Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Zimmerman Not Guilty


Lawful Metal

Recommended Posts

Guest The Magnificent 7

What's amazing is that in V-Rod's reality everyone fights by Marquis of Queensbury rules, submits to a tale of the tape and weigh-in, and after the first good knock down punch steps away and says, "Fine punch, my good sir, I've realized the error of my ways and apologize for offending Miss Honeycutt.  I intended no offense when I alluded to her weight problem." 

 

You are out of a fucking timewarp with this "should have taken his beating like a man" nonsense.  You haven't seen a streetfight in ages, let alone ever participated in one. 

 

Shit, even back in the days of glove removal and slapping your reality was twisted.

 

 

"Many respectable writers agree that if a man reasonably believes that he is in immediate danger of death or grievous bodily harm from his assailant he may stand his ground and that if he kills him he has not exceeded the bounds of lawful self-defense. That has been the decision of this court." (Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Brown v. United States, 1921)

 

You probably think Malcolm X was a gun pussy and should have been at the window with his dukes up, shadow boxing, instead of with his M1 Carbine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem here is that the law insists people should be allowed to defend themselves with lethal force even in a fight they originally provoked.  "Start some shit with a total stranger, get my ass briefly kicked, shoot the guy dead, and then get acquitted" is something that should never be legal.  And for all the people who whine "Trayvon threw down first!", we don't actually know that and it doesn't matter anyway because Zimmerman instigated it by stalking him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are out of a fucking timewarp with this "should have taken his beating like a man" nonsense.  You haven't seen a streetfight in ages, let alone ever participated in one. 

 

And that is where you are wrong. I was assaulted months back, I threw the man into a wall and held him in a headlock once I was in control of the situation and waited for the police to arrive. Of course the police were useless, but I did not use a fucking gun. I have had brooms broken over my head, been attacked with knives, cinder blocks and broken bottles. None of which I am proud of or happy about. Though you explain to me, why using a gun during a fist fight is a defensible action. That is if you can stop lecturing people on the proper way to grieve. Just please one good reason. Considering the pig was not even being strangled and his life was not in danger and he provoked the confrontation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though you explain to me, why using a gun during a fist fight is a defensible action. 

 

To be fair, I can think of plenty of scenarios where it would be completely justified.  But not this one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Magnificent 7

Posted Image

 

I just gave you case law.  People are killed in fights.  Whether 1 time or 1 million matters not a jot.  Whether a knife, a baseball bat, a curb stomp, a mean right hand, a molotov cocktail, a flying knee, matters not a jot the method someone is destroying you.  If your life is in danger you can use whatever force is necessary to end the fight.  Period, point blank, stop arguing this because it's a motherfucking fact.  Go back to "gun pussies" because that craziness was at least entertaining. 

 

No one is lecturing you on your "grief."  I'm lecturing you on your utter stupidity, Vic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Magnificent 7

 

Though you explain to me, why using a gun during a fist fight is a defensible action. 

 

To be fair, I can think of plenty of scenarios where it would be completely justified.  But not this one

 

 

And I say fair enough to that, and at least you can engage someone like you on the particulars of the case even though I may disagree on stuff with you. 

 

But this guy Vic lives in a different reality than me and cannot even grasp simple concepts that go way back in history like self defense. 

 

He's very close to a true hoplophobe, a term I'm not particularly fond of because I generally don't believe in painting people with terms that are meant to discredit (generally any ...phobia).  But his wackiness apparently knows no bounds when it comes to firearms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think guns are the weapon of the true coward, which fits Zimmerman's description. 

You never answered the question. Tell me how it is defensible (as in you should not go to fucking prison) to shoot an UNARMED man in a fist fight?

Let's not even get into the parts where Zimmerman started it. Just in general, two drunks get into a fist fight and drunk #1 pulls a gun and murders drunk #2. Why should drunk #1 not be in prison. 

If Zimmerman used self defense, then the concept of murder is out the window. 

Nobody is denying that an idiot with a gun will find an excuse to use one. The argument is why they should not be in prison. 
 

To be fair, I can think of plenty of scenarios where it would be completely justified.  But not this one.

 

I think I covered all my bases. 

 

Go back to "gun pussies" because that craziness was at least entertaining. 

 

Aww. I hit a nerve. Of course shooting an unarmed man makes you a paragon of bravery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell me how it is defensible (as in you should not go to fucking prison) to shoot an UNARMED man in a fist fight?

 

For an admittedly ridiculous scenario: imagine that Brock Lesnar is mugging Stephen Hawking.  In that case, as long as he can lift the damn gun in the first place and keep his hand from shaking long enough to pull the trigger, I'd have no problem with Steve busting a cap in Brock's ass.  Guns are an equalizer for people who can't otherwise fight back, and they're basically the only weapon that works reliably in any circumstance.  

 

But they sure as hell aren't an equalizer for a grownup with martial arts training to "defend himself" against a teenage boy he was stalking and outweighs by at least twenty pounds.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Tell me how it is defensible (as in you should not go to fucking prison) to shoot an UNARMED man in a fist fight?

 

For an admittedly ridiculous scenario: imagine that Brock Lesnar is mugging Stephen Hawking.  In that case, as long as he can lift the damn gun in the first place and keep his hand from shaking long enough to pull the trigger, I'd have no problem with Steve busting a cap in Brock's ass.  Guns are an equalizer for people who can't otherwise fight back, and they're basically the only weapon that works reliably in any circumstance.  

 

But they sure as hell aren't an equalizer for a grownup with martial arts training to "defend himself" against a teenage boy he was stalking and outweighs by at least twenty pounds.  

