BS: George Zimmerman to be Charged (Trayvon Martin

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST, Richard Bridge on the Big Mac
Date: 28 Apr 12 - 02:51 AM

I'm quite happy to stand on what the actual words on this thread say. They say what I say they say.

This thread has reached the name-calling point where it is all heat and no light. It is closed. --mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: gnu
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 09:27 PM

Thanks bb. Saved me from coming back to point out Ricky is not taking his meds or is taking too much. Or perhaps is just trolling and having a lark at my expense.

Right. I really have to get out of this thread now. It's gone all to hell. Not just the conjecture with no support... the name calling with no support and the quoting out of context are, if possible, worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 07:00 PM

"I never said you were not a member"

"The least you could do is become a member you fucking coward."

Come again, Wildebeest?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 02:22 PM

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: gnu
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 02:16 PM

Ricky... I never said you were not a member.

I shall take my leave yet again. Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 01:51 PM

One of these days Greggie boy may stop chasing me to make personal attacks- BUT I DON'T SEE any effort by those he supports to either distance themselves from his tactics, or get him under control.


Greg, your apology was NOT accepted- since you feel that it is OK tpo make personal attacks, YOU will get back as good you give, with some extra for getting away with this shit because of your political views ( as shown by previous edits that remove any comments YOU don't like, but leave your objectionable comments unanswered.)


You are trying very hard to shut this thread down, by your tactics. I hope you do not, but asking you to be reasonable is a waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 01:20 PM

One of these days Beardie may post my apology to him about the mistaken identity issue- I can't be arsed to look it up, but its in the archives.

Until then, I hope he seeks professional help.

And now, back to our broadcast..........

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,999
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 11:34 AM

As long as everyone's getting along . . .

meself has just hit the nail on the head. Most the rest of you are blowin' smoke out yer arses.

First, we know that people cherry-pick items in the 'news'. (News is what a talking head reads from a teleprompter or says because his/her editor wants people to believe this or that depending on the editorial policy.)

I can no longer be arsed to read back to determine who said what about whom. Some of you who seem to know bugger-all about the case or its realities figure that calling the other guy a misguided twit gives you credence. Ain't so. It just means you wouldn't be selected to a jury that has to give an impartial verdict/assessment of the defendant's actions and whether or not there was a murder committed.

In short, you're no better than the news to which you subscribe. People here have stated over the years that they find certain news sources too leftish, liberal, rightish or conservative. Diogenes would be wasting his time on this thread, imo. This thread is about games and hatreds that show folks to be little better than those they pillory, not a search for truth and hopefully justice.

A pox on both sides' houses. I hope they do a better job in court.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 10:56 AM

Juicy Brucie - he was lampooning your view there. I think it was obvious to everyone but you.

Chew on this. A black person may say "Mahnigguh" to another by way of greeting - but it is offensive if a white person does so. A white person who says (whether quoting a black person or not) that some blacks did X so all blacks do X is a racist. For the same reason, no matter how many Jewish people I have worked with, I'd have to be very very careful about telling another Jewish person a Jewish joke.

If you don't understand this it rather underscored my earlier view of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: meself
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 10:54 AM

I'm going to try to get a point in here before the usual suspects get yet another thread closed.

I don't know why we are to take the latest referenced article as any closer to reality than are the host of previous articles. One question I am left with: a number of the early articles said that Zim had for a time worked as a 'security guard' in an 'unlicensed establishment that served alcohol' (or some other such polite wording), but had been fired because of his aggressiveness, particularly in an incident in which he had roughed-up a female patron. More generally, the reporting on the Zim story has been so unreliable and irresponsible that I don't see the point in appealing to any new article that emerges purporting to provide relevant background or details about the Zim/Martin incident, now that we know there will be a trial, in which information will given under oath.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 09:17 AM

And I have noted that NOT A SINGLE SO-CALLED "LIBERAL" on this thread has EVER taken him to task, nor has even stated that they do not agree with him, since he supports them.

What does that say about the vast majority here???

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 09:15 AM

Greg F.

Since you attack me instead of making a contirbution to the thread,

I will point out you are the only acknowledged racist here- YOU make racist comments that you know to be lies.




"Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:00 PM
...
Beardie is also the guy that, in the thread about cash only for second-hand goods, wanted us to know that the sponsor of the bill was a Dumb Ni--er.."

His justification for this lie?

Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:31 PM

For Max and Beardie's benefit, from the archives:

Subject: RE: BS: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash
From: pdq - PM
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 07:37 PM

Just for the record, the idiot behind this bill is a member of the Louisiana House of Representitives.

