On 8/7/2013 1:30 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 15:50:55 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 14:22:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:



Oh, was the march to proclaim heroism?

It certainly elevated small time thuggery to an unprecedented level.

What "thuggery" did marching "elevate"?

The idea that Martin was justified in ambushing and beating the ****
out of some cracker who looked creepy to him

And "idea" is "thuggery" now? And who said that IF Martin "ambushed and
beat the ****" out of someone was justifiable?? Bet you can't name one
single person.

For one, you seem to think what Martin did was OK.

Better poll Harry to see if he'll admit to sayin it.

On 8/7/13 12:07 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:51:47 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What exactly did Martin do?

attacked and beat the **** out of Zimmerman.

And again, my bet stands, you can't name one
single person who said that IF Martin "ambushed and beat the ****" out
of someone that it was justifiable.

So you think it was not justifiable. Now we are finally getting
somewhere.



Actually, you are giving an entirely different meaning to his sentence
and pointing out why "discussions" in this newsgroup are pretty
much...futile.

"If you want a discussion on any subject, boating or otherwise, find a
place other than rec.boats."

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 08:44:42 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

So, following your logic, one can be found guilty of heinous crimes
without being arrested, and going to court?

I don't know, why not ask OBL?
... or Ibragim Todashev. (Holder's answer to GITMO)

That is just stupid on SO many levels I'm not sure where to start.......

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:51:47 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What exactly did Martin do?

attacked and beat the **** out of Zimmerman.

And again, my bet stands, you can't name one
single person who said that IF Martin "ambushed and beat the ****" out
of someone that it was justifiable.

So you think it was not justifiable. Now we are finally getting
somewhere.

Oh, nice, now you are trying to tell me what I think.......

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 16:11:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 14:21:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:00:38 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:40:24 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


Which of these was he arrested for? I find it sickly hilarious that you
defend Zimmerman who WAS arrested and Martin who was NEVER arrested....

What was Zimmerman ever CHARGED with. That was your original
contention.

1. Resisting officer with violence. (this happened while he was
drinking, by the way)
2. Restraining order issued against him for domestic violence.


Now, what was Martin ever charged with again??

Neither ever resulted in a CHARGE.

Cops don't charge people, They simply arrest them. The DA or states
attorney decides whether there are grounds for an actual charge.

Nope, only for felonies in Florida, where Zimmerman lives.

Zimmerman was never charged with anything, even after he shot Martin,
until politicians up to and including the intruder in chief demanded
it. (for political reasons, not facts)
In retrospect the first opinion of the states attorney the night of
the shooting was the right one., There was no case there.
Our local DA was on TV here saying the same thing the day after the
verdict and he explained why.
Zimmerman, like it or not was within his rights to use deadly force to
stop a physical attack that did not seem to be stopping.

Now, what was Martin arrested for again? Oh, nothing.......

...'cause he attacked someone and got his ass shot.

John (Gun Nut) H.

Cite?

You need a cite showing Martin's dead?

http://tinyurl.com/o42at

John (Gun Nut) H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

On 8/7/13 1:11 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:23:55 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

"If you want a discussion on any subject, boating or otherwise, find a
place other than rec.boats."

Since you start most of these off topic threads I suggest you start
first.



You're assuming I post for the sake of "discussion." I know better. For
discussions with reasonable, rationale people of all political stripes,
there are far better venues than this den of conservatrash.

wrote:
On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 13:20:09 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Since you start most of these off topic threads I suggest you start
first.



You're assuming I post for the sake of "discussion." I know better. For
discussions with reasonable, rationale people of all political stripes,
there are far better venues than this den of conservatrash.

So you are just trolling?

Not at all. Think more abstractly.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 16:11:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 14:21:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:00:38 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:40:24 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


Which of these was he arrested for? I find it sickly hilarious that you
defend Zimmerman who WAS arrested and Martin who was NEVER arrested....

What was Zimmerman ever CHARGED with. That was your original
contention.

1. Resisting officer with violence. (this happened while he was
drinking, by the way)
2. Restraining order issued against him for domestic violence.


Now, what was Martin ever charged with again??

Neither ever resulted in a CHARGE.

Cops don't charge people, They simply arrest them. The DA or states
attorney decides whether there are grounds for an actual charge.

Nope, only for felonies in Florida, where Zimmerman lives.

Zimmerman was never charged with anything, even after he shot Martin,
until politicians up to and including the intruder in chief demanded
it. (for political reasons, not facts)
In retrospect the first opinion of the states attorney the night of
the shooting was the right one., There was no case there.
Our local DA was on TV here saying the same thing the day after the
verdict and he explained why.
Zimmerman, like it or not was within his rights to use deadly force to
stop a physical attack that did not seem to be stopping.

Now, what was Martin arrested for again? Oh, nothing.......

...'cause he attacked someone and got his ass shot.

John (Gun Nut) H.

Cite?

You need a cite showing Martin's dead?

http://tinyurl.com/o42at

John (Gun Nut) H.

Yet another reply showing just how stupid you really are.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 12:33:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:51:47 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What exactly did Martin do?

attacked and beat the **** out of Zimmerman.

And again, my bet stands, you can't name one
single person who said that IF Martin "ambushed and beat the ****" out
of someone that it was justifiable.

So you think it was not justifiable. Now we are finally getting
somewhere.

Oh, nice, now you are trying to tell me what I think.......

I know
Usually it is MSNBC.

Really? Do show the group how you know what I watch, and what I believe.

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 2:24:56 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,

says...



On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 12:33:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:



In article ,

says...



On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:51:47 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:



What exactly did Martin do?



attacked and beat the **** out of Zimmerman.



And again, my bet stands, you can't name one

single person who said that IF Martin "ambushed and beat the ****" out

of someone that it was justifiable.



So you think it was not justifiable. Now we are finally getting

somewhere.



Oh, nice, now you are trying to tell me what I think.......



I know

Usually it is MSNBC.



Really? Do show the group how you know what I watch, and what I believe.

You expose it with every post, unless you post the crap you do without believing it, just for the sake of arguing.

Oh wait... never mind.