Zimmerman's Own Words

POSTED BY: BYTEMITE
UPDATED: Saturday, July 20, 2013 04:28
VIEWED: 7565
PAGE 1 of 1

BYTEMITE

Thursday, July 4, 2013 1:50 AM

Was watching an interview. He's on Hannity. Not sure why family was watching Hannity, as they don't really like him.

...

I understand what's at stake here. I understand how important it is for self-defense laws to stand.

But this guy. THIS GUY.

He just said that he thinks it was "god's plan" that Trevon Martin died that night.

Excuse me. Must rage.

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I understand what's at stake here. I understand how important it is for self-defense laws to stand.

This is what I don't get. Why is Zimmerman's right to self-defense a big deal and Martin's right to self-defense not at issue? Zimmerman was the instigator. The kid was walking home when some nut with a gun confronted him for no reason. Martin had a right to defend HIMself.

Quote:
But this guy. THIS GUY.

I'm right there with you on that.

BYTEMITE

Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:25 AM

You can't send people to jail just for being evil self-righteous bastards. And ultimately, while I question defining cement as a lethal weapon justifying escalation to lethal force, I'm not really sure what the outcome here will be. I don't think Zimmerman is "innocent" in the strictest sense of the term, but I'm also not sure he can be convicted.

Trevon Martin was probably defending himself. And probably Zimmerman was, though under the circumstances I think Zimmerman was in the wrong. We'll never really know exactly what happened that night. What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:25 AM

TM was the aggressor. Not GZ.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:25 AM

DP

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, July 4, 2013 2:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

100% it is so.

I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, July 4, 2013 3:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

100% it is so.

I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn.

He's on trial for 2nd degree murder. I'm sure he was told NOT to apologize, as that may appear to be some sort of admission of guilt, at least in the court of public opinion.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

1KIKI

Thursday, July 4, 2013 4:09 AM

"I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn."

HA HA

good one

I'll have to remember that.

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, July 4, 2013 4:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn."

HA HA

good one

I'll have to remember that.

Yeah. It's really the only way to handle it.

BYTEMITE

Thursday, July 4, 2013 4:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

100% it is so.

I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn.

He's on trial for 2nd degree murder. I'm sure he was told NOT to apologize, as that may appear to be some sort of admission of guilt, at least in the court of public opinion.

Maybe, but in this court of public opinion it seems to have backfired. I was kinda on his side before I heard this. Because I'm against our justice system and the punishments it gives out on principle because it's all corrupt.

But... him saying this actually makes him seem like a really terrible person. And he can't go to jail for that. But I can dislike him a lot.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Thursday, July 4, 2013 4:45 AM

I despair of your laws in the US if this guy gets off with nothing. If you shot and killed an unarmed person, if even you were defending yourself, you'd get convicted of something - manslaughter most likely. Surely there has to be acknowledge of due force, not any force.

Anyway, trial will determine the outcome, right or wrong.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, July 4, 2013 3:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
TM was the aggressor. Not GZ.

You don't know that for a fact. No one does save GZ.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, July 4, 2013 3:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I despair of your laws in the US if this guy gets off with nothing. If you shot and killed an unarmed person, if even you were defending yourself, you'd get convicted of something - manslaughter most likely. Surely there has to be acknowledge of due force, not any force.

Anyway, trial will determine the outcome, right or wrong.

In Florida as soon as you fear for your life you are allowed to use lethal force. It does not matter if the other person is armed or not.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

SIGNYM

Thursday, July 4, 2013 3:49 PM

I tend to settle the question about who's at fault by asking myself: Who approached who? There was, as I recall, a similar incident where some asshole watching a parade came off the curb to approach one of the paraders, and then claimed that he (curbman) was only "defending" himself in the ensuing scuffle.

Seriously???

GZ followed TM, even tho the police told him not to. Imagine- you're walking home at night, and some creep starts following you. You have no idea what's in his mind: Rape? Robbery? Harrassment? Handing you your wallet back, because you dropped it? Now, in my book, following (literally stalking) someone is an act of aggression. If you're following someone with an innocent purpose, especially at night and in a non-public situation (everyone else is indoors) you'll announce yourself, from a distance: Hello? Excuse me? I think you dropped your wallet!

What GZ did and failed to do is the initial crime. It's GZ's fault. Common sense should prevail.

1KIKI

Thursday, July 4, 2013 4:11 PM

I read an interesting discussion about 'jury nullification'. According to the author, it was intended by the founding fathers to be used as the last resort against unjust laws. (I don't know if the argument is historically or legally accurate; I haven't looked it up.) But supposing it's a legally-available tactic, then it should be used here.

NIKI2

Thursday, July 4, 2013 5:19 PM

Quote:
He just said that he thinks it was "god's plan" that Trevon Martin died that night.

Jezus.

Quote:
What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

Amen. He even laughed in court at one remark.

Quote:
I think someone else posted, but my mouse just started scrolling and I missed it. Darn.

Hee, hee, hee;

I really IS the best way to deal with trolls who are here to snark and nothing else.

Quote:
I despair of your laws in the US if this guy gets off with nothing.

I have despaired ever since OJ got off...and it only continues...As someone famous once said, sometimes "the law is an ass".

Quote:
Common sense should prevail.

But it rarely does.

Excuse me. Must

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Thursday, July 4, 2013 6:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
I read an interesting discussion about 'jury nullification'. According to the author, it was intended by the founding fathers to be used as the last resort against unjust laws. (I don't know if the argument is historically or legally accurate; I haven't looked it up.) But supposing it's a legally-available tactic, then it should be used here.

How nullification works is a jury finding someone not guilty even if he factually is, usually for emotional or political grounds. Are you suggesting that Zimmerman is guilty of something, but that the jury should let him walk?

My daughter, much more cynical than me, has told me that the jury will NOT convict Zimmerman.

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, July 4, 2013 6:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
GZ followed TM,

That's that.

An armed man invited himself into the personal space of an innocent doing nothing wrong. This was the first aggressive move that started the whole thing. TM had every right to stand his ground and defend himself against GZ.

Perhaps the self-defense isn't thought to apply to TM since he never prepared himself properly by pitching into the industry that loves Stand Your Ground? Or perhaps there's another reason... ?

OONJERAH

Friday, July 5, 2013 5:10 AM

Zimmerman received 'A' in college course that addressed self-defense

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/03/19270677-zimmerman-received
-a-in-college-course-that-addressed-self-defense?lite

GZ ... "received high marks in a criminal litigation

course that touched on Florida state law regarding when

it’s appropriate to use self-defense and the so- called

“Stand Your Ground” statute."

"Zimmerman had said during an interview with Sean Hannity

of Fox News last summer that he was not familiar with the

Stand Your Ground law prior to the shooting. Jurors were

shown that interview on Tuesday afternoon."

======================---------------

Today I see that GZ can be shameless telling a bald-faced lie.

What I wrote to myself yesterday while thinking that GZ might

not even be held for manslaughter. :

"George Zimmerman trial. ... I don't like the type of person

that GZ is, and I feel strongly that he initiated the contact --

the scuffle -- that ended in TM's death. I really think he is

guilty. But the evidence so far, being what it is, I don't

think it's proof of his guilt. They need to prove intent?

To know what was in his mind? My guess is, GZ intended to

observe TM doing a burglary; failing this, he'd confront TM

& hold him for the police to arrest for trespassing.

Which of them made the 1st contact? We'll never know."

He claimed to be the security watchman for his community.

But -- He wore no uniform or badge. He didn't introduce himself.

Indeed, his own behavior was pretty suspicious.

======================

All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. ~Paul Simon

NIKI2

Friday, July 5, 2013 12:39 PM

I see from the link that that is testimony from the trial. Ergo, Zimmerman is now a PROVEN LIAR. As far as I'm concerned, that makes suspicious anything he testifies that cannot be proven. It's not like that class was years ago and he could have forgotten it.

Given the sum total of his taking a class and knowing about the law, literally worming his way into becoming a pseudo-cop (yet not wearing any identification as such at the time), roaming around following someone at night with a loaded gun--against the advice of the proper authorities--saying it was "God's will" that Martin died, and everything else, I've pretty much made up my mind.

I think given the sum of what we know, arguing that Zimmerman was "innocent" is a stretch, and those who do have a bias.

M52NICKERSON

Friday, July 5, 2013 7:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
An armed man invited himself into the personal space of an innocent doing nothing wrong. This was the first aggressive move that started the whole thing. TM had every right to stand his ground and defend himself against GZ.

