Floriduh
 

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:36:11 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:44:32 -0700, jps wrote:

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:03:20 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:03:00 -0700, jps wrote:

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:52:56 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 25 Mar 2012 12:12:08 -0700, jps wrote:



The state that elected a crook for governor sets a new standard for
stupidity *and* hypocrisy.

Matthew Dowd, President George W. Bush’s former chief strategist, on
Sunday observed that the same conservative legislatures and governors
who are championing so-called Christian values like prayer in schools
are also pushing for dangerous gun laws that are counter to Christian
teachings.

During a panel on ABC, “Nightline” anchor Terry Moran noted that
Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law gave officials cover to not arrest
neighborhood watch vigilante George Zimmerman for killing Trayvon
Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old African American boy.

“No other state has a law like this,” Moran explained. “Not only is it
a ‘Stand Your Ground’ law — in the olden days under common law you had
a duty to retreat. ‘Stand Your Ground’ says, no, you don’t have to.
Florida goes one step farther. ‘Stand Your Ground’ is self defense —
defense at trial. It would go to trial where the jury would figure out
what happened.”

“In Florida, the law says if you raise a claim of self defense after
killing someone in public, you can’t even be arrested,” he added.
“It’s why prosecutors and police hated this law. It sabotaged our
justice system. All this discussion we’ve heard — What did Zimmerman
do? What did Trayvon do? — Juries are supposed to figure that out. The
Florida law destroys that American system.”

“There is such irony about this,” Dowd agreed. “Most of the states
that have passed this including Florida and the ‘Stand Your Ground’
laws and the expanded gun-ownership laws where you can carry a
concealed weapon are also the same states and the same legislatures
and the same governors who sort of pushed for prayer in the school.”

Dowd continued: “To me, there is such and irony here, that we want to
be a Christian nation and we want to act in a Christian manner, but
oh, by the way, we don’t believe in the turn your other cheek and we
don’t believe in love your enemy. We believe in loading citizens and
basically giving them an opportunity to shoot people.”

First of all, it is no surprise that you are all over this and that
you are twisting the facts and mis-stating reality to fit your
anti-gun mania.

Second, I'd like for you to cite where "the law says if you raise a
claim of self defense after killing someone in public, you can’t even
be arrested"

Third, I'd like for you to explain how " Juries are supposed to figure
that out," before or during the fact. Maybe you think the way this
should be handled is to let the criminal kill somebody and their
family and then let the lawyers fight it out in court. Personally,
I'll use my gun and then take my chances at being judged by 12 rather
than carried by 6. You can chose the opposite, if you wish.

Finally, If you believe that Trevon was murdered, feel free to show
how the "Hold Your Ground" law even applies, in the remotest way, in
that case.

I haven't twisted anything. The above recounting was a transcript of
an interchange on a news program that featured GW Bush's former cheif
strategist, who rightfully called out these bogus christians for
promoting laws that protect people using guns to kill others.

That was the only point.

Feel free to lose your mind and connect whatever point you think I'm
making to your fantasy scenarios but I won't be wasting my time
arguing with your lame attempt at debate.

You carefully avoided answering any of my questions regarding direct
statements YOU made, not some pal of the inbred Bush family. I'll
restate for your convenience:

I'd like for you to cite where "the law says if you raise a claim of
self defense after killing someone in public, you can’t even be
arrested"

If you believe that Trevon was murdered, feel free to show how the
"Hold Your Ground" law even applies, in the remotest way, in that
case.

You should go speak with the police in Florida who wouldn't bring
charges against someone who ended up killing a young man after
pursuing him without reason or merit.

Neither one of us know that. Were you there?

They're the ones who assumed Zimmerman didn't need to be more
thoroughly investigated. Their interpretation, not mine.

**** poor police work....

And the quote you cite wasn't mine. You need to take a reading
comprehension course.

So, you take no responsibility for what you post?

By posting I may endorse some or all of what someone else said but
it's just food for thought. If I don't agree with every single
snippet of every quote, I'm sure you'll forgive me.

Floriduh
 

In article 42fb3bc9-ab39-4859-8120-b70f7a50e375
@w1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com, says...

