyond me. Put yourself in Trayvon's shoes for a second and really think about it, if you're walking home at night on the phone with your girlfriend and some guy is following you around in the shadows in the middle of the night would you think for a second if you did something about it that you yourself were the aggressor in that situation? I didn't think so.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Neither of these facts tell us who started the fight, we literally don't know who started it, stop dreaming up bullshit.
    A dispatcher is not the police, drop this fallacy.
    Dreaming up bullshit? Nah. If you think any action George Zimmerman made past calling 911 was the right move then I'm sorry to say you're flat out wrong. If you say oh young black men have a propensity towards crime as your rationale for his actions then you have bigger problems than an unadulterated misunderstanding of this event.

    As for the 911 dispatcher not having the same authority as the police, I'd say thats grasping straws to justify what became a quite simply criminal act. They work on the same team, left arm, right arm. Just because the dispatcher doesn't have a badge doesn't mean their instructions shouldn't be followed. Theres so much I could say about this train of thought but honestly it just seems silly.... really, the 911 dispatcher had no authority so Zimmerman's actions are justifiable now? Because the middleman doesn't have the authority to tell him what to do? Bullshit. Smh.

    _____


    Also to the both of you, stop pretending like I'm saying Trayvon is some paragon of morality. No one is perfect and those imperfections are not a rationalization for killing him, no matter the crime rate in the neighborhood or his race in comparison to criminals of the same race.


    I'd like to die with the songs I love stuck in my head. I hope to make the most of these hollow bones we become.
    I raise a toast to the the souls that sang all along. I've been gathering friends to just to make some sounds,
    before the ship goes down, I've been making amends by making the rounds before the whole world ends


    [Chit Chat Specific Forum Rules] // Last Update - Friday March 13, 2009

  2. #32
    98abaile's Avatar
    98abaile is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    An Englishman in a shithole somewhere in Wales.
    Posts
    7,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    So stalking someone is perfectly okay in your mind? O_o Just a natural thing that people do? Slowly trailing someone in a SUV and then parking it and following that person around in the shadows on a rainy night?

    You cannot be serious if you think thats okay.
    I never said it was ok. I said it was not a confrontation.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Stalking is an antagonistic action.
    But not an aggressive one.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Even if Trayvon threw the first punch, if stalking is the action that starts the wheels in motion the person doing the stalking cannot claim self defense. How you don't see that is beyond me.
    And now you're projecting the mind of a stalker onto GZ even though he was trying to observe for criminal activity (or so he claims), and yes he CAN claim self defence because it applies to anyone under violent attack, it doesn't matter who (non violently) antagonized who. You keep acting as if this is some kind of moral balance, but it doesn't make a difference, GZ could have been stalking him for perverted reasons and been rubbing one out thinking about all the kinky things he was gonna do to the skinny little black boy (and for all I know, he was), but until he actually laid a hand or made some kind of move on him, he had not caused any confrontation that would legally warrant self defence on TM's part. So all it EVER comes down to is who threw the first punch when they came to blows, neither you nor I will ever know and GZ has reasonable doubt on his side. You keep going on about what GZ should or shouldn't have done to begin with, but IT. DOESN'T. FUCKING. MATTER. The law does not care about your (or my) opinion. How YOU don't see that is beyond me.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Put yourself in Trayvon's shoes for a second and really think about it, if you're walking home at night on the phone with your girlfriend and some guy is following you around in the shadows in the middle of the night would you think for a second if you did something about it that you yourself were the aggressor in that situation?
    I can't put my self in TM's shoes anymore than either of us can put ourselves in GZ's shoes and nor can you, because you are making assumptions about each person's motives and assuming that TM was JUST walking home (which nobody on the planet can know anymore) and that GZ would ever have seen himself as some kind of creepy antagonist and not some kind of brave valiant knight character keeping a vigilance.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    I didn't think so.
    Stop projecting.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Dreaming up bullshit? Nah. If you think any action George Zimmerman made past calling 911 was the right move then I'm sorry to say you're flat out wrong.
    Too bad it doesn't matter how right or wrong his prior actions were and again, stop projecting.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    If you say oh young black men have a propensity towards crime as your rationale for his actions then you have bigger problems than an unadulterated misunderstanding of this event.
    I said that a higher crime rate of blacks in general will change the perceptions of others towards blacks, and holy projection batman!

