VaultNetwork.netVault Network Boards
Author Topic: Trayvon Martin was punching Zimmerman in the head [Locked]
Yukishiro1  4 stars
Posts: 3,243
Registered: 2002-9-20 23:52:57
Zimmerman probably called him a racist slur as he was walking away and that made the kid flip out.


Morally Zimmerman is scum and totally at fault for the situation but if the kid was the first one to throw a punch it's not a sort of fault the law recognizes.
Sinlock  2 stars
Title: Savior of the Camelot Outpost
Posts: 376
Registered: 2000-5-14 16:20:01
Ardenwolfe posted:

Now you're just playing semantics.



No - you are.

You are intentionally using the emotionally laden word "child" in order to evoke an image that does not contrast with what really happened. It is the same game the media is playing; use semantically engineered language that incites outrage and therefore generates more hits/attention.

 

-----signature-----
THOOOOKA...THOOOOOKA...THOOOOOKA...
Future Grand President For Life of the Universe (you'll see! you'll be sorry then!)
Outpost Terrorist #1! I don't care what any law says!
GrilledCheez  4 stars
Title: The Lord's Balls
Posts: 1,060
Registered: 2006-3-22 11:06:32
Ashmaele posted:

Quote:

City officials issued a statement, they said was approved by Sanford Police Captain Robert O'Connor, condemning the group's appeal and asking citizens to leave all arrests to them.

"The City is requesting calm heads and no vigilante justice," the statement said. "Attempts by civilians to take any person into custody may result in criminal charges or unnecessary violence."









Thatw as gold ash. I don't know why you didn't get any recognition. Well done.

 

-----signature-----
Another word for expensive is successful.
Ardenwolfe  2 stars
Title: All Knowing Grammar Police
Posts: 499
Registered: 2002-12-11 14:47:24
Sinlock posted:

No - you are.

You are intentionally using the emotionally laden word "child" in order to evoke an image that does not contrast with what really happened. It is the same game the media is playing; use semantically engineered language that incites outrage and therefore generates more hits/attention.



Oh. I see. Does teenager work better for you? Okay, let's do that.

What's repulsive is that an adult shot and murdered an unarmed teenager, hasn't been charged or arrested, and there are people defending the murderer. That's truly repulsive.

Does that make your warped reasoning appear more valid to you?

Fool.

 

-----signature-----
Sanctimonious know-it-all.
cabbyman  2 stars
Posts: 441
Registered: 2003-1-6 07:48:53
Ardenwolfe posted:

Sinlock posted:

No - you are.

You are intentionally using the emotionally laden word "child" in order to evoke an image that does not contrast with what really happened. It is the same game the media is playing; use semantically engineered language that incites outrage and therefore generates more hits/attention.



Oh. I see. Does teenager work better for you? Okay, let's do that.

What's repulsive is that an adult shot and murdered an unarmed teenager, hasn't been charged or arrested, and there are people defending the murderer. That's truly repulsive.

Does that make your warped reasoning appear more valid to you?

Fool.



The teenager wasn't unarmed when he was shot. He was wielding Zimmerman's head as a blunt instrument...

 

-----signature-----
“No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.”
"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." -- John Wayne
“If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace” - Thomas Paine
Ardenwolfe  2 stars
Title: All Knowing Grammar Police
Posts: 499
Registered: 2002-12-11 14:47:24
Well, Zimmerman's head was empty, so the kid was obviously unarmed.

 

-----signature-----
Sanctimonious know-it-all.
Groucho48  3 stars
Posts: 821
Registered: 2003-10-22 03:00:14
No witness that we are aware of saw the start of the actual fight. None of them. So, none of us can say Martin attacked Zimmerman first or vice-versa. Anyone who does so is showing bias and an urge to come to a predetermined conclusion.

Zimmerman has given two very different versions of how the fight started. At first, he said he had just gotten out of his SUV to check the street sign and Martin came out of nowhere and attacked him. A few days later, his lawyer said that Zimmerman had followed Martin for a while, then turn around and then Martin attacked him.

At least one of those versions is a lie. Quite possibly both versions are lies. How can we trust anything a liar says when it's a matter of being charged with manslaughter or something?

 

-----signature-----
“Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it.” – Richard Feynman
Sinlock  2 stars
Title: Savior of the Camelot Outpost
Posts: 376
Registered: 2000-5-14 16:20:01
Ardenwolfe posted:

Does that make your warped reasoning appear more valid to you?



No - because you were not there and do not know what happened. You're just making up a scenario that satisfies your infantile temper tantrum. So, go ahead and fantasize and weep your stupid little tears; the rest of us will wait for the facts to arise during the actual trial.

 

-----signature-----
THOOOOKA...THOOOOOKA...THOOOOOKA...
Future Grand President For Life of the Universe (you'll see! you'll be sorry then!)
Outpost Terrorist #1! I don't care what any law says!
Ardenwolfe  2 stars
Title: All Knowing Grammar Police
Posts: 499
Registered: 2002-12-11 14:47:24
Groucho48 posted:

No witness that we are aware of saw the start of the actual fight. None of them. So, none of us can say Martin attacked Zimmerman first or vice-versa. Anyone who does so is showing bias and an urge to come to a predetermined conclusion.

Zimmerman has given two very different versions of how the fight started. At first, he said he had just gotten out of his SUV to check the street sign and Martin came out of nowhere and attacked him. A few days later, his lawyer said that Zimmerman had followed Martin for a while, then turn around and then Martin attacked him.

At least one of those versions is a lie. Quite possibly both versions are lies. How can we trust anything a liar says when it's a matter of being charged with manslaughter or something?



Pretty much.


Sinlock posted:

No - because you were not there and do not know what happened. You're just making up a scenario that satisfies your infantile temper tantrum. So, go ahead and fantasize and weep your stupid little tears; the rest of us will wait for the facts to arise during the actual trial.



Excuse me, but Zimmerman is alive. Martin is dead. I didn't argue how or why. I said it is what it is. You wanted to argue the semantics of child, kid, teenager. And now you want to argue something else as if you're suddenly above it all.

You really are a fool.

 

-----signature-----
Sanctimonious know-it-all.
cabbyman  2 stars
Posts: 441
Registered: 2003-1-6 07:48:53
Martin is dead because he attacked a guy who had a gun.

He shouldn't have done that.

 

-----signature-----
“No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.”
"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid." -- John Wayne
“If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace” - Thomas Paine

VaultNetwork.net is an independently operated community forum and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or technically based on IGN, GameSpy, FilePlanet, GameStats, or the former IGN/GameSpy Vault Network.
References to VaultNetwork.net mean this site/domain. VNBoards-style presentation is a visual homage only. By using this site, you agree to the forum rules.