Zimmerman’s chief defender: a racist and criminal!

reply to post by KawRider9

It must be a pride thing.
People there would rather be beaten to a pulp, then defend themselves with a firearm and offend someone in another country.

reply to post by KawRider9


If he'd had the same amount of access to firearms that you have in the US, it'd have been just as likely that the thug would have one too, and this incident might not have turned out so favourably. Your country is awash with them and it hasn't put much of a dent in the burglary stats. If burglaries are down, it's more likely because there's easier pickings, rather than they are too terrified to try because you might have a gun and know how to use it in a tight spot.

reply to post by macman


Nope, it's just proof it can be done without having to rely on a booming small arms industry.

reply to post by macman


Great reply!

But yeah, you smash a brick through my door and enter my house screaming for money, the only thing you're going to leave with is some lead! I don't care if I offend people in another country. Hell, I don't care if I offend people here!

reply to post by KawRider9


Doesn't that seem a little like overkill if a 92 yr old man can see a violent thug off with a punch? It'd seem a shame to reach the age of 92 without killing somebody and then go and spoil your record when a punch or 2 would have done the job, if you'd but tried, rather than falling onto your back and shouting "Mount me! Mount me!" Seems you'd prefer to encourage 92 yr olds to think "Well, I may not be around to be attacked next year, I'd better kill someone while I still can!"

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by KawRider9

 

Doesn't that seem a little like overkill

edit on 9-8-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

No, not to me. I don't defend criminal actions nor will I let them break into my home and assault me or steal from me. I guess you just don't understand my culture.

reply to post by KawRider9


Who is defending criminal actions? I've nothing against an 8 stone weakling defending themself with a gun, if that is their only option, but I'm never going to condone healthy male adults shooting someone just because they can. And don't give me this nonsense that none of you really want to kill anyone, as that is plainly untrue. Some of you are absolutely itching for the opportunity to rid society of another scumbag, or whatever your fave word to dehumanise people is.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


I'm no weakling by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a soon to be 37 year old redneck that loves hunting, fishing and racing dirt bikes. I've been in plenty of fights throughout my life and have no regrets. Given beatings and taken beatings, no big deal. But I have no desire to try and fight someone breaking into my house. I'm going to take the easy route and stop anything before it starts!

reply to post by KawRider9


In every circumstance, regardless of the intruder's own potential threat capabilities? Are you going to shoot to kill at any figure over 4ft, for example, or would you have a little bit of hesitation in your trigger finger if your burglar was an 11 yr old carrying a screwdriver? Say it was your wayward 17 yr old nephew who'd thought you were out and decided to make himself a quick buck? Fill him full of holes and bury him out back?

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by KawRider9

 

Doesn't that seem a little like overkill if a 92 yr old man can see a violent thug off with a punch? It'd seem a shame to reach the age of 92 without killing somebody and then go and spoil your record when a punch or 2 would have done the job, if you'd but tried, rather than falling onto your back and shouting "Mount me! Mount me!" Seems you'd prefer to encourage 92 yr olds to think "Well, I may not be around to be attacked next year, I'd better kill someone while I still can!"

edit on 9-8-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

OTOH, why should a 92 year old be left defenseless by the state in the face of a younger and more physically strong thug? A firearm is a tool that the physically weak can defend themselves from the physically strong. Otherwise we devolve into the days when the strong could victimize the weak with impunity. Why leave great grand dad defenseless when the true problem lies with the criminal?

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by KawRider9

 

In every circumstance, regardless of the intruder's own potential threat capabilities? Are you going to shoot to kill at any figure over 4ft, for example, or would you have a little bit of hesitation in your trigger finger if your burglar was an 11 yr old carrying a screwdriver? Say it was your wayward 17 yr old nephew who'd thought you were out and decided to make himself a quick buck? Fill him full of holes and bury him out back?

edit on 9-8-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

Why defend the criminal? It is easy to avoid being shot at any age--simply not make the choice to break into someone's home. It seems that your sympathy lies with the criminal, not the law abiding citizen.

Originally posted by phinubian
reply to post by digital01anarchy

 

Dating a black woman and any of the above about his so called teaching skills to blacks that can't read(what a joke) doesn't give a pass or prove anything at all of how he might have felt about black men or black male teens who would seem to be a threat to him or his manhood in his mind, I am sorry but this is usually the first goto card I hear from folks that claim they aren't racist but most of the time they are, "I've got black friends" I say go find some people who actually know George Zimmerman from his past who did not show up to court, you might find the accounts parallel closely to what his cousin said about him, his sexual abuse and how he and others in his family really feels about blacks, there is no doubt he has racist sentiments and more than likely is a straight up racist.

edit on 8-8-2013 by phinubian because: (no reason given)

Name me one thing that is provable in anything you have said lol. you want to get hearsay to prove your case lol seriously just stop! you lost the system works based on laws. Let me pose this question to you lets say a black panther member sees an odd looking white child "standing in the rain" in his neighborhood "the panther is in neighborhood watch" he follows him just to ask a question and the white kid lets say hes 17 years old runs and hides. the black panther member gets out of his car to see where this kid went when he turns around the white kid jumps him and bashes his head into the ground he ends up shooting the white kid to protect himself. So since hes a member of the black panthers we should just assume he guilty because he holds racist views toward white males and we should just convict him on that and that alone right? Yeah I didn't think so .

reply to post by IvanAstikov


Let me rephrase it for you.. Zimmerman has never commented on the guy in the media and they are neighbora but I'm fairly certain their rwlationship is exaggerated by Frank.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


This is you missing the point as usual.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


Lol the only gullible people are the onew that bought into the proaecution and media narrative. The people that supported Zimmerman never had to hear him say one word, the evidence spoke for itself . When you have watched the entire trial maybe you will have a more sensible perspective.

reply to post by NavyDoc


He did do time you know. It makes me wonder if he doesnt have a character similar to Martin that makes him sympathize.

reply to post by JBA2848



They only link you gave that had FBI origins is the Infraguard one. After looking it over it doesn't look anything remotely like a neighborhood watch organization. I do appreciate the work you put into your post though.

reply to post by IvanAstikov



Here in the US most burglars case houses before they rob them so they can make sure the homeowner is away and also to lessen their probability of being shot or having the police called. I am sure it is the same way in the UK. On the other hand... if a burglar was to rob a house that is occupied then they run the risk of being shot, if they rob a house and the burglar is armed when or if they get caught their jail sentence just got multiplied by 10. Most burglars are not stupid people. Both of our countries have them. The idea that you use them as an example and co-mingle it with a cheap shot at our right to bear arms just shows how intelligent you are on our gun laws, our crime, and our country.

reply to post by kdyam

Here in the US most burglars case houses before they rob them

Unfortunately that is Not the case in my area.

They come to knock on the door and if there is no answer they come on in and make themselves at home. There are those that are using this to their advantage. They won't answer the door and they go get their weapon and wait for the door or window to open then they let them get inside. That way they don't have to drag the body inside afterwards.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


How did a 92 year old living in the UK ever get around being sent to any of the numerous wars that his generation has seen? I have a feeling that he has killed someone in his lifetime. And if some limy nancy boy gets punched in the face during an invasion by an old man... well that just speaks to the type of pansy ass criminals you have in the UK. Of course you dont need guns to curb crime you just threaten to take away the tea and crumpets.