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    As for the 911 dispatcher not having the same authority as the police, I'd say thats grasping straws to justify what became a quite simply criminal act.
    Well that's too bad Judge Dread, maybe you'll get the perps the next time you retroactively make up laws in your head rather than deferring to the mandated criminal justice system.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    They work on the same team, left arm, right arm. Just because the dispatcher doesn't have a badge doesn't mean their instructions shouldn't be followed. Theres so much I could say about this train of thought but honestly it just seems silly.... really, the 911 dispatcher had no authority so Zimmerman's actions are justifiable now? Because the middleman doesn't have the authority to tell him what to do? Bullshit. Smh.
    Have I got to use the "P" word again? Nobody said justified, those actions just have no bearing on the case. If it were illegal to ignore a desk jockey in a call centre, yeah maybe you'd have an argument; but it's not, so you don't, it's a moot point you're making.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Also to the both of you, stop pretending like I'm saying Trayvon is some paragon of morality.
    I'm not, I'm under the impression that you're prejudged on this case for reasons that make absolutely no difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    No one is perfect and those imperfections are not a rationalization for killing him, no matter the crime rate in the neighborhood or his race in comparison to criminals of the same race.
    Again nobody said they were, because for the love of fucking god IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a self defence case for GZ, not an execution trial for TM; TM could have been Jesus reincarnated or Satan personified and it still wouldn't matter. Hell the whole reason it went to court in the first place was to try and shoot down GZ's claim to self defence, not to figure out if TM "deserved" to die.

    ------------------

    Let me give everyone the abridged version of this case:
    Two people who may have been shining paragons and walking bastions of innocence or disgusting miscreants scheming and up to no good, came to blows and one got shot, the survivor claiming self defence. The survivor who shot the now dead guy, is on trial for murder.
    "Who was winning the fight prior to the shooting?"
    "The dead guy."
    "Who started the fight?"
    "We don't know."
    "Is there any pertinent evidence at all that could allow us to discredit the survivor's claim to self defence?"
    "NOPE."
    "Is there anything at all we can convict this guy with?"
    "NOPE."
    "Well then we can't convict him."
    Cue massive butt hurt from prejudged people who don't have their facts right but have either jumped to or been lead to a conclusion.

  3. #33
    StealDragon's Avatar
    StealDragon is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    NCC-1701
    Posts
    13,424

    Default

    I really hate to accuse you of not having read my previous posts but unfortunately its exactly what I'm going to have to do for the majority of your last post. I know you know better than to reply to me without actually reading what I say.

    But first some housecleaning....

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Stalking is an antagonistic action.
    But not an aggressive one.
    The fact you're arguing semantics just shows how weak this train of thought is.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dictionary.com
    an·tag·o·nis·tic [an-tag-uh-nis-tik]
    adjective
    1.
    acting in opposition; opposing, especially mutually.
    2.
    hostile; unfriendly.
    Come the fuck on dude. Are hostile and aggressive not the same thing either? Aggressive and antagonistic are the same fucking thing, if you're gonna use my penchant for being sesquipedalian to try to poke holes in my argument then you're just being pedantic to make up for a weak position. The fact I even had to mention this is ridiculous.


    Now that thats done with. On to the meat of the discussion, the reason for my little preface, and a source of quite a bit of surprise on my part courtesy of you 98... =\