On Mar 29, 2:58*pm, Happy John wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:26:11 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says...

On 3/28/2012 4:33 PM, Happy John wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:48:00 -0400, *wrote:

In ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:53:16 -0400, *wrote:

In , says...

On 3/28/2012 12:33 PM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/28/2012 9:44 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says...

On 3/28/2012 9:00 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says...

On 3/27/2012 3:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In article23409357.826.1332874413803.JavaMail.geo-discussion-
forums@ynlw24, says...

On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 12:18:12 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article
,
says...

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:36:08 -0400, *wrote:

There is no evidence that Zimmerman ever approached Martin.
It appears
the opposite is true.
He says he was jumped from behind.

No evidence yet.

Zimmerman is the defendant
The state has to prove it is not true.
We know from the girlfriends phone transcript, Martin approached
Zimmerman

Fat guys with BMIs of over 36 do not "pursue", certainly not fast
enough to catch a 17 year old football star who wants to get away.

What was the kid supposed to do, allow the guy to come and
attack him?
How was Martin supposed to know that the guy wasn't some thug
wanting to
rob him, or kill him?

When Zimmerman asked him what he was doing there the first time,
all Martin had to say was "I'm going to my father's house, he
lives at 168 Maple Dr., call him if you don't believe me." Game
over, and you guys wouldn't be having this argument.

Since ya'll are so wound up about this, here's another take on it
that I just happened to have run across. Interesting.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-765534

I like how the article paints Zimmerman as a gang member which also
paints Martin as a racist. Nice touch.

The interesting part of the transcript is:

Zimmerman: Okay. These a**holes they always get away...S**t he's
running.

Dispatcher: Are you following him? Zimmerman: Yeah

Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman: Ok

Once Zimmerman got out of his car and pursued Martin all bets were
off.
Zimmerman wound up getting his ass kicked and fired a gun because
he was
losing the fight.

So, what you are saying is that if Zimmerman didn't have a gun and
asked
the Martin "what are you doing here", and Martin had beat Zimmerman to
death, that would have been ok because Zimmerman got out and asked
him a
question?

That's just stupid.

You both indicated Martin had the right to defend himself from the
follower, I am just asking what you would have done if Zimmerman didn't
have a gun and Martin beat him to death.... Neither one of you will
answer that question...

Because it's hypothetical and didn't happen, therefore has NOTHING to do
with this case. BUT, with the no retreat clause, if Martin felt in fear
of his life, he could do what he had to do. You have a 200# man with a
gun, and a 17 year old kid with a bag of Skittles. The kid gets shot and
killed by the man and somehow you are all right with that??? Seems as
though BAR is about the only person on the right in here that isn't so
extreme that he sees the problem for what it is.

How much did Martin weigh?

It doesn't matter here Oscar. Only hypotheticals that fit the racists
agenda are valid here...

YOU are the racist. YOU were the one to bring up race. Now, what is
"hypothetical" about Martin's weight? He was there, and he had that
weight. Unlike YOUR hypothetical which just didn't have any bearing on
anything to do with this case so it WAS hypothetical. So, show me ONE
STATEMENT I've made about this matter that was a hypothesis.

Wow. That guy 'Kevin' that used to be here would capitalize a lot of words also.

A person tends to capitalize words for affect, ASSHOLE.

'Affect' or 'effect'?

Kevin used to do that also - screw up words a lot.

It's more in the argument style... Several of these sock puppets (who
show up as soon as another leaves;), argue in a very distinctive manner.
It's as clear as if you could hear their voices, they are the same
person... Just like my style of speech, I couldn't hide it if I wanted
to. I just hoped the guy had more guts and confidence in his own
convictions to keep playing this silly denial game...

You all who think I'm Kevin should all get together, pool your money and
make a bet, I'll match.

Who thinks you're Kevin? I think you're Harry *pretending* to be Kevin.

I thought he was Fred... or Greg.. or some other pantywaist.
I'd bet $500 that I'm right..... what do you say, Kevin?

Karma's a bitch, eh Don? Any tragedy today?