Zimmerman Sues NBC

[Phatscotty]

You guys are clowns.

I think you're the one in the circus act here, and I for one, am fully entertained.

but gotta work dammit...Ill try to resume later

you misquoted. #1 Aradhaus said that #2 you should know I do not call people here names.

Sorry I ruined your entertainment

[Timminz]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

Even in your speculative fantasy, Zimmerman is obviously at fault.

"He told me to go f*ck myself", is not a valid reason to confront someone physically. Also, losing a fight to and unarmed person half your size (a fight that you initiated), is not a valid reason to shoot someone to death.

[thegreekdog]

are you smoking crack tgd? A - Obama looks like a black man. What the f*ck are you talking about? Is he not speaking out enough about white kids being gunned down and the murder not investigated properly?

B - the point he is making is that wether you're the son of the president, or some random schmo on the street, your death deserves to be treated with the same level of investigation. Without bias. Without prejudice. With justice.

The point he's making is that when it's politically beneficial for him, he will address violent crimes directly.

Do you know how many violent crimes happen in the United States to young black people? How many times has the president directly addressed these? Zero? Why is he addressing it now? The answer is because it's politically beneficial for him to do so.

From what I've read, this is a crime and a violent crime and a violent crime against a young black man, and it's horrible and it shouldn't happen and we should all be outraged. But we should all be outraged any time this happens. And we're not. And the president certainly is not. So, again, why is he outraged now?

[Aradhus]

are you smoking crack tgd? A - Obama looks like a black man. What the f*ck are you talking about? Is he not speaking out enough about white kids being gunned down and the murder not investigated properly?

B - the point he is making is that wether you're the son of the president, or some random schmo on the street, your death deserves to be treated with the same level of investigation. Without bias. Without prejudice. With justice.

The point he's making is that when it's politically beneficial for him, he will address violent crimes directly.

Do you know how many violent crimes happen in the United States to young black people? How many times has the president directly addressed these? Zero? Why is he addressing it now? The answer is because it's politically beneficial for him to do so.

From what I've read, this is a crime and a violent crime and a violent crime against a young black man, and it's horrible and it shouldn't happen and we should all be outraged. But we should all be outraged any time this happens. And we're not. And the president certainly is not. So, again, why is he outraged now?

Or.... He's answering, because the media repeatedly ask him about it... And his point was almost exactly what your last paragraph is.

[thegreekdog]

are you smoking crack tgd? A - Obama looks like a black man. What the f*ck are you talking about? Is he not speaking out enough about white kids being gunned down and the murder not investigated properly?

B - the point he is making is that wether you're the son of the president, or some random schmo on the street, your death deserves to be treated with the same level of investigation. Without bias. Without prejudice. With justice.

The point he's making is that when it's politically beneficial for him, he will address violent crimes directly.

Do you know how many violent crimes happen in the United States to young black people? How many times has the president directly addressed these? Zero? Why is he addressing it now? The answer is because it's politically beneficial for him to do so.

From what I've read, this is a crime and a violent crime and a violent crime against a young black man, and it's horrible and it shouldn't happen and we should all be outraged. But we should all be outraged any time this happens. And we're not. And the president certainly is not. So, again, why is he outraged now?

Or.... He's answering, because the media repeatedly ask him about it... And his point was almost exactly what your last paragraph is.

The media repeatedly asks him about a lot of things, like Syria or Iran or his manufacturing plan, and he chooses not to answer those questions. Please don't mistake my criticism of the president for my support of the crime. I don't support the crime. If the president wants to address violence against black men, he should spend some time coming up with some solutions and less time giving soundbites so that racists like Jesse Jackson can use those soundbites.

[saxitoxin]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

A neighborhood watch is supposed to watch, it's right there in the name. Watch doesn't include investigate or interrogate. If someone with no uniform or badge approached me on the street and started demanding I answer questions about my travel plans I'd probably tell them to go f*ck themselves also.

Carrying a firearm, Zimmerman had a special obligation to avoid confrontation but it seems he sought it out. I don't agree with Aradhus that this was premeditated, race based or part of a conspiracy. I'm not even sure if Zimmerman has legal responsibilty. It seems, though, that he might have moral responsibility.

[Phatscotty]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

Even in your speculative fantasy, Zimmerman is obviously at fault.

"He told me to go f*ck myself", is not a valid reason to confront someone physically. Also, losing a fight to and unarmed person half your size (a fight that you initiated), is not a valid reason to shoot someone to death.

lmao

[spurgistan]

"Speculate" =/ "invent a scenario that would fit your worldview when we already possess most of the relevant information."

