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.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
I just addressed that. The jury has to decide cases based on the law. You can debate that law going forward and hope the legislature changes it for future situations but that change would have zero effect on the TM/GZ case.
I think that a person should have more than a 'feeling' that they are threatened before using deadly force, and some SYG laws make it too fuzzy.
Originally posted by Willtell
reply to post by pngxp
The only idiot and moron is yourself who believes lies and only views superficial junk and takes it for truth.
The junk of a child killer is on your conscious since you believe his blatant lies and your own inherent ignorance is all you have to support your views.
You didn’t have the sense to even deal with any issues brought up just spouting your own ignorance and stupidity.
Originally posted by Willtell
reply to post by pngxp
The only idiot and moron is yourself who believes lies and only views superficial junk and takes it for truth.
The junk of a child killer is on your conscious since you believe his blatant lies and your own inherent ignorance is all you have to support your views.
You didn’t have the sense to even deal with any issues brought up just spouting your own ignorance and stupidity.
Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
You are suggesting that he should have just laid there and taken a full frontal assault and had his head smashed in on the concrete.
Also, when Trayvon took the squirrels route back to his house why didn't he just stay there? Why did he come back?
Also, if he had the gun "Handy" as you keep suggesting he wouldn't have been on the cement taking a beating like a red headed step child.
You really need to come up with something better than that.
Originally posted by Willtell
reply to post by NOTurTypical
How the hell do you know whether I watched the trial or not?
Its you folks who watched the trial with blinders on. Those blinders is your preconceived notions of white supremacy.
Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by thesaneone
So juries are perfect and their verdicts should never be debated.
Sure, we can debate their verdict for years. But what isn't up for debate is the witness and expert testimony, the evidence, the law in FL or the outcome of the jury decision.
Why can't the law in Florida be up for debate? Should we abide by laws we feel are unjust, unfair, unethical etc and just be good sheep?
Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by NOTurTypical
I'm not talking about changing the verdict, I'm talking about a public discussion about this law.