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.

 

Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

page: 78
157
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ker2010

Originally posted by miconATSrender


I know it is hard for tough guys to believe but the days of beating on someone is over. Tough guys will die of lead poisoning. All that wasted time working out to be big and tough, and all the time on the shooting range, kind of an eye opener for some, armed people have always known it.


This is the kind of bravado that gives gun owners a bad name and makes everyone think we are cowboys with a god complex cause we own a gun and go to the shooting range weekly.

I take pride in owning a gun and being able to shoot it efficiently.

I take even more pride in knowing im fit and can handle myself without a gun against most unarmed men...
edit on 15-7-2013 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)

Would you let someone tee off on your head with a baseball bat?
No?
But you would let them bust your head with their fists and bash your head into a concrete sidewalk.... and not pull your gun?

The poster was making the point that was made in the late 1800's: God created men, Colonel Colt made them equal.




posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker
reply to post by riffraff
 


My bad, at age 28 it looks even worst. I don't know everything about the case, but from what I can see, Zimmerman was soft. Although bigger, and most likely stronger than Martin, he chose to take the weeny way out. It's sad. If he was that soft he should have never taken the job in the first place.


Just remember many many people will take the "weeny" way out. So thugs and tough guy wannabes are on notice.
I agree with the not guilty verdict.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


reply to post by butcherguy
 


I saw the injuries TM was weak as hell if thats all he could have done. Give me 1 or 2 times to bash your skull onto concrete it would require a immediate hospital visit, something GZ didnt need :/ Injuries were not life threatening and that is a fact and was testified too. But I guess he did fear for his life or so he says so thats all that matters.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
i believe a reasonable person would think that hitting a person's head against concrete is intent to do serious harm.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Come on now, you know what I meant. Job, volunteer whatever you want to call it. Zimmerman should have never accepted it if he couldn't handle his own. How you gonna try to protect an area that your not ready for? I guess he just wanted to show how hard he was huh?


edit on 14-7-2013 by RealTruthSeeker because: (no reason given)


Just a point of fact, I have met three neighborhood watch people this year and all were women. So male is not a prerequisite qualification, oh and all three carry a weapon.
The not guilty verdict was the correct one in this case.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ker2010
reply to post by butcherguy
 


reply to post by butcherguy
 


I saw the injuries TM was weak as hell if thats all he could have done. Give me 1 or 2 times to bash your skull onto concrete it would require a immediate hospital visit, something GZ didnt need :/ Injuries were not life threatening and that is a fact and was testified too. But I guess he did fear for his life or so he says so thats all that matters.

No thanks to the head bashing from you.
But tell me, did George Zimmerman have a doctor there to advise him on whether the head bashing was not life threatening? Or did he just have to rely on his own instinct?

When Trayvon reached for his gun......

Remember, Trayvon threatened to kill him before bashing his head into the concrete.

You've surely heard the one about bringing a knife to a gunfight?
Maybe if people thought far enough ahead, they wouldn't think that bashing a person's head into concrete was an acceptable thing to do.
edit on 15-7-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by bruteforce13
reply to post by TKDRL
 

No i own guns but i go 100% out of my way to avoid trouble. If i looked out my house window in my neighborhood tonight and saw someone walking the street at 3 am looking shady Id call the cops and stay inside my house. I wouldnt run out and confront them like Dirty Harry.


Well when you do call the cops and they ask you for a description specifically what color they are you better first answer "I don't know let me check again" before answering. Otherwise you may be brought up on charges for racial profiling.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SilentKillah
 



So basically if you see a man reaching for his gun, you'd stand there and let him pull it out just so you have sight? Or you'd reach for it at the same time he was when his hands are obviously closer? Personally... I'd knock the guy to distract him from the gun while I go for it. At least, I'd have a chance to get it before he does. Forget where the gun went as long as I know it's not in his hands and pointed at me.


One thing that getting your CCW permit does, is give you reason to think long and hard about what if's. For all the headache and hassle it is to carry a gun (and it's pretty much all headache and hassle after the novelty wears off), it never really lets you forget it's there or why. The balance, for a sane person, is to want to avoid situations where it would be useful while at least knowing if one happens, you won't be a victim without a fair chance. The class I attended focused on the deterrent effect ..and they meant deterrent to each of US doing stupid things.

The above point is to emphasize where I think people misinterpret how this is and will be seen by normal people carrying a gun. Yes...Zimmerman has gotten an acquittal. However, his 'normal' life ended the night this happened. It will never be normal in his life again. More so for him than most because of the media attention, but I don't think anyone who carries in the real world, looks at this case and sees anything remotely encouraging about self defensing shooting ...except maybe the system isn't rigged to a guilty outcome in advance, of course.

---

It's funny you should ask this about what I'd do in a specific way. As noted above, you have lots of reason to think things like that through. It's part of the training, actually. To mentally play it out before living it out.

Assuming I was close enough to physically react before the other guy could draw and fire his weapon (inside 3-4 feet) and assuming I wasn't armed myself? What would I do if someone displayed it with the full intent of either grabbing it to shoot me or insuring I believed they did mean to? Well, I suppose a bunch of action cliches might fit here but I'll just keep it simple, since nothing planned in advance works out like you want anyway.

I'd do anything I could physically do to him with only one purpose and focus in mind. Get that gun. In looking at this situation, to be fair and not just critical, I would NOT straddle someone and beat them in the face. That leaves the brandished weapon at my back...or just behind my butt to be specific...and HIS arms capable of reaching it or getting free from my legs to reach it. Even the chance would be enough to just focus on getting the gun, IMO. Maybe after I secure the guy's gun and show him the meaningful end of it, I'll get to the punishment phase of the experience. I figure it's a fight for survival until then tho, and FBI stats show these fights usually start and end in seconds.