Perhaps the self-defense isn't thought to apply to TM since he never prepared himself properly by pitching into the industry that loves Stand Your Ground? Or perhaps there's another reason... ?

Thing is Zimmerman following Martin and asking him, even aggressively, is not against the law. It comes down to who started the physical confrontation. Zimmerman said Martin did. The prosecution will have to show that Zimmerman started the physical confrontation or shot Martin without any physical confrontation.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

MAL4PREZ

Saturday, July 6, 2013 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
An armed man invited himself into the personal space of an innocent doing nothing wrong. This was the first aggressive move that started the whole thing. TM had every right to stand his ground and defend himself against GZ.

Perhaps the self-defense isn't thought to apply to TM since he never prepared himself properly by pitching into the industry that loves Stand Your Ground? Or perhaps there's another reason... ?

Thing is Zimmerman following Martin and asking him, even aggressively, is not against the law. It comes down to who started the physical confrontation. Zimmerman said Martin did. The prosecution will have to show that Zimmerman started the physical confrontation or shot Martin without any physical confrontation.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

I read something else. From the trial:

They called as a witness Alexis Francisco Carter, the military attorney who taught the class. Carter described Zimmerman as one of his better students and said the neighborhood watch volunteer got an "A" in his class.

Under cross-examination, Carter gave two definitions of legal concepts that seemed to bolster the defense's case. He explained that a person can make a self-defense argument if the person has a "reasonable apprehension" of death or great bodily harm.

"It's imminent fear. The fact alone that there isn't an injury doesn't necessarily mean that the person didn't have a reasonable apprehension or fear," Carter said. "The fact that there are injuries might support there was reasonable apprehension and fear."

I'm a teenager, walking alone in the dark, when a grown man approaches me making demands in a belligerent voice. Oh, and the man has a GUN while all I have is a bag of skittles.

So, can I defend myself now?

Or should I just bow down to my "master", which is what many folks seems to think TM was obliged to do?

SIGNYM

Saturday, July 6, 2013 5:53 AM

MAL4- indeed. Thank you.

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, July 6, 2013 8:42 AM

Again.

I stand by my initial assessment - Second Degree Murder.

ETA: Took a while to dig up - original assessment is HERE, about 2/3rds of the way down through the first page.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=51371&p=1

Summary from a later thread for those interested, but not wanting to read the whole mess.

Quote:
*shaking head*

You try to pull a gun on me, TRUST me, you'd wind up in far worse shape than Zimmerman did. How it is that even people who know better chug down a spoon fed narrative so obviously manufactured ?

I stand by my assessment, still. Zimmerman approached an already suspicious Martin, got in his personal space aggressively, and Martin reacted in a hostile fashion, a scuffle ensued and wound up with Martin getting shot - my OPINION of that unknowable moment is that Zimmerman laid hands on him, and Martin reacted by pounding the crap out of him, but backed off once Zimmerman was incapable of aggressing on him, THEN Zimmerman shot him as he was backing away, out of a combination of fear, humiliation and ego involvement.

Which is in fact second degree murder, acceptable on plea to manslaughter.

But the spin on this, the blatancy of what appears to be something between institutional racism, and general ass-covering, also shows up the immense imbalance of power which makes our court systems something of a joke when the prosecutor, police, and court collude on something, whether it be railroading someone innocent, protecting someone guilty, or bending the hell out of the rules to shield their own incompetence - if a public defender started strategically leaking information he'd damn near be lynched for it and WOULD be disbarred, not to mention the various procedural and other violations prosecutors get a free pass for, not the least of which is violation of discovery, which is ALSO a factor here, since the leaked information being held back WAS in fact a violation of the discovery process, you understand.

The thing that's grinding my gears right now is the complicity of the media shovelling a narrative in such a way as to intentionally try to influence a trial, that's obstruction of a sort, but let that go, what REALLY annoys me about it, is this... "On noes, the person being chased by a suspicious, aggressive creep physically beat him when that suspicious, aggressive creep tried to pull a gun on him, oh how horrible..." And I say to that, Fuck You.

When an ARMED, suspicious and threatening individual approaches and confronts you, maybe lays hands on you, you really think it's beyond the pale to respond violently in an effort to prevent them from deploying that armament against you ? Mind you, we do not know whether Martin was aware that Zimmerman was armed, but I highly suspect that reaching for that armament is what set the conflict from push and shove to serious violence - one of my own well known tactics is preventing someone from deploying a weapon in much the same storm-rush fashion, but I don't stop till said weapon is in my possession.

Oh and FYI, tactical/procedural screwup I maybe didn't mention before, in addition to all the other ones... Zimmerman also screwed the pooch by getting in arms reach during that confrontation, probably in an effort to intimidate - there's a REASON I talk to people out there in the darkness from fifteen feet away, folks.

And I remain standing by that original assessment, I know exactly the dynamic, I've thrown fifty and more "zimmermans" out of my damn office via the interview process, believe it....

-F

MAL4PREZ

Saturday, July 6, 2013 3:38 PM

Frem, I remember your post well. It fit everything I knew about the case then, and even more so now.

AURAPTOR

Saturday, July 6, 2013 3:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

But... him saying this actually makes him seem like a really terrible person. And he can't go to jail for that. But I can dislike him a lot.

Maybe he and Casey Anthony can start a club of some kind. A support group for really rotten folks who escaped jail time ? Naww... he'll likely be found guilty.

Will there be riots, by those who think he should be acquitted ? ( yeah, right )

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

BYTEMITE

Saturday, July 6, 2013 4:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

But... him saying this actually makes him seem like a really terrible person. And he can't go to jail for that. But I can dislike him a lot.

Maybe he and Casey Anthony can start a club of some kind. A support group for really rotten folks who escaped jail time ?

Heh.

You raise an interesting point, though - perhaps I'm assuming malice where there's only human folly.

NIKI2

Saturday, July 6, 2013 5:31 PM

It's definitely "human folly" to me. I see this as a guy who went down a path which got him in trouble, not because he's a bad person, but for many, many reasons, at least one of which can be laid at the feet of ALEC and the gun manufacturers' machinations to sell more guns. Some people are more easily led than others, and think they're doing the honorable or heroic thing without realizing they've gone too far until it's too late.

and "yes", to a degree, both Mal4 & Frem.

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 7, 2013 5:37 AM

WE only have his side. But, he was told not to follow and he did so anyway.
The 911 call says it all, "he's up to no good" he says. THIS GUY was out for blood, he picked a fight and shot him dead. How could it be self defense when he put himself in harm's way. End of story.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I understand what's at stake here. I understand how important it is for self-defense laws to stand.

This is what I don't get. Why is Zimmerman's right to self-defense a big deal and Martin's right to self-defense not at issue? Zimmerman was the instigator. The kid was walking home when some nut with a gun confronted him for no reason. Martin had a right to defend HIMself.

Quote:
But this guy. THIS GUY.

I'm right there with you on that.

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 7, 2013 5:53 AM

Try thinking about this: Zimmerman has an automatic weapon on his person. Does he carry his gun with the safety on or off?

Why is this important, you may ask. Ok, let's say Trayvon was the aggressor. They both reach for the gun (damn that sounds familiar) and Zimmerman wins the struggle. In his own words he describes that scenario, which he wins and he shoots.

When, in the life and death struggle over the gun, and in defense of his life, does he have the presence of mind to say "Oh, yeah right, the safety is on. Let me click that button and aim carefully at his heart and pull the trigger."

That's the $65 Million dollar question: when did he click the safety on the gun?
If it's before he confronts Trayvon; murder.
If it's after or during the struggle, Bullshit.

Who brings a gun to a neighborhood watch?

A few years back in NY, an auxiliary policeman was killed because he followed too closely. Auxiliary policeman do not carry weapons, their supposed to call it in.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
You can't send people to jail just for being evil self-righteous bastards. And ultimately, while I question defining cement as a lethal weapon justifying escalation to lethal force, I'm not really sure what the outcome here will be. I don't think Zimmerman is "innocent" in the strictest sense of the term, but I'm also not sure he can be convicted.

Trevon Martin was probably defending himself. And probably Zimmerman was, though under the circumstances I think Zimmerman was in the wrong. We'll never really know exactly what happened that night. What I find intolerable is how unapologetic Zimmerman is about a situation that ended in someone dying that by all accounts appears to have been a tragic misunderstanding.

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 7, 2013 6:12 AM

He never said that he ID's himself as a neighborhood watch person. Had he done that, we would be talking about nothing right now. At no point does he ID himself.