Zimmerman wasn't supposed to have a gun. The dispatcher Zimmerman spoke with was adamant that he not pursue Trayvon, because he wasn't supposed to do that. Zimmerman sounded angry that "they always get away."

[ViperOverLord]

I will speculate a little bit. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watchman. He saw a stranger (Trayvon did not live there) walking through the closed community. The watchman asked Trayvon if he lived there and maybe where he was going. Trayvon told him to go f*ck himself. Zimmerman got out of the car and told Trayvon to show him how someone fucks themselves. They got into a fight, Trayvon was getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimm pulled out the gun and shot him.

Even in your speculative fantasy, Zimmerman is obviously at fault.

"He told me to go f*ck myself", is not a valid reason to confront someone physically. Also, losing a fight to and unarmed person half your size (a fight that you initiated), is not a valid reason to shoot someone to death.

Not many people think Zimmerman isn't at fault. But what is he at fault for? What kind of legal case is there against him? Murder? Probably not, assuming the witness accounts are correct. Man Slaughter? Probably not, assuming that the witness accounts are correct. Some sort of lesser deadly negligence charge? That's possibly where his legal fault lays. That's still a serious charge. I don't think anybody feels especially great about defending George Zimmerman. He's either a nimrod or he had a serious lapse in judgment. But many of us object to the media's myriad of irresponsible reporting and social engineering in the wake of the tragedy. I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them. F that. They know the facts. They just want attention and to be victims of the man. PS said it best__ they murder more people than anyone. They need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of looking for scapegoats.

[Night Strike]

"Speculate" =/ "invent a scenario that would fit your worldview when we already possess most of the relevant information."

Zimmerman wasn't supposed to have a gun. The dispatcher Zimmerman spoke with was adamant that he not pursue Trayvon, because he wasn't supposed to do that. Zimmerman sounded angry that "they always get away."

Why wasn't he supposed to have a gun? Every law abiding citizen is allowed to have a gun if they choose to. That's why we have the 2nd Amendment.

[Symmetry]

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them.

I'm gonna go ahead and offer you the chance to rephrase that. Perhaps, I would gently suggest, in a way that doesn't suggest you hold an irrational grudge against African-Americans.

[Night Strike]

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them.

I'm gonna go ahead and offer you the chance to rephrase that. Perhaps, I would gently suggest, in a way that doesn't suggest you hold an irrational grudge against African-Americans.

There are more blacks in the US than just those who are African-Americans. There are also African-Americans who are not black. And yes, people like Al Sharpton do get to cry racism without any challenge to their irrational grudges against white people.

[Symmetry]

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them.

I'm gonna go ahead and offer you the chance to rephrase that. Perhaps, I would gently suggest, in a way that doesn't suggest you hold an irrational grudge against African-Americans.

There are more blacks in the US than just those who are African-Americans. There are also African-Americans who are not black. And yes, people like Al Sharpton do get to cry racism without any challenge to their irrational grudges against white people.

I'm a little baffled, I must say, how precisely is Al Sharpton not challenged? Presumably you're looking at different sources than me, as he seems to be challenged fairly often. I'm also a little unclear on your irrational grudges against white people line that you feel black people have.

[ViperOverLord]

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them.

I'm gonna go ahead and offer you the chance to rephrase that. Perhaps, I would gently suggest, in a way that doesn't suggest you hold an irrational grudge against African-Americans.

I'm not going to pander to your liberal condescension. I said what I meant. You choose to see an irrational grudge that does not exist.

And here's the full quote that was based on rational thinking:

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them. F that. They know the facts. They just want attention and to be victims of the man. PS said it best__ they murder more people than anyone. They need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of looking for scapegoats.

I know you'd rather reduce it to a sensational come on instead of realizing the fullness of the logic.

[Symmetry]

I also am annoyed that blacks aren't held to account. They just get to scream racism any time they want and we're not supposed to challenge them.

I'm gonna go ahead and offer you the chance to rephrase that. Perhaps, I would gently suggest, in a way that doesn't suggest you hold an irrational grudge against African-Americans.

I'm not going to pander to your liberal condescension. I said what I meant. You choose to see an irrational grudge that does not exist.

Then you're kind of racist dude. Sorry, but the idea that "blacks" aren't held to account is ridiculous. I'm guessing, from the tone of your post, that this isn't the first time you've been called racist over something you've said, and that you're annoyed that so many people call you racist.

I would suggest that if a lot of people call you out on the stuff you say as racist, perhaps, and I put this gently, the problem doesn't lie with the "blacks", but with the stuff you say.

Which, obviously, is pretty racist.