It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." - Obama. What the MSM isn't telling you.

page: 44
78
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by rufusdrak
It is you that obviously have no understanding of American law. It's the same for a bouncer in a club they are allowed to escort out and subdue but not beat someone to a bloody pulp, for instance use strikes to the face etc. You're really reaching and it's only exposing your ignorance on the matter.


Wrong again. A Bouncer in a club can escort someone out without touching them. If they touch the customer without provocation, it is assault by the Bouncer. If the customer attempts to assault the Bouncer, the Bouncer than has legal rights to defend himself with an appropriate level of force. The reason a Bouncer can not beat you to a bloody pulp is because at some point it no longer is a case of self defense. Self Defense (since you missed it the first time), is using the appropriate level of force to stop an imminent threat.

Also, your example also brings up the issue of property rights. Which is not applicable in the case we are discussing, but I am sure with your amazing understanding of Law, you knew that already


You really don't know the law...well maybe if you live in Kalifornia....I used to be a bouncer and under the law we could toss their a$$ out the door....the door being the key here. Once outside of the building the bouncer has no right to do anything!

The bouncer is the security for the establishment, and has the right to stop any disturbance within said establishment with physical force if necessary. Equal Force vs Equal Aggression...Understand????




posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by rufusdrak
 



He has already 'demonstrated' why he pursued him very clearly: The neighborhood had suffered from breakins recently and Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain os that was his duty to pursue suspicious activity and report it to the police, so I'm not sure why that is not clear to you.


What isn't clear to those of us that aren't racist is what made Trayvon look suspicious besides him being black???

Maybe your genius intellect could point this out to us.


The fact that 1. he was looking around and looking into houses and 2. Zimmerman didn't even know he was black at first, the audio tape proves this. When the dispatcher asks him what race is the guy, Zimmerman has to squint real hard and says "uhh" and can't tell for 5-15 seconds and then finally decides he's black. So you fail again because it clearly proves that Zimmerman did not even know Martin's race when he began pursuing him.
Try harder next time.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by rufusdrak
 



He has already 'demonstrated' why he pursued him very clearly: The neighborhood had suffered from breakins recently and Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain os that was his duty to pursue suspicious activity and report it to the police, so I'm not sure why that is not clear to you.


What isn't clear to those of us that aren't racist is what made Trayvon look suspicious besides him being black???

Maybe your genius intellect could point this out to us.


I f I could interject. It might not be racism,as many want it to be.Old people are sometimes suspicious of Young people,just because THEY are young.Not saying this is the reason for Mr. Zimmerman doing what he did. Could it be race related,like you want to make it out to be? Sure. Just like I believe it could be race related for the President to jump in the mix of this,to garner votes.

See how it can be perceived ?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by rufusdrak


Exactly you just proved my entire argument right and disproved yourself. You are allowed to use a REASONABLE amount of force which in the court of law quickly becomes UNREASONABLE when you are wailing away at someone's face with your fists while SITTING ON TOP of them. So just as you aptly pointed out, Martin's hypothetical defense has zero possibility of using 'self defense' because at that point when Zimmerman was on the ground beneath him, already had cuts requiring stitches and a broken nose, bleeding profusely on his face, it was no longer a reasonable amount of force that Martin was doling out on him.


Problem #1. My point is that Zimmerman created the chain of events which lead to the death of Martin. Weather or not Martin attacked Zimmerman is irrelevant. Maybe you should go back to my previous post on the topic of involuntary manslaughter for more details.

Problem #2 You are assuming that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. When the truth is, all we know is what position they were in during the confrontation. We do not know what caused the physical part of the confrontation or who was at fault. And again... since you keep missing the point, it is irrelevant to my argument for a case of involuntary manslaughter.



It's true we do not know for a fact whether Martin assaulted him first and unfortunately if we NEVER find out that means Zimmerman will get off free because "innocent until/unless proven guilty" and if you do not have the PROOF in the court of law then you can't put him in jail.

One thing I had already suggested previously that could give credence to who assaulted whom first is whether Martin had any damage on his face/body at the time of his death. If his face had bruises it could indicate perhaps Zimmerman assaulted him first, whereas if his face was completely free of bruises it would be strong evidence that Martin assaulted first.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
He has already 'demonstrated' why he pursued him very clearly: The neighborhood had suffered from breakins recently and Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain os that was his duty to pursue suspicious activity and report it to the police, so I'm not sure why that is not clear to you.


Wrong again. It is not his "duty" to pursue anyone. It is his "duty" to observe. This is even explain by someone in a much better position to know that you, the audio expert.


Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."


Source



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
He has already 'demonstrated' why he pursued him very clearly: The neighborhood had suffered from breakins recently


So Trayvon, an unarmed kid, got persued and harrassed by Zimmerman and shot because of other events that was not connected to him? Right.


Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain os that was his duty to pursue suspicious activity and report it to the police,


It is not Zimmermans duty as neighbourhood watch to persue and confront suspicious activity, his position is referred to as neighbourhood watch for a reason. Unless Trayvon was on his property in his house or his neighbours, there was no reason for Zimmerman to confront him, Zimmerman was not a cop, this kid was unarmed.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I don't see any of those people protesting when a white guy ends up shot on the wrong side of town. Everyone participating in this racist witch hunt is a fear mongering hate spreader just like the media.

Why should I care? Why should white people even care? In the last five minutes, a number of people were probably murdered all over the globe. The only reason people care about this one is because they are either racist or bigots, they have a dog in this fight. That is what these two people are reduced to... dogs. Now the "losing" side lost their puppy for once and we'll never hear the end of it as long as there is a profit to be made.