You're right about one thing; in the dark and rainy night, he's a stalker for all he knows. In the reenactment, he never says that Trayvon was looking into houses or trying to jimmy open doors, or trying to break into cars. He says that he's up to no good and that he appears to be on drugs.
Zimmerman must have x-ray goggles on because it's raining and dark.

He says that he was carrying something in his hand. Yeah, he was right about that: a soft drink and a bag of skittles.

In New York there was a case where a group of detectives (3) mistook a wallet for a gun and shot at the "suspect" 50 times. The "suspect" was coming home from work, an African immigrant. Imagine, you're minding your own business and some idiot wants to play "cop" and decides that you're up to no good because you cover your head from the elements, and have the nerve of carrying something in your hand.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I tend to settle the question about who's at fault by asking myself: Who approached who? There was, as I recall, a similar incident where some asshole watching a parade came off the curb to approach one of the paraders, and then claimed that he (curbman) was only "defending" himself in the ensuing scuffle.

Seriously???

GZ followed TM, even tho the police told him not to. Imagine- you're walking home at night, and some creep starts following you. You have no idea what's in his mind: Rape? Robbery? Harrassment? Handing you your wallet back, because you dropped it? Now, in my book, following (literally stalking) someone is an act of aggression. If you're following someone with an innocent purpose, especially at night and in a non-public situation (everyone else is indoors) you'll announce yourself, from a distance: Hello? Excuse me? I think you dropped your wallet!

What GZ did and failed to do is the initial crime. It's GZ's fault. Common sense should prevail.

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 7, 2013 6:39 AM

Zimmerman claims that they both struggled for the gun and that Martin had a hold of his holster and gun and that he wrested it away from him.

Then why wasn't any of Martin's DNA on the holster or gun. Plus, there was no trace of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin finger nails (remember Zimmerman claimed he banged his head against the concrete several times).

So, according to Zimmerman, Martin both touched the gun and him, yet no traces of Zimmerman's DNA on him and no traces of Martin's DNA on gun.
Hmmmmmmmmm!!!

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
An armed man invited himself into the personal space of an innocent doing nothing wrong. This was the first aggressive move that started the whole thing. TM had every right to stand his ground and defend himself against GZ.

Perhaps the self-defense isn't thought to apply to TM since he never prepared himself properly by pitching into the industry that loves Stand Your Ground? Or perhaps there's another reason... ?

Thing is Zimmerman following Martin and asking him, even aggressively, is not against the law. It comes down to who started the physical confrontation. Zimmerman said Martin did. The prosecution will have to show that Zimmerman started the physical confrontation or shot Martin without any physical confrontation.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

OONJERAH

Sunday, July 7, 2013 8:56 AM

Quote ShinyGoodGuy, "THIS GUY was out for blood, he picked a fight and shot him dead.
How could it be self defense when he put himself in harm's way. End of story."

If I say that, because GZ is over 21, he's a mature & responsible

adult who could easily foresee the consequences of his actions,

then yeah, there's no self-defense. He'd say, "Well, yeah! I was

out hunting for Bad Guys. It's my thing."

But because GZ is a childish, unfulfilled dickwad who is unaware

of his own egomania & the fact that He was up to no good that

night ... I can make it self defense based on his self-delusions.

... But I won't.

Quote SGG, "That's the $65 Million dollar question: when did he click the safety on the gun? If it's before he confronts Trayvon; murder. If it's after or during the struggle, Bullshit.

Right. I've read that GZ has a long history of stalking.

Quote SGG, "In the reenactment, he never says that Trayvon was looking into houses or trying to jimmy open doors, or trying to break into cars. He says that he's up to no good and that he appears to be on drugs."

I've read that GZ has a long history of stalking ... people "who were

up to no good." Those people give him a "higher purpose."

Quote SGG, "So, according to Zimmerman, Martin both touched the gun and him, yet no traces of Zimmerman's DNA on him and no traces of Martin's DNA on gun. Hmmmmmmmmm!!!"

Do you mean that TM never touched the gun (while banging GZ's head

upon the pavement)? And that George is lying to us -- again!?

Why am I not surprised?

Thanks, Shiny. You have pointed out flaws in GZ's story that I had not heard.

======================

All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. ~Paul Simon

FREMDFIRMA

Sunday, July 7, 2013 9:19 AM

Lest we forget, Zimmerman has changed his little story at least five times now, including an admission of flat out lying in the official report, so it's not like there's any credibility to be had when he opens his mouth anyways.

His ORIGINAL bullshit story was getting out to check a street sign and being jumped from behind by surprise out of the blue for no reason by Martin, despite the obvious fact that given he was FOLLOWING Martin he kinda had him in sight and in front of him, and that story further came to pieces on the call logs, whereupon Zimmerman changed his tale, and than again when THAT version was proven a lie... and so forth and so on - frankly I feel that he damned well ought to face additional charges for knowingly giving a false police report and possibly for perjury as well, as he's made statements under oath proven to be not only demonstrably false, but also that he knew at the time were false.

No, being a stupid jackass isn't a crime - murdering someone out of wounded pride cause of a situation YOU sent spiraling out of control to feed your goddamn ego, and then lying about it repeatedly.... that *IS*.

-Frem

NIKI2

Sunday, July 7, 2013 12:38 PM

Thank you, Oonj. In many ways, your thinking parallels mine. I'm not keeping up with the trial, just hearing bits and pieces. I'm hoping the defense has questioned the DNA not being on gun or holster issue, that's a biggie. I heard about the safety being off, but forgot about it, and that's another big point. I would say at least...what do they call it, "manslaughter" or something?--if he was walking around with a gun with the safety off in the first place. I'm surprised there isn't a law against that or something, but in Florida, I don't imagine there is.

Your analysis of Zimmerman's mentality is what I have concluded, and what I was referring to in my last post. I don't think he's evil, just immature and irresponsible. But he killed out of that immaturity and irresponsibility, which makes him culpable, IMHO.

OONJERAH

Sunday, July 7, 2013 1:01 PM

If I recall your posts last year, Frem ... didn't you say that

Zimmerman wouldn't be able to keep his mouth shut, and he'd

convict himself by blab?

By now, I guess, there's no way his attorney would let him take

the stand.

In the prosecutor's opening statement, he said "fuck" & "fucker"

several times quoting Zimmerman's remarks to the dispatcher

about the suspicious person who turned out to be Martin.

I also feel that the police, at least some of them, are very

reluctant to give a straight opinion of GZ now 'cause they

refused to arrest him last year until ordered to do so by the

state's attorney.

======================

GEEZER

Sunday, July 7, 2013 3:25 PM

Here you go, guys.

Heck. You know he's guilty. Why bother with a trial?

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NIKI2

Sunday, July 7, 2013 5:06 PM

Asinine, Geezer. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, even if you disagree with it, y'know? We're not on the jury; what information we get, we're allowed to listen to and make up our own minds, whether you like it or not, sorry.

Not to mention the fact that I'd appreciate you pointing out any person on this forum who has called for Zimmerman to be killed for his actions. In other words: Asinine.

GEEZER

Sunday, July 7, 2013 6:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Everyone's entitled to their opinion...

Yep.

Mine is that a lot of folks are jumping to conclusions based on stereotypes and prejudices, and are cherrypicking evidence - and stuff not in evidence - to back up what they've already decided.

Unlike these folks, I have no idea what actually happened, and am willing to accept 'innocent until proven guilty".

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

MAL4PREZ

Sunday, July 7, 2013 10:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

Mine is that a lot of folks are jumping to conclusions based on stereotypes and prejudices

Oh, you mean like someone who would accuse/try/find guilty/sentence to death/carry out the death sentence of an innocent young man in the space of a few minutes despite warnings from the real authorities to NOT do any of that? All for the heinous crime of walking after dark while wearing a hoodie and dark skin?

Geezer, what's really illuminating is how, from day one, you and your con buddies have been cherry picking evidence and making all possible assumptions that excuse the scared little man with the gun. Talk about drawing your own conclusions based on your own stereotypes and prejudices!

As for the noose - no one here has suggested killing Zimmerman. Martin, however, is fully and completely dead. Did you notice? Does it seem like any kind of injustice to you that this young man is dead? I've yet to see you or GZ express remorse about that. Again, very illuminating.

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 7, 2013 11:19 PM

MAL4- again, thank you for that cogent post.

OONJERAH

Monday, July 8, 2013 12:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
MAL4- again, thank you for that cogent post.

