|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 3:07 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Krause radio, I'll bet. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. In my opinion, the only crime committed was by Martin and he paid for it. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/12 7:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. Amazing, isn't it, that someone who served in the military ostensibly to defend the Constitution gets up on his electronic soapbox and tells someone he is an "idiot" for merely expressing his opinion. Obviously the marines don't check recruits for basic intelligence and ability to understand. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. When the police say "don't do that," most people of at least average intelligence "don't do that." I suppose if you were in the military or if you are really really stupid or both, it's okay to ignore that advice. Righties...always trying to split hairs to defend their lack of understanding of issues. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/20/2012 7:55 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/20/12 7:48 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. Amazing, isn't it, that someone who served in the military ostensibly to defend the Constitution gets up on his electronic soapbox and tells someone he is an "idiot" for merely expressing his opinion. Obviously the marines don't check recruits for basic intelligence and ability to understand. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. When the police say "don't do that," most people of at least average intelligence "don't do that." I suppose if you were in the military or if you are really really stupid or both, it's okay to ignore that advice. Righties...always trying to split hairs to defend their lack of understanding of issues. Note to the English professor: When you paraphrase, quotes are inappropriate. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article om,
says... On 7/20/2012 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Krause radio, I'll bet. You have limited knowledge of the facts in this case, yet you are highly opinionated. You've been listening to Rush radio, I'll bet. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/20/2012 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:07 AM, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. A conviction would be nice, but the only real good that might come out of this is a serious modification of Florida's Shoot First So You Don't Have to Question Law. When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. But such change isn't likely in a state populated by rednecks, crackers, bible-toters and modern Republicans. In my opinion, the only crime committed was by Martin and he paid for it. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com