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.

 

Trayvon Martin Shooter Told Cops Teenager Went For His Gun

page: 21
20
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Considering his father lived there with his fiance, yes, he did have the right to be there. If his father and his fiance did NOT live in the community, THEN he wouldn't have had that right.

Again, by your logic, I'm trespassing daily when I go for my walks in my neighborhood because I don't technically own the home, a family member does.
edit on 27/3/2012 by Believer101 because: Brain fart.





posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 

Where in the Constitution does it state you can shoot a unarmed man and not have to prove it was in defense?

WOW I never read that part.

Good if you ever move to my neighborhood im gonna harass your kids when i see them.. because they are in MY neighborhood and i do not notice them!!
edit on 27-3-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Apparently it is you who is having a problem with comprehension,

The Home Owner's Association recognized him as Neighborhod Watch Captain for their development....they even put in their 2011 pamphlet to let the residents know who to contact.


I don't know how much clearer I can make it...

And Chief Lee stated when interviewed that it was legal for him to have his concealed weapon on him while on patrol since he had the proper permit.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deranged74
reply to post by timetothink
 

Where in the Constitution does it state you can shoot a unarmed man and not have to prove it was in defense?



I don't know about the Constitution - - but in Florida its called STAND YOUR GROUND.

Which is the position Zimmerman put Tayvon in.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Believer101
 


Wow...you are really reaching....

I don't know how this community works, but in mine, you must sign in anyone who is a visitor and you must tell them who lives there.

People can't just come in at anytime and hang around.

A public neighborhood is not the same.

the only other exception (where my home is) is if they are in the car with you that has the sticker to get thru the electronic gate...and if you walk around alone people may ask you what you are doing there.


Just because you don't like the rules or the fact these private communities exist, doesn't change anything.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Since 2004 Zimmerman called the cops at least 46 times.. 46 TIMES!!!!

Now you mean to tell me you think that neighborhood is that bad? Where does he live Compton?!


46 times!! The guy was a paranoid freak!!!!!!
edit on 27-3-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Annee
 


Apparently it is you who is having a problem with comprehension,


I am not having any problems at all.

Vigilantism is a time bomb waiting for someone to get hurt or killed.

Its that simple.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 


Yes Sanford is that bad, he was neighborhood watch captain, he was supposed to call the cops, not engage.




posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 


when did I ever say that...

Are you American...have you heard of the second amendment?



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deranged74
reply to post by timetothink
 


Since 2004 Zimmerman called the cops at least 46 times.. 46 TIMES!!!!

Now you mean to tell me you think that neighborhood is that bad? Where does he live Compton?!


Hey!

I was born in Compton



edit on 27-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink


he was neighborhood watch captain, he was supposed to call the cops, not engage.
[/img]


THANK YOU!! EXACTLY!
edit on 27-3-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-3-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink

Because he doesnt have one,

Charges were dropped.


Actually the felony charges against Zimmerman were reduced to a single misdemeanor charge in exchange for a guilty plea. He got away with a misdemeanor instead of two felonies, but he's still guilty of a crime either way. That makes him a CONVICTED CRIMINAL regardless of how you try to spin it.

Treyvon Martin may have a questionable past, but he had never been convicted of a crime. That absence of a conviction makes him innocent until such time that his "crimes" were proven



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 


Maybe he lived in FLOMPTON? But yeah, an article.

motherjones.com...

I just can't seem to shake this Observe N Report thought away...sooo many similarities.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Just A Reminder



It is a very, very rare occasion for a member to be the subject of a thread. And surprise, this thread isn't one of those threads. While we all have opinions let us keep focused on the topic and not each other.

Thank you.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Treyvon Martin may have a questionable past, but he had never been convicted of a crime. That absence of a conviction makes him innocent until such time that his "crimes" were proven


Find me a squeaky clean 17 year old high school kid. It is the age of taking chances and experimenting.

Compared to a man who is 28 years old.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
What if Treyvon was able to get ahold of the gun when he attacked Zimmerman, and shot and killed him. Would there be such a national media frenzy?



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Deranged74
 


when did I ever say that...

Are you American...have you heard of the second amendment?



The second amendment means - - the people are the government - - and have the right to bear arms to over throw the government if it no longer represents the people.

That is what the second amendment really means.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
What some of you are forgetting is that none of this was initiated by the deceased. What would you think if someone was closely following you, at night, for several minutes? I would think I was about to get mugged, and defend myself. That seems to be what happened here.

Martin did not just go out of his way to attack this guy for no reason. That is not a logical claim. If he was from the "street" as many are claiming, then that proves my point even more...You don't start following someone that closely for several minutes without spooking them. Instead of running to prevent what I'm sure Martin thought was impending danger, he was proactive about the situation.

Now, I don't know if that is how it happened, but if it was, then I do not understand why everyone is getting so bent out of shape over "protecting" Zimmerman. The bottom line is that HE initiated the confrontation, and HE is the one who shot and killed this guy. If I come up to you at night, walk right behind you, and you turn around and say something, then a scuffle breaks out...How are you standing your ground?

I say that the rule does not apply in this case because it could have easily been AVOIDED. And it very well should have. This man, after calling the police, had no right to play cop when there was NOTHING illegal going on. So even if it was self defense, that was after the fact that this man put the other man in a situation which probably made him feel threatened, and Martin was LITERALLY standing HIS ground.
edit on 3/28/12 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Laxpla
What if Treyvon was able to get ahold of the gun when he attacked Zimmerman, and shot and killed him. Would there be such a national media frenzy?
Of course not. You have to be black for that to happen. Call me a racist (which I am not), but the truth is the thruth.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


No....

The second amendment gives all citizen the right to keep and bear arms. (guns). Not sleeveless shirts.

At any time, not just to overthrow the government.
edit on 28-3-2012 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join