[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] I did. So the skateboarder didn't see him flash a gun but saw him pull the gun when turning around. Spun around when? When James spun him around? The article isn't clear on that. Did he go to walk away and them pull a gun on James or did James go after him and then have a gun pulled on him?Ace6301

Well flipping up you showing off the weapon during a heated argument is fairly illegal, also witnesses say he started the thing by yelling at a kid on a skateboard for using a basketball court.

Well as no-scope stated flashing the weapon made the encounter a deadly one, the other person would not know if the person is walking away or would turn around and fire. It is a major threat and again highly illegal; heck even showing a weapon by mistake is illegal in Florida.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Finish reading. 

Ace6301

Well flipping up you showing off the weapon during a heated argument is fairly illegal, also witnesses say he started the thing by yelling at a kid on a skateboard for using a basketball court.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] It's legal to carry a concealed weapon but not to demonstrate that you have said weapon? Sorry, what?Ace6301

apparently yes, and I guess what he did is considred open carry 

Making threats with a weapon is pretty illegal in all states.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

If I remember correctly, during World War II, U.S. decision makers in the Roosevelt Administration decided during WWII to devote 20% of U.S. military resources to the Pacific front against Japan and 80% to the fight against Germany and Italy in Europe and Africa. Do you think this was the right decision?

Should the U.S. have diverted more resources to the Pacific Theater?

On the one hand, Germany seemed to be more of a strategic threat in the war and to be the most powerful Axis country (indeed, though I don't think the U.S. knew it, Germany was able to develop rocket technologies, which if done earlier could've been a serious threat). With Germany there was the risk that Germany could've perhaps defeated the Soviets and that they could've taken Egypt (gaining control of the Suez) and advanced into the Middle East gaining control of the oil fields.

Japan didn't seem capable of any major attack on the U.S., maybe some air-raids on the West Coast or air raids on Naval bases or oil fields (such as in Alaska).

the_bi99man

1 the war with germany started first.

2 japan was a much smaller threat.

Exactly. Germany had to stopped, because the fate of the entire planet pretty much rested on that. As for Japan, whatevs. Nothing a couple a-bombs (or, as I like to call them, 'Negotiators') couldn't handle.

Well to be fair I am sure having two suns appear over two German cities would take the fightning will of the Germans.

I have a feeling many people thought zimmerman should have gotten charged with manslaughter, rather than murder

lostrib

Also there were witnesses and evidence. Unlike with Zimmerman.

I would say so, With the Pacific it was a large area, but mostly ocean so you don't need to allocate that many resouces. Europe is a large part land so you need bombers and fighters to cover the bombers, tanks, a larger number of troops. 

All the GZ supporters want to talk about things from his view. Nobody wants to talk about TM's view point. TM was a minor walking home alone in the dark. When GZ who was going to the store stopped and profiled TM as a criminal. He then went on to follow him in his truck. Then drives ahead to park and wait for TM to pass him. He then lets TM pass him before he follows him again in the dark while it is raining.

Super TM manages to out walk a truck of a grown man from the area (wow them black people sure are fast). GZ lost sight of him in the dark. So he claims he had to get out in the rain to look for a address. Mind you there is a house to the right where he got out his truck. Yeah GZ who lived there for years and was the NW cpt has no idea what street he is on. He can't call anybody "hey my memory is on the friz can you tell me where I am" cause his phone contact list is missing. He needs the address from the far side and he can't drive there he must walk. He can't wait at the front gate for police. He can't wait at a known location that he remembers the name of yeah it is just one big blur.

GZ is walking around in the dark in the rain for over 2 mins. He could not find a address during his nice long walk in the rain at night with his flash light and gun with one in the head. Yeah it was just the slimmest of chances that GZ just happened to be in the area that he lost sight of TM. Yeah this story makes alot of sense to a 5 year old or a racist giving GZ the benefit of the doubt. I guess GZ voice suddenly stopped working and he could not say "Hey my name is George and I am Cpt of the NW are you lost how can I help you." either at any point.

Yeah there are no child molesters. No stranger danger. No kids that walk by themselves and end up missing. No kids on the back of milk cartons. No police files of thousands of missing kids. TM does not know that Sanford is a racist area either. TM has no idea that a grown man is following him and called his fat friend a creepy ass cracka. He has no idea that he should not bring a stanger back to the house where his 12 year old step brother is home alone. TM is at ease with GZ following him in the dead of night in the rain. He feels no fear when that same truck stops and a large man with a flash light gets out to walk in his direction he thought he was safe in.

Yes the grown man who knows the area and lives there with a loaded gun with one in the head and MMA training and is much larger is the only person that can feel fear from a skinny minor walking alone and does not ID himself. I know this is normal behavior only cause a black kid at night is evil. Nothing out of the ordinary here just GZ looking to give TM a fruit basket.

That fruit basket was a double action keltec 9mm round to the heart of TM from GZ the loving NW Cpt from Sanford.

no-scope-AK47

You seem to know alot about what happened on that night. You must of been an witness of the events, why weren't you in Sanford to testify, your may of shown that Zimmerman was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"]

 

After reading up more on this story, I've thought long and hard about this, and while I don't normally like to put much thought into subjects like these, because what do I know, I'm just some loser typing on a computer and its most likely pointless to get into arguments about situations like this. 

But all I can say is this. I hope all the people who were claiming, after Sandy Hook, that gun control is pointless because "criminal's don't follow the law and they will still have guns and murders will keep happening as usual" have their big dumb foots shoved straight in their mouths right now.