He is Black and a Democrat."


NOTE THIS WAS NOT EVEN MY POST, and that Greg F reads "He is Black and a Democrat." as "the sponsor of the bill was a Dumb Ni--er."

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 08:54 AM

Spoken like a true bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 08:31 AM

Dickie,

What I did was point out that the quote YOU had posted was taken out of context, and was BY A BLACK WOMAN that YOU were calling racist. I made no judgement- YOU DID.

STOP CALLING PEOPLE RACIST WHEN THEY DISAGREE WITH YOUR BIGOTRY.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Apr 12 - 05:12 AM

Look Wildebeest

I am a member.

Juicy Brucie was the one who, as I said, looked racist.

The proof was there in his own words - he just repeated that black youths had been robbing and so it was legitimate to suspect any black youth. That is a racist statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: gnu
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 08:04 PM

I read it Ricky... yer guilty as charged. In your own words. Denying it and not apologizing for it just makes you look like a Richard.. er, Dick. Yeah, that's it... a big Dick.

And, as for the removed post (not involving Ricky), I received three emails about it. Fact is, I never said ANYTHING except Z should have been charged right away and that NObody here knows the full story before the trial. My questions CANNOT be construed as me being a racist. If you, and YOU know who you are, ever do that again, I will fuck you over in any way that I can you ignorant piece of shit. The least you could do is become a member you fucking coward.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 07:53 PM

Sure gnu. I expect you go round in circles a lot. The basis is there. Read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: gnu
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 06:49 PM

Ricky! Yer on fire tonight! Quoting partial text and implying things out of context. Making inane arguements which only prove your arguements are unsound and inane. And then calling someone racist with no basis. Yer lookin fer trouble. I expect yer gonna find it sooner or later. Especially when you commit libel, in print, like you just did.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 05:15 PM

I'll tell them to look for men in sheets with torches, not white men. You look more like a racist than ever before, juicybrucie.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 02:42 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge - PM
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 12:38 PM

From the article

"There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

That's a pretty classic statement of bigotry. Martin was deemed suspicious because he was black.
....................................................................


MORE OF the article"

"A criminal justice student who aspired to become a judge, Zimmerman also concerned himself with the safety of his neighbors after a series of break-ins committed by young African-American men.
Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.
"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."


So, when the neighbors complain about the white men in sheets with torches, YOU will tell them that they are making a classical statement of bigotry??????

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 12:38 PM

From the article

"There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

That's a pretty classic statement of bigotry. Martin was deemed suspicious because he was black.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 12:20 PM

Lots more on Z for people interested in reality:

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-prelude-shooting-194235114.html

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 11:52 AM

None of us really needs to give a shit Wrong'un!!

Not while you're piling it high and selling it cheap.

You save us the bother of buying shovels.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,josepp
Date: 26 Apr 12 - 12:24 AM

How about if I tell you that I that I don't give a shit if Obama gives a shit about Trayvon Martin or not?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Songwronger
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 11:29 PM

AN OBAMA DRONE KILLS A 16-YEAR OLD BOY:

A group of Pakistanis met in Islamabad late last month to discuss the impact of U.S. drone strikes in their communities. One of the attendees was a 16-year-old boy named Tariq Aziz, who had volunteered to learn photography to begin documenting drone strikes near his home. Within 72 hours of the meeting, Aziz was killed in a U.S. drone strike....

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/7/us_drone_kills_16_year_old
Tell me again how Obama gives a shit about Trayvon Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 04:42 PM

I doubt that his status on or off the community watch will have any bearing on the charge of second-degree murder. Even if they'd encouraged him to carry a gun (and apparently they didn't), the issue would still be whether he had sufficient reason under the law to shoot someone with it.

The difference would be important in a civil suit against the community. If the watch program kicked him off, or if they told him explicitly not to carry and he did it anyway, that suit would probably go nowhere.