Anyway, you asked.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel
i believe a reasonable person would think that hitting a person's head against concrete is intent to do serious harm.


And if that wasn't enough....

Reaching for the person's gun while hitting his head on the concrete would surely constitute intent.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



One thing that getting your CCW permit does, is give you reason to think long and hard about what if's. For all the headache and hassle it is to carry a gun (and it's pretty much all headache and hassle after the novelty wears off), it never really lets you forget it's there or why. The balance, for a sane person, is to want to avoid situations where it would be useful while at least knowing if one happens, you won't be a victim without a fair chance. The class I attended focused on the deterrent effect ..and they meant deterrent to each of US doing stupid things.


That’s an excellent point.

I brought up the CCW issue earlier in the thread (couple hundred pages ago
). Not only do CCW holders go through training, they also have extensive background checks. People with a CCW are good citizens with no serious criminal record.

Also, statistically they are FAR LESS LIKELY to commit any crime. I think the stats I quoted before was less than 1% of the crimes committed in my state involved someone with a CHL (and many of those crimes committed by the CHL holders didn’t involve a gun).



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
The argument I keep seeing people post about how he should have fought (I guess in there minds) as fair has brought this old movie favorite to mind.



Granted not exactly the same but I think most will get the point.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
The Stanford police chief believed there was no racism and it was self defense. He was fired.
The Seminal D.A. believed there was no racism and it was self defense. He was removed from the case.
The Stanford lead detective found no racism but felt manslaughter was possible. He was transfered.
The jury saw no racism and agreed it was self defense. NOT GUILTY.
Even the FBI CLEARED Zimmerman of racism 1 year ago.
I was shocked at the W.H./ Justice Dept. involvement and the MSM spin.
I am more shocked at the publics gullabilty of MSM spin on racism when the prosecution DID NOT even prove it in court.
The trial is over.
The verdict is in.
There was no racism.
Let sleeping dogs ly..



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



People with a CCW are good citizens with no serious criminal record.


Absolutely true. In fact, it's true to the point where I'm seeing a variety of totally unrelated and non-firearm listings for organizations, activities and even some jobs saying display of current, valid CCW helpful or preferred.

They don't know or care if you carry it and many have rules against carrying in their own places anyway. It depends on the listing, but I'm seeing it more than ever. They're looking for the card as a little piece of proof by the state on that successful criminal background check and status.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
theconservativetreehouse.com...

Why no coverage on the Robo angle? I know Robo all to well and this could have been the smoking gun which was never covered. What about all Trayvon's highly thuggary Facebook posts?

I feel for Zimmerman. I pray for his safety.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The accelerated sensationalization of near non-existent protests over the results of a trial that should never have happened feels like a massive distraction effort.

"Forget about the NSA folks, we have a race war brewing!"





Don't play into it.


Thanks for stepping in Skep, sincerely.
I mentioned so much earlier in the thread that the domestic upheaval water bearers were
going to get at least one boiling pot out of this, no matter what the verdict. So obvious...

It's quite shocking what was going on simultaneously with Scott Peterson and Aruba
Girl. Now and with all the viable scandal monstrosities at the administration's doorstep,
how could Obama and Holder not weigh in for prosecuting 'possible civil rights violations'?

Oh the irony... I need to make some absolutely obscene but constitutionally sound
dark chocolatoid / pecan chip cookies, and find an indignant soul of the fair sex--
race-nonspecific. The world is nuts, and they all deserve to be smashed--- or at least chopped



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   
video.foxnews.com...

few interesting links on the ongoing topic

www.cnn.com... im pretty sure this means to prove zimemrman guilty in a civl rights trial they have to prove it was a hate crime,and as the FBI seems to say that he showed no racisim in his attack kinda goes to show that he was not the racist every one seems to think he was



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evil_Santa

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
the fact is we only have zimmermans word to go off of and we all know he had dozens of inconsistent statements.


I would like to see these "dozens" of inconsistent statement please. In bullet form so we can count them, at least 24 as you used the plural form of dozen.


the prosecution went over at least 13 of his inconsistent statements in the closing arguments. his story did not add up and only he knows how it truly went down. his story has too many holes for me to believe him. from trayvon jumped out of the bushes to trayvon going for his gun and claiming to have been punched 2 dozen times yet no bruises or broken ribs, claiming to know everyone in his neighborhood yet not knowing the streets when there were only 3 streets, how he was able to reach his gun which was behind him with trayvon on top while getting beaten to death, he said the dispatcher said "can you get to a place where you can see him" but that wasn't in the recording played in court, he said he spread martins arms out after shooting him yet martins hands were underneath him, he claimed to have been scared that he was being beaten to death yet didn't seek medical help. he claimed martin was acting suspicious yet trayvon was not committing any crime. he claimed not to be racist but made disparaging remarks about mexicans and middle easterners, his cousin WHOM CLAIMS HE MOLESTED HER FOR A DECADE claimed his family is in fact racist www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
This was definitely a good ruling. As it were mentioned, if George Zimmerman were black it wouldn't have gotten any air time.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnBlack
 


This is unrelated but I was curious what you ladies and gents though about giant humans. Can you PLEASE prove these fake xD

www.flickr.com...



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Happy1
 


I believe the jury made their choice. I agree.



new topics

top topics



 
157
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join