 

 

Jesus fuck do we need to be giving Vince ideas like this?

 

...FOR FREE? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they sure as hell aren't an equalizer for a grownup with martial arts training to "defend himself" against a teenage boy he was stalking and outweighs by at least twenty pounds.  

 

 

And this is why some people think a "vanilla midget" is not a credible champion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is why some people think a "vanilla midget" is not a credible champion.

Wrestling isn't reality.  Wrestling is Jackie Chan.  Wrestling is Buffy The Vampire Slayer.  There's no reason why Khali shouldn't lay down for Spike Dudley in a fake fight.  In real combat sports, there's damn good reasons why they have such strict weight limits.  All things being equal, that twenty-pound weight difference matters.  And in the main event of Martin vs Zimmerman, all things were not equal and Zimmerman already had the advantage because he had BJJ training and he was aware when he first approached Martin that a fight might be coming (because otherwise, why'd he bring the damn gun?).  Martin lacked both that training and that awareness, and it's frankly amazing that he was holding his own as well as he apparently did.  Zimmerman getting his ass whooped was just desserts for being a dumbshit who wrongly profiled an innocent kid and charged into a situation where he didn't know the facts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Tell me how it is defensible (as in you should not go to fucking prison) to shoot an UNARMED man in a fist fight?

 

For an admittedly ridiculous scenario: imagine that Brock Lesnar is mugging Stephen Hawking.  In that case, as long as he can lift the damn gun in the first place and keep his hand from shaking long enough to pull the trigger, I'd have no problem with Steve busting a cap in Brock's ass.  Guns are an equalizer for people who can't otherwise fight back, and they're basically the only weapon that works reliably in any circumstance.  

 

But they sure as hell aren't an equalizer for a grownup with martial arts training to "defend himself" against a teenage boy he was stalking and outweighs by at least twenty pounds.  

 

Except in this case, Brock would have been the one that stalked Hawking instigated a fight for no good reason, got was coming to him, and used his gun like a pussy. . .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And this is why some people think a "vanilla midget" is not a credible champion.

Wrestling isn't reality.  Wrestling is Jackie Chan.  Wrestling is Buffy The Vampire Slayer.  There's no reason why Khali shouldn't lay down for Spike Dudley in a fake fight.  In real combat sports, there's damn good reasons why they have such strict weight limits.  All things being equal, that twenty-pound weight difference matters.  And in the main event of Martin vs Zimmerman, all things were not equal and Zimmerman already had the advantage because he had BJJ training and he was aware when he first approached Martin that a fight might be coming (because otherwise, why'd he bring the damn gun?).  Martin lacked both that training and that awareness, and it's frankly amazing that he was holding his own as well as he apparently did.  Zimmerman getting his ass whooped was just desserts for being a dumbshit who wrongly profiled an innocent kid and charged into a situation where he didn't know the facts.

 

 

If it is amazing that Trayvon Martin was holding his own in the fight, there are those who would see that as evidence that he gained an advantage from laying in wait and doing a Pearl Harbor job to initiate the fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is amazing that Trayvon Martin was holding his own in the fight, there are those who would see that as evidence that he gained an advantage from laying in wait and doing a Pearl Harbor job to initiate the fight.

Except that Zimmerman himself admits that they spoke before the fight happened (and the person on Martin's phone backs this up), which pretty much kills the entire "Martin blitzed Zimmerman from behind, and probably threw powder in his eyes too" theory right in the cradle.  Especially the hilarious footnote that Zimmerman claimed Martin came at him from a hiding place in the bushes... and then later, when reconstructing the crime with police, said the fight happened at a spot were there weren't any bushes nearby.  

 

BTW, is it weird to anyone else that George Zimmerman is always referred to by his last name, but Trayvon Martin generally gets called his first name?  I have a theory that some people say "Trayvon" because a made-up ebonics name subconsciously makes him sound more like a ghetto thug to the general public.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yeah, we actually do know the scenario you painted didnt happen.

No we don't.
Yeah we do actually because there were witnesses that saw the two scuffling from their windows but couldn't tell exactly who was who. Unconscious people dont really put up a fight. You also have the 911 call and screams of help before the gunshot was heard. Unconscious people don't scream and neither do people standing over an unconscious person about to shoot them.

 

His fake scenario wasn't weekend at Bernie's where Zimmerman shoots Martin and then fakes a scuffle. It had Martin coming too. It had everything that was necessary: scuffle which ends with Martin on top and Zimmerman shooting him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If it is amazing that Trayvon Martin was holding his own in the fight, there are those who would see that as evidence that he gained an advantage from laying in wait and doing a Pearl Harbor job to initiate the fight.

Except that Zimmerman himself admits that they spoke before the fight happened (and the person on Martin's phone backs this up), which pretty much kills the entire "Martin blitzed Zimmerman from behind, and probably threw powder in his eyes too" theory right in the cradle.  Especially the hilarious footnote that Zimmerman claimed Martin came at him from a hiding place in the bushes... and then later, when reconstructing the crime with police, said the fight happened at a spot were there weren't any bushes nearby.  

 

BTW, is it weird to anyone else that George Zimmerman is always referred to by his last name, but Trayvon Martin generally gets called his first name?  I have a theory that some people say "Trayvon" because a made-up ebonics name subconsciously makes him sound more like a ghetto thug to the general public.  

 

 

Not saying I believed that happen, just that some people will see it as evidence that Martin somehow got the jump or struck the first blow to gain an advantage.

 

My theory is that people say "Trayvon" because it make him seem more child-like, while using his last name would make him seem like an adult.  Juror B37 used both of their first names in her interview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...