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Even if Trayvon threw the first punch, if stalking is the action that starts the wheels in motion the person doing the stalking cannot claim self defense. How you don't see that is beyond me.
    And now you're projecting the mind of a stalker onto GZ even though he was trying to observe for criminal activity (or so he claims), and yes he CAN claim self defence because it applies to anyone under violent attack, it doesn't matter who (non violently) antagonized who. You keep acting as if this is some kind of moral balance, but it doesn't make a difference, GZ could have been stalking him for perverted reasons and been rubbing one out thinking about all the kinky things he was gonna do to the skinny little black boy (and for all I know, he was), but until he actually laid a hand or made some kind of move on him, he had not caused any confrontation that would legally warrant self defence on TM's part. So all it EVER comes down to is who threw the first punch when they came to blows, neither you nor I will ever know and GZ has reasonable doubt on his side. You keep going on about what GZ should or shouldn't have done to begin with, but IT. DOESN'T. FUCKING. MATTER. The law does not care about your (or my) opinion. How YOU don't see that is beyond me.
    This disappoints me 98. Because I said this almost a week ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuyvesant View Post
    Uh, okay.
    While being armchair jurors and judges is all fun and games, wasn't this stuff known at the trial? Has there been any explanation as to why Zimmerman was found not guilty?
    Because if you go by the exact letter of the law, Stand Your Ground gives you the right to kill anyone who, by your opinion, is immediately threatening your life. The spirit of the law, as I've understood it from the political analysis I've watched before and after the verdict, including the interviews with some of the lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who voted for the law, all say this usage of the law by George Zimmerman goes against the spirit of the law, which was was give you the right to defend yourself with lethal force if it was available to you when you are attacked or threatened. If you can initiate a conflict and then kill the other person and just claim you stood your ground that means the law is nothing but legally sanctioned murder and therefore anyone anywhere could pick a fight, get hit once or threatened once and then shoot and kill the other person, claim SYG and subsequently get away with it... which is exactly what George Zimmerman did. But since the language of the law is so non-specific as to how the conflict is initiated there you have the reason why Zimmerman was able to get off. I have no doubt he thought his life was in danger and if he wanted to shoot Trayvon because of that then fine. Whatever. What matters is that even though he started the altercation by stalking Trayvon through his own neighborhood, the fact he began to lose the following fight it apparently gave him the right to shoot Trayvon and subsequently allowed him to claim he stood his ground and now he can walk the earth as a free man instead of the murderer that he is... a broken and sorrowful situation if I ever saw one.
    I don't know if you saw this but what you seem to think I think, I already said wasn't the case right here. I know you're arguing its about the letter of the law, well I already said that. What it is I'm arguing is the massive clusterfuck that happened and even though you can call it whatever you want through some masterful legalese, murder is still murder. Stand Your Ground is a law that basically says "This pile of reeking shit right here... this is now a rose." This is a fucked up situation and now an innocent (legally anyway *rolleyes*) kid is dead and the person that MADE him dead is walking around doing whatever, I don't know, "rubbing one out thinking about all the kinky things he was gonna do to the skinny little black boy" free as a bird in the fucking sky. If you personally don't see anything wrong with that and your only response is to hide behind "well its the law" argument then you're misunderstanding the outrage that is driving this whole thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Put yourself in Trayvon's shoes for a second and really think about it, if you're walking home at night on the phone with your girlfriend and some guy is following you around in the shadows in the middle of the night would you think for a second if you did something about it that you yourself were the aggressor in that situation?
    I can't put my self in TM's shoes anymore than either of us can put ourselves in GZ's shoes and nor can you, because you are making assumptions about each person's motives and assuming that TM was JUST walking home (which nobody on the planet can know anymore) and that GZ would ever have seen himself as some kind of creepy antagonist and not some kind of brave valiant knight character keeping a vigilance.
    Bullshit. Both men were on their phones immediately prior to the incident and we know exactly what they were thinking.

    1. Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend.

    http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/1...scared_trayvon

    He was just walking home when he saw GZ following him both in the car and on foot. He was still on the phone with her when the altercation started. He was complaining to her about this creepy guy following him around. She testified that he was afraid George Zimmerman was going to try to kidnap and rape him.

    2. George was on the phone with the 911 dispatcher

    Heres the transcript of that call >>> http://www.documentcloud.org/documen...zimmerman.html

    Note on Page two where he refers to TM as one of those "assholes [who] always get away"... yeaaaaah. Definitely no clue as to what motive he had, or what kind of state of mind he was in or what his opinion on TM was and how that might have colored his judgement when he, with a loaded gun, approached this "asshole who always gets away".

    So yet again. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. You want to be pedantic those are first hand accounts straight from the horses friggin mouth. So stop trying to argue ignorance about motives as a reason to react with any sort of the apathy towards this situation you clearly have. Zimmerman thought he was going to be the man who stopped those assholes who get away and he had the opportunity and firepower to do it and he used it.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    I didn't think so.
    Stop projecting.
    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    If you say oh young black men have a propensity towards crime as your rationale for his actions then you have bigger problems than an unadulterated misunderstanding of this event.
    I said that a higher crime rate of blacks in general will change the perceptions of others towards blacks, and holy projection batman!
    Projecting what exactly? >_>

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Dreaming up bullshit? Nah. If you think any action George Zimmerman made past calling 911 was the right move then I'm sorry to say you're flat out wrong.
    Too bad it doesn't matter how right or wrong his prior actions were and again, stop projecting.
    Actually it totally matters. I refer you to that article I posted above.