Ditto, MAL4!

Martin's death was worse than unnecessary and tragic. There was malice

in it -- the sort of impersonal malice of an angry & very foolish man.

May this become a classic lesson in the need for self-honesty.

If I do hammer on that point, it's probably due to my own years of Out

of Control, foolish, destructiveness. Thru no fault of my own, I did not

cause a tragedy and come before my judges.

Why do I have no sympathy for Zimmerman? He just pisses me off, lying &

inflating his pride when he should show remorse. He's not Teachable.

======================

All I suggest is a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. ~Paul Simon

1KIKI

Monday, July 8, 2013 3:47 AM

"Are you suggesting that Zimmerman is guilty of something, but that the jury should let him walk?"

No, I'm concerned that the jury will be instructed to ONLY consider the letter of the 'stand your ground' law as applied to Zimmerman, and be told to ignore all other context. I'm concerned that the jury is white and Hispanic, with no African-Americans. I see a lot of room for ancillary factors that could lead to a less than just verdict.

Geezer, b4 you start whining like a dog that needs to be let out, I suggest you re-read my post and try to find anywhere where I suggest the jury should ignore the facts and come to a pre-judged verdict.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, July 8, 2013 7:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I despair of your laws in the US if this guy gets off with nothing. If you shot and killed an unarmed person, if even you were defending yourself, you'd get convicted of something - manslaughter most likely. Surely there has to be acknowledge of due force, not any force.

Anyway, trial will determine the outcome, right or wrong.

In Florida as soon as you fear for your life you are allowed to use lethal force. It does not matter if the other person is armed or not.

I've had discussions around this. I do not agree with this law.

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, July 8, 2013 7:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
If I recall your posts last year, Frem ... didn't you say that

Zimmerman wouldn't be able to keep his mouth shut, and he'd

convict himself by blab?

By now, I guess, there's no way his attorney would let him take

the stand.

Depends on whether his attorney really means to defend him, or intends to take a dive on purpose, and there's also what an idiot Zimmerman is, as he's fired at least one attorney rather than listen to his advice about shutting the fuck up - my exact comment was thus:

Quote:
See, from a prosecution angle, all you have to do is get this guy on the stand and start poking his fragile ego, and he'll ruin himself, lickety split - and worse, he will WANT to do it, just as his pride and ego forced that confrontation, demanded that he shoot, it will push him to tell his side of the story and "dress it up" in some logically inconsistent way that will allow a prosecutor with even a peanut for a brain (which is most of em) to completely excoriate his ass. So even if he gets a decent attorney, chances are he will no more listen to them about shutting the fuck up and staying off the stand, than he did the police dispatcher telling him not to pursue.

Really, guys like this, all you have to do is hand them a shovel, you understand ?

And in respect to Geezers stupid bullshit, one could say that's prettymuch what happened to Martin, couldn't they ? and somehow you don't have much a problem with THAT, do you - careful, you're true colors are showing.

I have ever maintained that Zimmerman is MORALLY guilty, and whether or not he is LEGALLY guilty needs be determined by a court, but since we all seem to know damn well our so-called-justice system is nothing but a fucking rubber stamp for the prison profit machine, wailing about it now does much of nothing, and again, I didn't see any fucking bitching when it railroaded kids and minorities, so maybe you should just fly that white sheet as a flag instead of wearing it, right Geeze ?

Me personally, I got an attitude about this cause it demeans MY work and profession, that which puts food on MY table, so yeah verily imma take it a bit more harsh than most would.

-Frem

NIKI2

Monday, July 8, 2013 12:38 PM

Yay Mal4, for me, too! WE are listening to the FACTS provided to us by the media and making up our own mind, and there are plenty of facts to point the way we are leaning. I think we have that right just as much as the jury does.

I not only disagree with that law, I believe it, and those in other states like it, were created explicitly by ALEC for the gun manufacturers in order to sell more guns. There are plenty of facts to back that up as well. And I see Zimmerman as being precisely the consequences of that law, as well as a patsy to it.

I will defend my right to listen to the facts and make up my own mind, and speak my mind. We all have that right, and to pretend anyone here is saying Zimmerman should be hung is illustrative of Geezer's prejudice and mentality, not a single thing more.

OONJERAH

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 6:46 AM

Prosecution taking a dive?

Zimmerman trial: It's about race - By Roxanne Jones, Special to CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/09/opinion/jones-zimmerman-trial/index.html

"I would have told Martin's parents, 'prepare for hell,' " says
Donaldson. "It will not be easy. They will present evidence that
will make your son look like the worst criminal. ... "

======================

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I've had discussions around this. I do not agree with this law.

I don't agree with it either. However because of the law and how it is written I think Zimmerman is going to be acquitted.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NIKI2

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:32 PM

I fear so too. It isn't the first, and won't be the last.

JONGSSTRAW

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:38 PM

Zimmerman's a piece of crap, but I expect he's going to be free by Friday or early next week. Some people are saying they expect riots and buildings set ablaze in large urban areas. In that case I'll just sit back on my couch and watch it all on tv with a large bag of buttered popcorn and some cold beers. Should be great entertainment watching big cities burn down and property destroyed as rioters and looters run amok through the streets. But the best part of course, will be watching the faces of the race-mongering media pundits as they cover the aftermath of the monster they solely created.

SHINYGOODGUY

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:53 PM

Right you are Frem. His "take" on the events leading up to the murder, yes I said it, rang hollow to me from day one, but as testimony after testimony shines a light on his "take" it becomes clearer to me this guy is lying through his teeth. It's like Detective Serino said, he's pathological.

What's telling to me is the Judge's flat out rejection of the defense's motion to dismiss the case. That message was loud and clear: there's enough evidence to try the case. Also telling was her turning her back on defense attorney West as he argued for a particularly positive ruling regarding evidence/testimony submitted on behalf of Zimmerman. She left the court while he was in mid-sentence (truthfully, this guy seems like a total dick. Imagine him posting that degrading tweet revealing his and his family's total disdain for Rachelle Jenteal).

One other lie that some have missed: regarding his "head trauma", the 2 cuts on his noggin. In one of the videos where he's talking to the cops he states that when he went to emergency clinic that he was told he needed stitches, but that he refused treatment. The physician's assistant that treated him testified that he did not need stitches and was given a follow-up date. He did not go to the follow up visit. Head trauma my ass..wait, well he does have serious issues, but going on inside his cranium.

There are just too many lies.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Lest we forget, Zimmerman has changed his little story at least five times now, including an admission of flat out lying in the official report, so it's not like there's any credibility to be had when he opens his mouth anyways.

His ORIGINAL bullshit story was getting out to check a street sign and being jumped from behind by surprise out of the blue for no reason by Martin, despite the obvious fact that given he was FOLLOWING Martin he kinda had him in sight and in front of him, and that story further came to pieces on the call logs, whereupon Zimmerman changed his tale, and than again when THAT version was proven a lie... and so forth and so on - frankly I feel that he damned well ought to face additional charges for knowingly giving a false police report and possibly for perjury as well, as he's made statements under oath proven to be not only demonstrably false, but also that he knew at the time were false.

No, being a stupid jackass isn't a crime - murdering someone out of wounded pride cause of a situation YOU sent spiraling out of control to feed your goddamn ego, and then lying about it repeatedly.... that *IS*.

-Frem

OONJERAH

Wednesday, July 10, 2013 10:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
... be great entertainment watching big cities burn down and property destroyed as rioters and looters run amok through the streets. But the best part of course, will be watching the faces of the race-mongering media pundits as they cover the aftermath of the monster they solely created.

I disagree, JS. It's a situation that Our Racist Society
creates over and over again. The only difference with this
case is, like the Rodney King thing, it got noticed & then
it wouldn't go away.

Our Racist Society could be made to notice more of these
cases. Our hypocritical ass needs to get the message.

======================

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, July 11, 2013 2:17 AM

Leaving aside the casual and obvious racism of our rightwingnuts, the factor of the media is something of concern in that rather than playing the typical sensationalism and biased yellow journalism (in both directions, naturally, to get maximum viewer potential), as of late they've seemed to be almost deliberately feeding the fire - and a careful analysis indicates repeated out of place phrases and strange word choices which really gives off a whiff of having been handed a script from upstairs....

Others of similiar suspicious bent went digging into the backtrail, and it's come to light there seems to be an actual push by the USDOJ towards confrontation, and we're waitin on document evidence since there's apparently a paper trail.