Really, I don't even think this is newsworthy.
edit on 24-3-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by rufusdrak
He has already 'demonstrated' why he pursued him very clearly: The neighborhood had suffered from breakins recently and Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain os that was his duty to pursue suspicious activity and report it to the police, so I'm not sure why that is not clear to you.


Wrong again. It is not his "duty" to pursue anyone. It is his "duty" to observe. This is even explain by someone in a much better position to know that you, the audio expert.


Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."


Source


Yes and in observing someone he is allowed to "follow" that person. I might have misspoken with the word "pursue" because to knee jerk guys like you it has too much of a strong connotation of a "chase" which many of you have incorrectly attributed to it. But Zimmerman is fully in his rights as a citizen and as a watch captain to OBSERVE someone and when that someone is no longer stationary and walks away, Zimmerman is still fully within his rights to FOLLOW said person and question them. Walking up to someone and asking them "What are you doing here?" is legal and under no manner of law does it give justification to the other person to brutally assault you and sit on top of your chest while pounding in your face, thus my case still stands correct.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by HereAgainGoneTomorrow
You really don't know the law...well maybe if you live in Kalifornia....I used to be a bouncer and under the law we could toss their a$$ out the door....the door being the key here. Once outside of the building the bouncer has no right to do anything!


Maybe you should look into my previous posting which discusses my personal life a little bit better. I have been working in night clubs across the country for over 20 years. This sir, in one area I am very well versed in. Currently I am in court on this case.

Punch outside club

But of course you "used to bounce" so I am sure you would be a position to know much better than I what the law says in these regards.



The bouncer is the security for the establishment, and has the right to stop any disturbance within said establishment with physical force if necessary. Equal Force vs Equal Aggression...Understand????


Did I not say an appropriate level of force? What exactly do you think "equal force vs equal aggression" means?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by BrokenCircles
 


Obviously, you don't care about the facts, like the rest of the crowd out to lynch Zimmerman, for self defense.

You are proof that racism is alive and well.

Good job of fanning the flames of racism.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
Anyone read this article?


www.americanthinker.com...


it shows the identical situation having occurred but reversed where the shooter is black and the shooter got off scott free.


i'm sure people will read this and come up with some reason as to why it isn't the same. it's ok because it was just some cracker getting killed tho



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
I don't see any of those people protesting when a white guy ends up shot on the wrong side of town. Everyone participating in this racist witch hunt is a fear mongering hate spreader just like the media.

Why should I care? Why should white people even care? In the last five minutes, a number of people were probably murdered all over the globe. The only reason people care about this one is because they are either racist or bigots, they have a dog in this fight. That is what these two people are reduced to... dogs. Now the "losing" side lost their puppy for once and we'll never hear the end of it as long as there is a profit to be made.

Really, I don't even think this is newsworthy.
edit on 24-3-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)


Please read this article www.americanthinker.com...

it goes together with everything you are saying



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


And Trayvon had no right to attack Zimmerman and punch him repeatedly in the face after knocking him on the ground....you attack someone like that you should assume they may have a gun and fight back.

Why didn't Trayvon just say what he was doing there? Again no personal responsibility.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak
Yes and in observing someone he is allowed to "follow" that person. I might have misspoken with the word "pursue" because to knee jerk guys like you it has too much of a strong connotation of a "chase" which many of you have incorrectly attributed to it. But Zimmerman is fully in his rights as a citizen and as a watch captain to OBSERVE someone and when that someone is no longer stationary and walks away, Zimmerman is still fully within his rights to FOLLOW said person and question them. Walking up to someone and asking them "What are you doing here?" is legal and under no manner of law does it give justification to the other person to brutally assault you and sit on top of your chest while pounding in your face, thus my case still stands correct.


Ok, now we are starting to get on the same page. You are correct when saying in observing someone you can follow them.

Now if all Zimmerman did was follow Martin from a distance, how did they get into a fight?

If all Zimmerman was doing is following, why did get out of his truck?

If all Zimmerman was doing is following, how do you explain the public statements from the girlfriend who heard the verbal exchange between the two?

What does the article I linked to say was the first thing Zimmerman did wrong? Let me post it again...


Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.


He "approached" and that is not "observing" is it?



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 



Zimmerman has to squint real hard


You're ridiculous.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Where has the time gone? Anyway, you all know where I stand and I welcome any rebuttals that come my way. To do so, please send me a u2u because I have spent far too much time in this thread and will likely not be visiting again.

Wendal, Outkast, Circles, Sunny, Popeye, blupblup, Southern Guardian, Rf, hell everyone! I love you all. Please don't argue yourselves into Oblivion. And remember this irrelevant saying "All your bases are belong to me". Thank you all and peace out.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Interesting...

www.slate.com...



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


You are just helping me prove my point of the double standards
which are perpetuating this race baiting.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   


Actually, from his facebook posts we can assume he was a known drug dealer.
reply to post by Chalupas
 


IF and I mean IF this is true, then one more shot person is no big deal. Anyway, I have never believed this is an innocent person just walking through the neighborhood.

Anyway, I don't know the 17 year old (17 is NOT a child anymore especially when dealing DRUGS) so I don't really care!!!!! I don't have any thought about it really as I am eating my chicken and asparagus before heading to the gym. More important things to do.

You lot want guns in America, to protect??? Well this white guy zimmerman says he was protecting or defending. So BACK him, otherwise they will use this to take your gun rights, and flush them down the toilet. I back him!!!

FUNNY how this little story caused more of a problem than the shooting of that female governor or congress woman a while back.

FUNNY though how oboma (intentional misspelling) has got involved as its a black kid. Typical of his racists attitude.



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join