If they'd encouraged him, it would be very different.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: meself
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 04:11 PM

Just to clarify: I wrote, "A couple of reports said that Z.'s carrying of a gun had been a source of some contention within the neighbourhood watch" - I should have said "contention between Z. and the rest of the neighbourhood watch." I clearly remember one article that said he had been kicked out of the neighbourhood watch over this gun issue, and so that he could not have been 'officially' on duty at the time of the incident. However, there has been so much misinformation, and slanted and exaggerated information, whether in support of one side or the other or just to have another story, that it's hard to know what the truth is. It's curious that some of these apparent 'facts' have quietly disappeared from subsequent reports. No doubt the trial will be enlightening.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 03:36 PM

As they should.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,josepp
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 03:18 PM

////A number of the early news stories that I read on Yahoo mentioned that according to the rules of the neighbourhood watch group to which he belonged, he was not supposed to be armed. A couple of reports said that Z.'s carrying of a gun had been a source of some contention within the neighbourhood watch. Whether those stories are still available on line or not, I have no idea. I did not save the pertinent urls (if that's what they're called). /////

I'll back you because I read the same thing. Cannot be armed and cannot confront. Observe and report only. If that's the case, it's going to be hard for Zimmerman to say he was acting in the capacity of a neighborhood crime watch captain or whatever it's called. He was acting on his own in the capacity of a vigilante. I'll be very surprised if the crime watch committee is going to back him and open themselves to a possible lawsuit. I think they'll cut him loose and say arrivederci sucka.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 11:24 AM

The Florida SYG law was passed in 2005.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 10:50 AM

Problem with carrying a gun is that it becomes a option for solving problems and if you make a mistake, you end up like Mr. Zimmerman. Seems to me that Songwronger's 73 year old lady thinks a lot like Mr. Zimmerman, and has a pretty good chance of ending up the same way.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 04:46 AM

Can I add a new offence to the US statute book? Saying "burglarising" in stead of "burgling"?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Apr 12 - 01:03 AM

I don't know how old that SanfordFl manifesto is- it may well be from before the SYG law - but it is quite clear that under it, Zimmerman was way out of sync with its explicit instructions.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 11:03 PM

Thanks for the ref.

The Sanford pamphlet states in boldface, "Do not take any risks to prevent a crime...." and "Remember that apprehension is the job of your police department."

It makes clear that the purpose of a neighborhood watch is solely to observe and report.

But it doesn't say specifically that you can't be armed.

Obviously you don't need to be packing a rod to observe and report, and Z had no business accosting M in the first place. But it seems he was within his rights to be carrying a legal firearm.

Even if the neighbors had kicked him off the watch for carrying a gun (assuming they knew), he might still have confronted M if he thought M was a burglar.

As I read it, nothing seems to count legally except the limits of the SYG law and whether the prosecution can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Z was not in fear of his life.

It sounds like an uphill climb for the prosecution, especially since the lead investigator has testified that he has no evidence to contradict Z's version of events.

Of course, I'm not a lawyer. I just watch them on TV.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,999
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 10:30 PM

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/NWProgramHandbook.pdf

That is the Neighborhood Watch program as published by the Sanford PD.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: meself
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 10:13 PM

"A quick Google search failed to find any authoritative statement that either the law or the community demanded that he not be armed. Can you provide a source?"

A number of the early news stories that I read on Yahoo mentioned that according to the rules of the neighbourhood watch group to which he belonged, he was not supposed to be armed. A couple of reports said that Z.'s carrying of a gun had been a source of some contention within the neighbourhood watch. Whether those stories are still available on line or not, I have no idea. I did not save the pertinent urls (if that's what they're called).

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 09:41 PM

Here's the deal here... No one has ever had a problem with folks defending themselves, wrongman...

The problem is that the way these ALEC/NRA laws are written that you can be the instigator & killer and get away with it...

That is messed up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Songwronger
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 09:26 PM

"We got to have a little Old West up here in Detroit. That's what it's gonna take," Detroit resident Julia Brown.

The last time Brown, 73, called the Detroit police, they didn't show up until the next day. So she applied for a permit to carry a handgun and says she's prepared to use it against the young thugs who have taken over her neighborhood, burglarizing entire blocks, opening fire at will and terrorizing the elderly with impunity.

http://mytechnologyworld9.blogspot.in/2012/04/911-is-joke-detroit-citizens-no-longer.html

Detroit's got a large black population. I'm sure Obama will be all over this situation, showering his love, since he cares so deeply about Trayvon Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 07:16 PM

Good point, John P... ALEC, governors and legislators should be held liable... BTW, I'd love to see the NRA brought to task...

And yeah, Lighter, the Guardian Angles never carried guns... Never!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 06:59 PM

Before cell phones, the Guardian Angels carried walkie-talkies.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 03:26 PM

I well remember the Guardian Angels in New York. They were founded by a young guy working-class guy named Curtis Sliwa in the late '70s.

They acted as subway patrols and were "trained" to make citizens' arrests in a city whose rate of violent crime was one of the highest in the nation. A lot of people, including the Mayor, criticized them as "vigilantes."