So once again we have our so called protectors deliberately causing chaos and carnage to justify their own existence, and the fifth estate helping them instead of shutting them down - which all in combination is gonna make any verdict, particularly an exoneration, look damn suspicious, for if the USDOJ financed and supported a push towards riots, you'd think for even a second they'd balk at strongarming a judge into pulling the trigger on it ?

Welcome to "justice" in america today - and yeah verily Obama shares the blame, but you rightwingnuts here don't get to point the finger cause you cheered on and maliciously, deliberately, ignorantly, enabled the very means by which he gets to do so, when your dimwitted texan asshat was sliming up the chair, which deprives you of any moral high ground in this.

-Frem

1KIKI

Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:04 AM

It looks to be going the way I feared. There's no consideration for a guy who was minding his own business going home from the store. Somehow, the fact he got stalked by a man with a gun - and had to defend himself with force - was his fault.

I would HOPE the jury is smarter than that. But when they see a black man, I suspect they see evil-doer rather than sympathetic victim. And when they see a really Caucasian-looking Hispanic, I suspect they see a potential victim, or hero, just like them. And not the sole architect of his own fuck-up.

I would like to be proven wrong.

OONJERAH

Thursday, July 11, 2013 6:21 AM

Something that seems odd to me ...
This trial was started and finished in record time.
Faster than a speeding bullet train.

Are lawyers & witnesses just way sharper & faster in FL
than in CA? Did members of the jury have no questions?
Was it all rehearsed?
Did I sleep thru it?

======================

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, July 11, 2013 11:36 AM

The trial was short because there was not a lot of evidence to present. That is a problem for the prosecution. Remember they have to proof that Zimmerman was not acting in self defense. Florida is not like most states. In Florida self defense is not a positive defense, meaning the state has all the burden of proof.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NIKI2

Thursday, July 11, 2013 4:08 PM

Thank you, Shiny. I'm not following the trail, it's not worth it for me because I'm pretty much afraid, it being Florida, that "law" being useful, he'll get off. I've paid attention to what's come out and what I've heard here, and for me there is enough evidence to make up my own mind. So I appreciate what you added about the judge, and there is news that indicates you may be onto something:

Quote:
Zimmerman jury may consider lesser charge of manslaughter: judge

Jurors in the second-degree murder trial of George Zimmerman may also consider convicting him of the lesser charge of manslaughter in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, a judge ruled on Thursday.

In a victory for Florida state prosecutors, Judge Debra Nelson issued her ruling before prosecutors were scheduled to deliver closing arguments Thursday in the case which has captivated and polarized much of the U.S. public, and which generated a wave of street demonstrations last year.

As of Wednesday afternoon, prosecutors had indicated they would seek a second option of aggravated assault. More at http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/11/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUS
BRE96A0O320130711

I had yesterday heard the defense was arguing against any lesser charges--obviously just the one major charge would be difficult, and I don't think it's warranted. It may evidence what you suggested about the judge, Shiny, that she's allowing this lesser charge; personally I hope she allows the aggravated assault. I don't see Zimmerman as evil, just not too smart and with a dangerous mentality, and I think aggravated assault is the most logical verdict they could come up with, or manslaughter if that's not allowed. In my opinion Zimmerman has shown himself to be guilty, but not of deliberate murder, and I don't see sending him away for life as "justice". JMHO.

I think we all understand how it works:

Quote:
The defense preferred an "all or nothing" choice on second-degree murder ... concerned the jury might opt for what lead defense lawyer Mark O'Mara described as a "compromise verdict."

Zimmerman's detractors see him as a racial profiler who considered Martin suspicious because the teenager was black, and blame the defendant for unnecessarily pulling out his Kel Tec 9mm pistol, which was fully loaded with hollow-point bullets.

STORYMARK

Thursday, July 11, 2013 4:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I despair of your laws in the US if this guy gets off with nothing. If you shot and killed an unarmed person, if even you were defending yourself, you'd get convicted of something - manslaughter most likely. Surely there has to be acknowledge of due force, not any force.

Anyway, trial will determine the outcome, right or wrong.

In Florida as soon as you fear for your life you are allowed to use lethal force. It does not matter if the other person is armed or not.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

Such an inanely broad, unfocused law. By that logic, someone with agoraphobia could kill a whole bunch of people at a mall or something, and claim they were scared.

Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NIKI2

Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:44 PM

The whole IDEA is to make it broad. Just keep in mind that it's part of ALEC working in MANY states to create laws that will encourage people to buy guns. That's all the explanation you need to understand the "why" of the law.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, July 11, 2013 6:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Such an inanely broad, unfocused law. By that logic, someone with agoraphobia could kill a whole bunch of people at a mall or something, and claim they were scared.

Pretty close. People have walked away with no charges for shooting unarmed people who did not even touch them; shooting people who did attack them but then were fleeing.

Plus, as I stated before Florida is one of the few states that does not view self defense as a positive defense. If you claim self defense here the state has the burden of disproving that. You have no burden what so ever.

If Zimmerman is found not guilty no one that has followed the case and looked at the laws will be surprised.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, July 11, 2013 6:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
The whole IDEA is to make it broad. Just keep in mind that it's part of ALEC working in MANY states to create laws that will encourage people to buy guns. That's all the explanation you need to understand the "why" of the law.

The problem is less with the Stand Your Ground law than it is with the other laws in the state. Such as people claiming self defence not having to prove that.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

OONJERAH

Thursday, July 11, 2013 9:40 PM

Quote Niki's quote: "pulling out his Kel Tec 9mm pistol, which
was fully loaded with hollow-point bullets."

Pardon my attention deficit, but this is the first I've heard of Hollow-Points!

Hollow-points mean to me: You are hunting big game, you expect to
meet someone armed & dangerous, OR you intend to kill someone.

Trayvon Martin was minding his own business, had done nothing wrong,
no cause to invade his space. He was Innocent that night.

George Zimmerman just became twice as guilty in my eyes; he was
out for blood!

======================
A man's gotta know his own Mind.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, July 12, 2013 12:31 AM

Nah, hollowpoints are actually a rather common load, for two reasons.

1. Generally a pistol is carried for last ditch defense of your person, in hopes of never using it, but should you need to, it's absolutely imperative to do as much damage as possible as rapidly as possible, in order to fully stop even a determined foe - bullets ain't a hollywood magic wand, and a fatally wounded attacker can still take you with them unless you put enough damage into them to render them incapable of this.
(Caveat, despite being less-lethal, a Taser will subvert this by locking them up and dropping them instantly, but suffers from a few flaws such as lack of multiple shots and trickier operation/retention at close range which make them less preferred as carry weapons, though they do have their place)

2. Bullets don't magically stop when they hit a threat, standard ball rounds will often punch right through and keep right on going, becoming a danger to anyone in their path beyond that, and are far more prone to richochet upon striking a hard surface if the target is missed as well, so there is also that to consider.

When I carried that little colt mustang I used Keithpoints with a much lower charge behind them, because in the inner city at most likely ranges of 5-15 feet, and in areas of poorly built low rent housing and high population density, you really don't want to blast through a threat and the next three apartments, or wind up in a tight alley with your own lead bouncing back at you.

So... very good and natural reasons for loading hollowpoint ammunition, as is common with any CCW weapon - the prosecutor was playing it up to pander to a certain ignorance (no offense intended) and draw exactly that knee-jerk reaction, which is a shifty trick as far as I am concerned.

-Frem

OONJERAH

Friday, July 12, 2013 12:45 AM

Thanks, Frem. I'm very relieved.

If you are at close range and shoot me anywhere in the torso
with a hollow-point, what are my chances of survival?

I will try not to go crazy after the sentence tomorrow. :)

======================
A man's gotta know how to kill and walk.

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, July 12, 2013 2:30 AM

The jury won't get the case until late afternoon Friday. But this court is "open" over the weekend so there's a slight chance of a verdict before Monday. I believe they'll need a few days to reach a verdict unless they cannot unanimously agree one way or another.

The prosecution case for second degree murder was very weak and they knew it. So did this judge. The new manslaughter option becomes a real possibilty now because the prosecution did a decent job today with their closing arguments. Tomorrow the defense will go full tilt with the self-defense argument, but it may not be enough to convince the jury to let Zimmerman walk free.

I wish the Orange County prosecutors had done as well as these Seminole County prosecutors have when they charged Casey Anthony with murder. That jury was never given the option of a lesser charge like third degree murder or manslaughter, and because of that, Casey Anthony, a clearly depraved murderer and despicable human being walked free. This week her equally despicable parents had a garage sale and sold off their dead granddaughter's belongings.