    [...]police determined the deadly encounter between Zimmerman and Martin was, quote, "ultimately avoidable," if Zimmerman had, quote, "remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement," end of quote.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    As for the 911 dispatcher not having the same authority as the police, I'd say thats grasping straws to justify what became a quite simply criminal act.
    Well that's too bad Judge Dread, maybe you'll get the perps the next time you retroactively make up laws in your head rather than deferring to the mandated criminal justice system
    I... don't understand what you mean by this at all. Seriously. It makes so little sense I can't even speculate as to what you were getting at. Whats Judge Dredd, retroactively making laws, and your apparent belief in the infallibility of a criminal justice system have at all to do with listening to the person on the other end of a 911 call? I have no fucking clue. Please rephrase and refine if you feel its important enough to warrant it.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    They work on the same team, left arm, right arm. Just because the dispatcher doesn't have a badge doesn't mean their instructions shouldn't be followed. Theres so much I could say about this train of thought but honestly it just seems silly.... really, the 911 dispatcher had no authority so Zimmerman's actions are justifiable now? Because the middleman doesn't have the authority to tell him what to do? Bullshit. Smh.
    Have I got to use the "P" word again? Nobody said justified, those actions just have no bearing on the case. If it were illegal to ignore a desk jockey in a call centre, yeah maybe you'd have an argument; but it's not, so you don't, it's a moot point you're making.
    You keep using the "P" word and I have no idea why... so I don't really care. As for the second part of this... I ... yet again... have no idea what you're trying to get at. You seem to think that because the people on the other end of a 911 call don't have badges, that when they tell you to do something its sort of like asking for advice? I get that you're not legally bound to follow their instructions, yes, but to say its irrelevant that Zimmerman did literally the exact opposite of what they told him to do and someone ended up dead because of it is kinda ridiculous. They do have an implied authority, I'm so lost as to why you don't understand that I dunno I think I'm gonna have to chalk it up to the possibility that maybe things are different in the UK.

    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    Also to the both of you, stop pretending like I'm saying Trayvon is some paragon of morality.
    I'm not, I'm under the impression that you're prejudged on this case for reasons that make absolutely no difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    No one is perfect and those imperfections are not a rationalization for killing him, no matter the crime rate in the neighborhood or his race in comparison to criminals of the same race.
    Again nobody said they were, because for the love of fucking god IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a self defence case for GZ, not an execution trial for TM; TM could have been Jesus reincarnated or Satan personified and it still wouldn't matter. Hell the whole reason it went to court in the first place was to try and shoot down GZ's claim to self defence, not to figure out if TM "deserved" to die.
    I get that I said both but you really should have realized this was 98% for R3d and 2% for you. Like, dude, I know what you said.

    ...but this little excerpt...
    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    I'm under the impression that you're prejudged on this case
    I'll get back to this some other time.




    Finally.
    Quote Originally Posted by 98abaile View Post
    Let me give everyone the abridged version of this case:
    Two people who may have been shining paragons and walking bastions of innocence or disgusting miscreants scheming and up to no good, came to blows and one got shot, the survivor claiming self defence. The survivor who shot the now dead guy, is on trial for murder.
    "Who was winning the fight prior to the shooting?"
    "The dead guy."
    "Who started the fight?"
    "We don't know."
    "Is there any pertinent evidence at all that could allow us to discredit the survivor's claim to self defence?"
    "NOPE."
    "Is there anything at all we can convict this guy with?"
    "NOPE."
    "Well then we can't convict him."
    Lol. I love reading this because its pretty much exactly what I said... just minus the realization that what its describing is something thats fundamentally fucked up.

    Side by side I think this basically is exactly what we've been saying to each other since this started.


    I'd like to die with the songs I love stuck in my head. I hope to make the most of these hollow bones we become.
    I raise a toast to the the souls that sang all along. I've been gathering friends to just to make some sounds,
    before the ship goes down, I've been making amends by making the rounds before the whole world ends


    [Chit Chat Specific Forum Rules] // Last Update - Friday March 13, 2009

 

 
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
vBulletin Skin by: ForumThemes.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79