Situations are more complicated than that. I hope this proves that. Was zimmerman under the law the way it is written guilty? No... Is he a self entitled moronic vigilante wanna be cop who put himself in a dangerous situation because we gave him a sense of power by letting him to walk around with a fire arm in public? Yes. He's an idiot, but technically he didn't break any laws... Which is wrong. What he did SHOULD be against the law, but its not.. people like him are not qualified to "investigate" situations that they deem to be suspicious. Was TM actually doing anything suspicious? We don't know... But as a citizen your job is to INFORM police of situations like that, not seek them out. HOwever, some people, if they have a gun tend to think "well Ill just check it out, if I get confronted ill be fine because I have my gun as a safety measure".

How can that be ok?

I'm not saying that guns should be completely outlawed or that we take measures to the extreme. But there needs to be regulations. There needs to be more RESTRICTIONS to make is so assh0les like this guy can't walk around with firearms stalking people thinking that they are safe. Making restrictions and new laws that are designed to limit the amount of scenarios were untrained civilians are allowed to use lethal force will do absolutely nothing but reduce the amount of deaths that result from gun related violence. How many damn countries have to make progress with this issue before we get the picture?

What did we do when we were faced with a drunk driving crisis in the 70s? We didn't just throw our hands up in the air and say "Well this situation is ****ed and theres nothing we can do about it." The government worked hard and came up with hundreds of precautionary procedures and regulations to deture people from drunk driving and the numbers of deaths resulting from it in the last 30 years have dropped dramatic numbers. Are they gone completely? No... But the goal should be to limit situations that result in death as best we can. I don't understand why people find that so difficult to understand. There are so many things we could do to satisfy both people who want some from of increased gun regulation, while not completely stripping away pro gun Americans who feel they need them in order to protect their families. Its not hard but I feel that people in this country are too freaking stupid to come to a compromise of any measure and just like to shout and get behind simplified headlines and slogans that have zero basis in reality. The media, the dems and republicans are going to tear everyone apart in anyway that they can to ensure that zero progressive movement is made because we are too damn stubborn to do anything that might save thousands and thousands of peoples lives each and every year without taking away anyone's feeling of safety.

sonicare

You seem upset. 

1) Why are you brining up gun control. Would Zimmerman of acted differently if he didn't have a weapon. Maybe, maybe not. But he was not doing anything illegal.

2) Gun crime has been dropping since 93'. Just because the media is reporting on it doesn't mean it is a crisis.

The point is we do not know the full story, yea Zimmerman did act like an idiot. But did that empower him, Zimmerman's side of the story is he did not confront Martin, and it seems that lethal force was a near last resort.

 

After reading up more on this story, I've thought long and hard about this, and while I don't normally like to put much thought into subjects like these, because what do I know, I'm just some loser typing on a computer and its most likely pointless to get into arguments about situations like this. 

But all I can say is this. I hope all the people who were claiming, after Sandy Hook, that gun control is pointless because "criminal's don't follow the law and they will still have guns and murders will keep happening as usual" have their big dumb foots shoved straight in their mouths right now.

Situations are more complicated than that. I hope this proves that. Was zimmerman under the law the way it is written guilty? No... Is he a self entitled moronic vigilante wanna be cop who put himself in a dangerous situation because we gave him a sense of power by letting him to walk around with a fire arm in public? Yes. He's an idiot, but technically he didn't break any laws... Which is wrong. What he did SHOULD be against the law, but its not.. people like him are not qualified to "investigate" situations that they deem to be suspicious. Was TM actually doing anything suspicious? We don't know... But as a citizen your job is to INFORM police of situations like that, not seek them out. HOwever, some people, if they have a gun tend to think "well Ill just check it out, if I get confronted ill be fine because I have my gun as a safety measure".

How can that be ok?

I'm not saying that guns should be completely outlawed or that we take measures to the extreme. But there needs to be regulations. There needs to be more RESTRICTIONS to make is so assh0les like this guy can't walk around with firearms stalking people thinking that they are safe. Making restrictions and new laws that are designed to limit the amount of scenarios were untrained civilians are allowed to use lethal force will do absolutely nothing but reduce the amount of deaths that result from gun related violence. How many damn countries have to make progress with this issue before we get the picture?

What did we do when we were faced with a drunk driving crisis in the 70s? We didn't just throw our hands up in the air and say "Well this situation is ****ed and theres nothing we can do about it." The government worked hard and came up with hundreds of precautionary procedures and regulations to deture people from drunk driving and the numbers of deaths resulting from it in the last 30 years have dropped dramatic numbers. Are they gone completely? No... But the goal should be to limit situations that result in death as best we can. I don't understand why people find that so difficult to understand. There are so many things we could do to satisfy both people who want some from of increased gun regulation, while not completely stripping away pro gun Americans who feel they need them in order to protect their families. Its not hard but I feel that people in this country are too freaking stupid to come to a compromise of any measure and just like to shout and get behind simplified headlines and slogans that have zero basis in reality. The media, the dems and republicans are going to tear everyone apart in anyway that they can to ensure that zero progressive movement is made because we are too damn stubborn to do anything that might save thousands and thousands of peoples lives each and every year without taking away anyone's feeling of safety.

VendettaRed07

You seem upset. 

1) Why are you brining up gun control. Would Zimmerman of acted differently if he didn't have a weapon. Maybe, maybe not. But he was not doing anything illegal.

2) Gun crime has been dropping since 93'. Just because the media is reporting on it doesn't mean it is a crisis.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="lowkey254"]

Anyone who agrees with the verdict is agreeing that it's ok to stalk someone, instigate a fight with them, and ultimately kill that person.

You're all off of your rockers.

lowkey254

1) Zimmerman wasn't stalking Martin, he was following him, which isn't stalking. 

2) he wasn't told to stay away.

3) We do not know who insitgated this. Zimmerman said that Martin jumped him, and there is no evidence or witnesses to say otherwise. Remember beyond a reasonable doubt.