As to the Zimmerman thing....before today I would have predicted 90% likelihood of acquittal of the murder charge. Now I think it's more like 50-50 on the manslaughter. Also, maybe a 25% chance of a hung jury.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, July 12, 2013 4:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
Thanks, Frem. I'm very relieved.

If you are at close range and shoot me anywhere in the torso
with a hollow-point, what are my chances of survival?

Actually quite high, relatively speaking - if you are not instantly killed outright, 78-80% on average... which is why the idea of warning shots or shooting them in a non-vital location (not easy to do ever, and impossible in the heat of battle) is patently ridiculous when engaging a threat with a pistol.

There was a case back in 2007 in Detroit where a 7yr old child by the name of Alexis Goggins threw herself in front of her mother as a human shield when an enraged ex-boyfriend emptied a firearm at her, shooting eight times, two of which hit the mother and the child took the remaining six.
Both of them survived.

As I say, firearms are not magic wands, like hollywood would have one believe, a for real close encounter between armed opponents is as nasty and messy a business as there ever was.

-F

SIGNYM

Friday, July 12, 2013 3:04 PM

Quote:
So once again we have our so called protectors deliberately causing chaos and carnage to justify their own existence, and the fifth estate helping them instead of shutting them down

Welcome to Egypt.

SIGNYM

Friday, July 12, 2013 3:12 PM

Quote:
Such an inanely broad, unfocused law. By that logic, someone with agoraphobia could kill a whole bunch of people at a mall or something, and claim they were scared.

That is the whole problem with stand your ground and imperfect defense. GZ started the whole confrontation, and TM could himself easily play the imperfect defense card, had he survived. In fact, TM's defense would have been even better, since GZ approached him with a gun. Now, if anyone could argue being in fear for one's life, it would have been TM. But after the scuffle ensued, so could GZ.

The whole concept of imperfect defense rather than proportionate response provides legal justification to rapidly escalate any situation into violence, in which both parties can claim the same defense. But only the survivor can apply the defense and "win". Therefore, the lesson becomes: Leave no survivors.

SHINYGOODGUY

Friday, July 12, 2013 10:53 PM

Hey Frem,

Adding to your assessment, I don't understand the logic behind Zimmerman's proposed fear for his life, in his feeble attempt to escape justice, when his lies points out he obviously ignored, as you correctly stated, all semblance of common sense.

What I mean is, if he was so afraid why did he leave his car? That is the question put forth by the prosecutor. Makes you wonder if he even had a car.
Several times I watched the tapes and felt, this guy is making it up as he goes. His description of the struggle for the gun, for instance. He literally tacked on, "oh, by the way, he said he was going to kill me." Wouldn't that be the number one thing out of his mouth. No, he calmly stated his claims as a matter of fact; like he was changing a tire or something.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
If I recall your posts last year, Frem ... didn't you say that

Zimmerman wouldn't be able to keep his mouth shut, and he'd

convict himself by blab?

By now, I guess, there's no way his attorney would let him take

the stand.

Depends on whether his attorney really means to defend him, or intends to take a dive on purpose, and there's also what an idiot Zimmerman is, as he's fired at least one attorney rather than listen to his advice about shutting the fuck up - my exact comment was thus:
Quote:
See, from a prosecution angle, all you have to do is get this guy on the stand and start poking his fragile ego, and he'll ruin himself, lickety split - and worse, he will WANT to do it, just as his pride and ego forced that confrontation, demanded that he shoot, it will push him to tell his side of the story and "dress it up" in some logically inconsistent way that will allow a prosecutor with even a peanut for a brain (which is most of em) to completely excoriate his ass. So even if he gets a decent attorney, chances are he will no more listen to them about shutting the fuck up and staying off the stand, than he did the police dispatcher telling him not to pursue.

Really, guys like this, all you have to do is hand them a shovel, you understand ?

And in respect to Geezers stupid bullshit, one could say that's prettymuch what happened to Martin, couldn't they ? and somehow you don't have much a problem with THAT, do you - careful, you're true colors are showing.

I have ever maintained that Zimmerman is MORALLY guilty, and whether or not he is LEGALLY guilty needs be determined by a court, but since we all seem to know damn well our so-called-justice system is nothing but a fucking rubber stamp for the prison profit machine, wailing about it now does much of nothing, and again, I didn't see any fucking bitching when it railroaded kids and minorities, so maybe you should just fly that white sheet as a flag instead of wearing it, right Geeze ?

Me personally, I got an attitude about this cause it demeans MY work and profession, that which puts food on MY table, so yeah verily imma take it a bit more harsh than most would.

-Frem

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:48 AM

Well, what's pissin me off about it is that the whole matter has gone far far beyond anything Zimmerman did or didn't do cause of factors external to the incident.

Firstly, there's the propaganda campaign playing both sides, riling them up and setting them at each others throats by either pandering to latent fear and racism, or alternatively stoking the outrage of folks who have perhaps some right to be, but doing so for nefarious purpose.
This isn't just the usual ratings based controversy bullshit either, this is deliberate participation and manipulation.

Now, I hold the First Amendment a little dearer than most, as I am of the mind yes you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, but should you do so you are then responsible for the CONSEQUENCES which result from that action - and while unlikely, I think the major media outlets should be held accountable for their part in trying to forment a situation which could spark civil unrest.

The rest of it is that there's been so much bullshit - as I pointed out initially, and was proven out on later, Zimm was a cop-wannabe and ass-kisser, and since cops love to have their fucking egos stroked, they tried to cover this shit up for him.
Most likely that was the officers who's asses he was kissin, and perhaps without the knowledge or participation of their superiors, but it is what it is, an attempted coverup, which makes THEM additionally culpable, but since of course they're treated as little tin gods immune to accountability that lets them off the hook and encourages both society and a jury to take it all out on Zimmerman, which isn't really fair.

Then there's the homeowners org letting a nutter like that self-appoint as security despite having an obvious agenda and blatant mental issues, which are SO obvious as to be undeniable, as many of you have noticed - which also begs the question of who the hell cleared this guy for CCW, when he is obviously a potential danger with one ?
But no, it ALL falls on Zimm, even shit that ain't his fault, cause everyone else slithers away from being held properly accountable.

On the OTHER side, is the USDOJ financing some of the protest marches out of their CRS fund during the period from Mar25-Apr12 2012, while one could look at it as providing a release vent and putting it under official sanction to avoid trouble starting, a more cynical eye would perhaps wonder if whipping up a frenzy and then stepping aside when things go to hell might be yet another manufactured "incident" to justify their own existence.
(Documentation now available via Judicial Watch)

Plus there is prosecutorial misconduct, not least of which is a little sleight of hand with discovery, and shifty tricks like the one I broke down regarding hollowpoint loads.

Much as it disgusts me, this compromises any concept of a Fair Trial, and begrudgingly with gritted teeth I admin that *SHOULD* mean a walkaway... but of course our so called Justice system is so rigged up this way that it's hard to feel sympathy for a guy like Zimm when folks are dropshot 24-7 for far less, and often blatantly innocent - where was this sympathy when those two PA Judges were ruining kids lives like a goddamn assembly line, you know ?

What SHOULD happen now, in a better world than ours...
Zimm cops an Alford Plea(1) by virtue of his belief that he was acting properly under the law, and the court takes this into account and convicts him of manslaughter with minimal or suspended sentence - because factually the purpose of all this is to make sure his dumb ass pays for the crime and ensure he is unlikely to do it again.
Well pulling his CCW and smacking a criminal charge on his background blacklists him from any position where that would be likely, and frankly I think the fact that he's been made a whipping boy and bit of a laughingstock by all this, along with the punitive financial burden of defending himself, is a pretty solid punishment right there given that the inevitable civil suit against him by Mar

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, July 13, 2013 3:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The whole concept of imperfect defense rather than proportionate response provides legal justification to rapidly escalate any situation into violence, in which both parties can claim the same defense. But only the survivor can apply the defense and "win". Therefore, the lesson becomes: Leave no survivors.

Sadly, this has been true for some time and part of the REASON it became so was homeowners in obvious cases of self defense shooting armed intruders in their own home being abused and charged for it, which was a good part of the inspiration and impulse behind those laws being created and passed, which eventually lead to the unofficial maxim within the armed community - "Leave only one story - YOURS." by virtue of necessity rather than desire.
(Excepting the nutters, which exist in any collective)

I concur that the situation is horrible, but leaving out the needless and often malicious and vengeful prosecution of cases that were blatantly and obviously self-defense which lead to these laws being supported enough to pass is not telling the whole story.