Sliwa, an outspoken gut-level kind of conservative, was once beaten and nearly killed by professional criminals. He came back. He never expressed the need to carry a gun, and the Guardian Angels never carried them.

As far as I know, they're still in existence and still unarmed. By the time I moved from NYC a few years later, the Mayor and the Police were supporting them and their organization for enhancing public safety.

To repeat: they were watchmen in one of the country's toughest cities and still didn't want to carry guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 03:12 PM

Some months ago I was cruising down Broadway Avenue North, one of the main drags near where I live, and I encountered two people wearing identical yellow sweatshirts with the word "Guardian" on the chest and back, and they both wore red berets. One of them was a tall, muscular young black man and the other was a young white woman.

I stopped and chatted with them for a few minutes. Very friendly. The Guardians, they explained, were, essentially, a neighborhood watch group. They'd heard about a group a few decades ago in New York called "The Guardian Angels" and thought it was a good idea. Such a group was forming here in Seattle.

They always travelled in pairs. They would casually stroll here and there, chat with people as they were doing with me, and generally keep an eye on things. Also, they would lend a hand if anyone looked like they needed help, such an elderly lady lugging a big grocery bag from a store to her car, things like that.

The local merchants were aware of them and approved.

By the way, they were armed.

With cell phones.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 02:17 PM

> Z. was supposed to be unarmed.

A quick Google search failed to find any authoritative statement that either the law or the community demanded that he not be armed. Can you provide a source?

A number of police officials have explained that watchmen "should not be" armed, and that they *tell* them not to carry arms. But that's not quite the same thing as "must not be" or "it's illegal."

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: meself
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 01:59 PM

Earlier reports made it clear that according to the policies of his neighbourhood watch org., Z. was supposed to be unarmed while acting in his capacity as a neighbourhood watch-er. This was widely reported, along with many other matters that seem to be viewed as shrouded in mystery here ....

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 12:52 PM

>Is it possible that in Florida all of the volunteers have permission to be armed?

I can't believe that someone licensed to carry a concealed weapon could be legally prohibited from doing so while engaged in a blockwatch program. Legal is legal. Drawing the weapon for no good reason is the problem, just as it would be for anyone at any time.

All neighborhood watch programs could state in writing that volunteers must not be armed while "on duty." I'm not even sure what "on duty" means in Z's case. Did he work a regular shift? Or was he just driving around because he had nothing else to do at that time?

A more radical and more effective way would be laws to prohibit being armed on neighborhood watch. I doubt such a law could be passed anywhere.

In any case, the gated community where Z lived is apparently being sued in civil court for any connection with the shooting. I don;t know if that issue has any bearing on whether Z is convicted of a crime.

The ultimate question is this: Do SYG laws prevent more shootings and other crimes than they cause? I have no idea. Other than the NRA, I wonder who does.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 11:25 AM

That aspect, John P, has baffled me from the start. I think a community/block watch is a good idea but WATCH is the operative word. A person armed with more than a cell/mobile phone is a danger to himself and others.

In Juneau, the volunteers stay in their vehicles; they do not poke around in corners on foot.

Is it possible that in Florida all of the volunteers have permission to be armed?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: John P
Date: 24 Apr 12 - 10:53 AM

No one except Z knows what happened that night, which means we may never find out. A court will decide if he will be deemed to be guilty of a crime.

For me, that has never been the issue. The issue is the SYG law and the fact that a "blockwatch volunteer" was armed. An armed blockwatch volunteer is a vigilante. Being a vigilante is illegal, and there seems to be no doubt that Z was being a vigilante at the time of the killing.

Is it legal for a blockwatch program to have an armed component?

Is the gated community that Z was blockwatching for going to get in any trouble for establishing their own untrained police force?

Have the SYG laws ever been tested in a higher court?

Is it possible to sue the people who paid for the SYG law over this? If not, why not? What about the legislators who voted for it?

I'm a big believer in taking personal responsibility for your actions, and anyone who thought about it for one minute should have known that an SYG law would lead to this mess. In an obviously non-legal sense I think there are a lot of Florida legislators and a governor who are guilty of murder.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Apr 12 - 10:48 AM

Question GfS!

Who died and made you controller of free speech on this forum?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Apr 12 - 12:48 AM

Bobert: "Exactly, Lighter..."

...and leave it at that!

'Patience' I keep saying.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman to be Charged
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 12 - 11:15 AM

Exactly, Lighter...

Even the ultra-right-winged ALEC has pulled back saying it will not be pushing any more statehouses to enact "stand you ground" laws... Of course, that doesn't mean much because ALEC had run out of right winged statehouses to push...

B~