I do have a proposed solution to this, and that is a rotating Grand Jury of properly accredited firearms experts, before which ANY case involving a self-defense shoot is brought, and actually giving them latitude enough to make a real decision instead of hemming them in with rules and then handing them cherry picked or outright false (because oddly enough, it's legal for a prosecutor to BLATANTLY LIE to a Grand Jury, without penalty) information to turn them into a rubber stamp factory.

-Frem

PIRATENEWS

Saturday, July 13, 2013 6:10 AM

Emotions Run High After MSNBC "Mistakenly" Shows Photo of Trayvon Martin's Dead Body www.christianpost.com/news/emotions-run-high-after-msnbc-mistakenly-sh
ows-photo-of-trayvon-martins-dead-body-99978/ http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-msnbc-is-trayvon-martins-dead-body-
753370712

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

The libtard commies think this photo of one dead burgler is gonna get the blackies to kill da whities for da jooies. I doubt blacks r dat stoopid, since they dont like black burglers robbing blacks either and Zimmerman is a black mexican joo.

In Firefly the Alliance merged the US flag with the flag of Communist China

OONJERAH

Saturday, July 13, 2013 9:53 AM

Trashing Trayvon
Zimmerman's defense tries to blame the victim for his own death

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trashing-trayvon-article-1.1397657

<:==================================:>

NIKI2

Saturday, July 13, 2013 1:32 PM

Quote:
Well, what's pissin me off about it is that the whole matter has gone far far beyond anything Zimmerman did or didn't do cause of factors external to the incident.

I pretty much agree with most of what Frem wrote in that post. One of the things I disagree with is that Zimmerman has any "mental problems"; I think it's quite easy to understand him, his motivations and his actions from all we've heard without it being in any way a "mental" problem. The cop-wannabe part is pretty obvious from so many things, and his attitude is easy to understand. One doesn't have to be mentally ill to be a fool and do something stupid.

I'll leave Frem's DOJ assumptions alone, I have my own opinions on where that comes from, but beyond that, I think he's got a pretty cogent analysis of why this has gone the way it has from the very beginning.

OONJERAH

Saturday, July 13, 2013 9:25 PM

Zimmerman's father bein' a judge would not
be a factor external to the incident?

Mental? When a person is 28, has the emotional
maturity of an 8-year-old but less objectivity,
and is wholey unteachable in regards to his own
foolishness, to me, that's a major mental problem.
Learning disorder? Ego illness?

Seems to be pretty common, tho.

PIRATENEWS

Saturday, July 13, 2013 11:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Zimmerman's a piece of crap, but I expect he's going to be free by Friday or early next week. Some people are saying they expect riots and buildings set ablaze in large urban areas. In that case I'll just sit back on my couch and watch it all on tv with a large bag of buttered popcorn and some cold beers. Should be great entertainment watching big cities burn down and property destroyed as rioters and looters run amok through the streets. But the best part of course, will be watching the faces of the race-mongering media pundits as they cover the aftermath of the monster they solely created.

If there are any large riots, it will be due to Obama ordering the cops to stand down and hide in their bunkers, in cities that are Gun Ban Victim Disarmament Kill Zones like Chicago, NYC and DC. Despite a new state law allowing concealed carry, the Democraps in Illinois are refusing to allow anyone to obey that law for another 6 months, to increase the Death Count for maximum psyop FX.

In Firefly the Alliance merged the US flag with the flag of Communist China

Jury says NOT guilty BTW...

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 14, 2013 3:45 AM

NOT GUILTY, no surprise there.

Casey Anthony, and now George Zimmerman.

Florida.........................arm yourselves, you're gonna get shot anyway.

SGG

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 14, 2013 3:48 AM

No riots, but I expect some people will begin to shoot first, worry about it later.

The South has spoken!!!

Only in America!

SGG

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 14, 2013 4:00 AM

The prosecution pretty much bungled this trial almost from the get go. But, given that, the evidence, Zimmerman's own words and that 911 call said it all.

One thing that was pointed out on MSNBC that made perfect sense regarding the jury, they live there and would have to put up with the pressure of living with their families among the gun "enthusiasts" in the region. It wasn't media pressure, nor pressure from the trial, it was purely along racial lines.

They acquitted one of their own, simple as that.

A black kid, an unarmed black kid, in their eyes, is a threat to the community at large. There will be more of these type of cases, copycat cases, mark my words.

It is sad really, no one knows what this means to this country.

sgg

OONJERAH

Sunday, July 14, 2013 4:01 AM

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for
-firing-warning-shots/

What color is Fla. mom?

======================
A man's gotta know his rights in the local jurisdiction.
Your mileage may vary

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 14, 2013 4:04 AM

Retarded!

Quote:
Originally posted by PIRATENEWS:
Emotions Run High After MSNBC "Mistakenly" Shows Photo of Trayvon Martin's Dead Body www.christianpost.com/news/emotions-run-high-after-msnbc-mistakenly-sh
ows-photo-of-trayvon-martins-dead-body-99978/ http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-msnbc-is-trayvon-martins-dead-body-
753370712

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

The libtard commies think this photo of one dead burgler is gonna get the blackies to kill da whities for da jooies. I doubt blacks r dat stoopid, since they dont like black burglers robbing blacks either and Zimmerman is a black mexican joo.

In Firefly the Alliance merged the US flag with the flag of Communist China

SHINYGOODGUY

Sunday, July 14, 2013 4:20 AM

Frem, your reasoning is spot on. I get every word my friend.

In America, justice is not blind. I have personally been a victim.
A man can be arrested just on someone's say so (charges were dropped, my lovely ex). The cops lied and I went peacefully. Spent a night in the holding pen.

In this case, prosecutors made some rather questionable and glaring mistakes. DeLiriondo was terrible in closing, what a maroon!

I dare say that they fumbled the ball almost on purpose, or took a dive.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Well, what's pissin me off about it is that the whole matter has gone far far beyond anything Zimmerman did or didn't do cause of factors external to the incident.

Firstly, there's the propaganda campaign playing both sides, riling them up and setting them at each others throats by either pandering to latent fear and racism, or alternatively stoking the outrage of folks who have perhaps some right to be, but doing so for nefarious purpose.
This isn't just the usual ratings based controversy bullshit either, this is deliberate participation and manipulation.

Now, I hold the First Amendment a little dearer than most, as I am of the mind yes you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, but should you do so you are then responsible for the CONSEQUENCES which result from that action - and while unlikely, I think the major media outlets should be held accountable for their part in trying to forment a situation which could spark civil unrest.

The rest of it is that there's been so much bullshit - as I pointed out initially, and was proven out on later, Zimm was a cop-wannabe and ass-kisser, and since cops love to have their fucking egos stroked, they tried to cover this shit up for him.
Most likely that was the officers who's asses he was kissin, and perhaps without the knowledge or participation of their superiors, but it is what it is, an attempted coverup, which makes THEM additionally culpable, but since of course they're treated as little tin gods immune to accountability that lets them off the hook and encourages both society and a jury to take it all out on Zimmerman, which isn't really fair.

Then there's the homeowners org letting a nutter like that self-appoint as security despite having an obvious agenda and blatant mental issues, which are SO obvious as to be undeniable, as many of you have noticed - which also begs the question of who the hell cleared this guy for CCW, when he is obviously a potential danger with one ?
But no, it ALL falls on Zimm, even shit that ain't his fault, cause everyone else slithers away from being held properly accountable.

On the OTHER side, is the USDOJ financing some of the protest marches out of their CRS fund during the period from Mar25-Apr12 2012, while one could look at it as providing a release vent and putting it under official sanction to avoid trouble starting, a more cynical eye would perhaps wonder if whipping up a frenzy and then stepping aside when things go to hell might be yet another manufactured "incident" to justify their own existence.
(Documentation now available via Judicial Watch)

Plus there is prosecutorial misconduct, not least of which is a little sleight of hand with discovery, and shifty tricks like the one I broke down regarding hollowpoint loads.

Much as it disgusts me, this compromises any concept of a Fair Trial, and begrudgingly with gritted teeth I admin that *SHOULD* mean a walkaway... but of course our so called Justice system is so rigged up this way that it's hard to feel sympathy for a guy like Zimm when folks are dropshot 24-7 for far less, and often blatantly innocent - where was this sympathy when those two PA Judges were ruining kids lives like a goddamn assembly line, you know ?

What SHOULD happen now, in a better world than ours...
Zimm cops an Alford Plea(1) by virtue of his belief that he was acting properly under the law, and the court takes this into account and convicts him of manslaughter with minim

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

OONJERAH

Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:50 AM

What's next for GZ?

Not Guilty - He will get to keep his gun permit & return to his life
as a security person.

... Hmmm. Maybe he'll become Head of Security for some big company.

Maybe even a cop. :)

<: =========================================== :>

NIKI2

Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:34 PM

Sickens me, Oonj...our legal system has totally gone to shit.

Somehow I don't think he'll be hired as a security guard by anyone ever again. Or at least, I guess I sincerely HOPE not!!

PHOENIXROSE

Sunday, July 14, 2013 7:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for
-firing-warning-shots/

What color is Fla. mom?

Well, I would like to point out the problem with "stand your ground" and "make my day" laws that I think applies. The problem is that, with testimony being one of the most important parts of a trial, if the party getting shot at is alive to testify, it doesn't turn into an automatic acquittal. If there's only one story to judge by, however, it more often than not won't be an issue.
Example: I live in Colorado, which has something referred to as a "make my day" law. The law states that if someone has forced their way into your home, you can respond lethally. Okay, so for the purposes of this, say that, I don't know, one of my neighbors has shot a guy who broke into his house. If the guy dies and my neighbor tells the police and the court that he was an intruder, he doesn't face any kind of murder charge at all. But say the guy lives, and claims that he's a salesman or an activist and was let into the house freely. Well, then there's conflicting stories. There's charges for attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon and a trial. (Don't forget that there was resistance against even arresting Zimmerman. Less coverage and public outrage and this case would never have gone to trial.)
This sort of thing encourages people against firing warning shots, because warning shots go into that gray area of self-defense laws, because there's more than one story. If you're claiming self-defense and your attacker claims they were just talking/arguing with you and you were the aggressor, it's trickier for the courts to decide you're telling the truth. But if you're the only witness and claim it was self-defense? Well, we can see the results.
I bet that if Trayvon Martin had lived, and been able to testify on his own behalf, and say that he had been attacked, this trial would have gone a lot longer, and probably would have different results.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

JONGSSTRAW

Monday, July 15, 2013 1:14 AM

Quote:

I bet that if Trayvon Martin had lived, and been able to testify on his own behalf, and say that he had been attacked, this trial would have gone a lot longer, and probably would have different results.

One difference would have been that Zimmerman wouldn't have beed charged with murder and manslaughter under that hypothetical. A more relevant to the case hypothetical is how many more punches to the face and head slams to the ground could Zimmerman have endured before he was dead? Looks like the jury came to terms with that question.

Another interesting hypothetical is what if the Hispanic man involved in this shooting had been named Jorge Zapata or Juan Rodriguez instead of George Zimmerman? Would the shooting incident ever have been more than a 2 minute story on the local evening news?

PHOENIXROSE

Monday, July 15, 2013 5:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:

I bet that if Trayvon Martin had lived, and been able to testify on his own behalf, and say that he had been attacked, this trial would have gone a lot longer, and probably would have different results.

One difference would have been that Zimmerman wouldn't have beed charged with murder and manslaughter under that hypothetical.

*sigh* Duh. But, as we can learn from reading about the woman in Florida who was charged with attempted murder for discharging her weapon and not killing or hitting anyone (which is, in part, what I was trying to draw attention to) apparently the minimum sentence for that is still twenty years.
Thank you for taking my point and turning it into something else. I just can't get enough of that. [insert sarcmark here]

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NIKI2

Monday, July 15, 2013 5:44 PM

But Rose, it's JONG; the way he is now, did you expect something cogent?

Given we only have Zimmerman's WORD that he took more than one of anything (I seem to recall an expert saying the wounds to the back of his head didn't match his testimony), even his "hypothetical" is meaningless.

Give it up; we know how those joying in this verdict think; trying to communicate with them is just banging one's head against the wall.

PHOENIXROSE

Monday, July 15, 2013 6:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
But Rose, it's JONG; the way he is now, did you expect something cogent?

Not really. There's a reason I post here about once a month instead of daily, now. I was, however, thinking that someone might have some response that actually addressed what I have pointed out about the way trials work and the laws encouraging murder and discouraging warnings or wounds.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

JONGSSTRAW

Monday, July 15, 2013 6:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:

Thank you for taking my point and turning it into something else. I just can't get enough of that. [insert sarcmark here]

Remembering the pics you've posted here, I'll bet you can't get enough donuts either. [not sarcasm]

OONJERAH

Monday, July 15, 2013 8:26 PM

Viewpoint: Was Zimmerman Telling the Truth? by John McWhorter

http://ideas.time.com/2013/07/15/viewpoint-was-zimmerman-telling-the-t
ruth/?xid=gonewsedit&google_editors_picks=true

"But we still will never know the truth about this key question: who
instigated the scuffle that led Zimmerman to pull out his gun? ...
But I think that Zimmerman almost certainly lied about this. I think
it for three reasons."

Oonj: I think it, because GZ's remarks to the dispatcher show that
he can see someone calmly walking down the sidewalk & decide that
someone is up to no good.

Was it GZ's sharp awareness of body language that let him spot TM's
"bad intentions"? Or did he just need a stalking fix?

======================================
Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events,
small minds discuss people.

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, July 15, 2013 8:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
Not really. There's a reason I post here about once a month instead of daily, now. I was, however, thinking that someone might have some response that actually addressed what I have pointed out about the way trials work and the laws encouraging murder and discouraging warnings or wounds.

I did actually address that, particularly the latter, but it kinda got lost in the flood - basically it boils down to the reason for these laws being a backlash against a long slew of malicious prosecutions of even blatantly obvious cases of self defense because "OMG, Guns are Eeeevvvvilll!!!!", which is admittedly an asinine way to go about it, given the proper solution to that problem would be not maliciously prosecuting folks for having dared defend themselves (costing avg of $30,000.00 even on a case drop/aquittal) so this is also a matter of the anti-gun people "shooting themself in the foot" (pun intended) by forcing the hand of the law to counter such prosecutions.

Me, I'd end-run the whole mess by having a standing Grand Jury of credentialed firearms and defense instructors before which any and every case of defensive handgun use is passed, with additional latitude to doublecheck the facts of the case, given that it's completely legal for a prosecutor to blatantly lie to a Grand Jury, and thus they'd need the ability to determine the facts for themselves before chosing to no-bill or process the case.

I do try to take a reasonable stand, even when the demands are so often unreasonable and the amount of crass goalpost-moving offensive, and have often offered solutions which meet every ADMITTED intention of both sides only to have them rejected out of hand if not ignored, so I feel your frustration, but it does enrage me that so few seem to actually realize the longterm consequences of their demands upon a system which is not the proper venue to address the root problem.

-Frem

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, July 15, 2013 9:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:

*sigh* Duh. But, as we can learn from reading about the woman in Florida who was charged with attempted murder for discharging her weapon and not killing or hitting anyone (which is, in part, what I was trying to draw attention to) apparently the minimum sentence for that is still twenty years.

I keep reading about this case. I remember we discussed it in another thread. I honestly don't understand the laws in these cases. Why would you get 20 years for self defensive action where no one had died, and aquitted when someone did. If your theory is correct, I imagine there will be more shoot to kill incidents rather than warnings.

KPO

Friday, July 19, 2013 10:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:

Thank you for taking my point and turning it into something else. I just can't get enough of that. [insert sarcmark here]

Remembering the pics you've posted here, I'll bet you can't get enough donuts either. [not sarcasm]

That was needlessly bitchy.

It's not personal. It's just war.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, July 20, 2013 2:14 AM

Can we just arm everyone (who wants to be) already? No, really. No criminal record = armed. Then we can wild west it and forget about the corrupt legal system. I personally want a mini-gun. In case of kaiju, of course.

JONGSSTRAW

Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:28 AM

All You Need Is Guns - Lenin/McCarthy

Guns, guns, guns ... guns, guns, guns ... guns, guns, guns

There's nothing you can view that can't be shot.
Nothing you can sing that can't be shot.
Nothing you can shoot but you can learn how to pull the trigger.
It's easy.

There's nothing you can make that can't be shot.
No one you can save that can't be shot.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you at the range.
It's easy.

All you need is guns, everybody
All you need is guns
All you need is guns, guns
Guns are all you need.