Why the hell not. Everyone else is.

It means the left wing automatically assumes Zim was at fault b/c he's white and was out looking to kill a black kid. They all KNOW it for a FACT too....just look at one of the 15 "Poor angel Trayvon!!" threads on this board.

It means maybe Zim really did go to say "Sup buddy, what are you doing??" and got attacked by some kid with a chip on his shoulder...maybe he didn't.

But we all know that's a lie, Trayvon was a perfect person and no 17 y/o boy is capable of doing anything but being a perfect person.....the left knows that for a fact right??

Innocent until proven guilty isn't good enough for democrats and those further left anymore. Justice based on public opinion is their flavor now....:rolleyes:


So the trick to stand your ground laws is to make sure you kill the person you're aiming at in order to keep them from telling their side of the story, right?

But seriously, what kind of wholly immoral person would choose to shoot a 17 year old when they had the option to exit the situation?
 
So the trick to stand your ground laws is to make sure you kill the person you're aiming at in order to keep them from telling their side of the story, right?

But seriously, what kind of wholly immoral person would choose to shoot a 17 year old when they had the option to exit the situation?

Hey, you're unfluffing the thread! :mad:
 
I dunno. I try to make a funny, and people get all mad and call me a Democrat buttcheek and stuff.

I don't understand these current events threads. :confused:

I'm waiting for the "socialist tit" myself.


I'd suck on that.

Laurel's Democrat buttcheeks and Wings' socialist tits are way more welcome and damn more enjoyable than these Republican conservative limp dicks.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9n9zyxd9h1r6izdd.gif

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7awqQuQl1qbkepco1_r1_500.gif
 
I'm waiting for the "socialist tit" myself.


I'd suck on that.

Socialism would be an upgrade.....most socialist believe a person is innocent unless it can be proven they committed a crime.

This just isn't so with American democrats and those sitting to their left.

Laurel's Democrat buttcheeks and Wings' socialist tits are way more welcome and damn more enjoyable than these Republican conservative limp dicks.

I agree.....but in case that was a shot at me, I'm not a fucking REPO or a conservative. And pointing out left wing hypocrisy and downright stupidity over a subject doesn't make me part of the RWCJ club.

Don't hurt yourself....I know you think anyone who doesn't jump on the MSN bandwagon is a card carrying GOP member, but that's simply not reality.
 
Last edited:
What I'm saying is, if Martin had been a choirboy up until that night or if he was a crack dealing gangbanger is irrelevant. He was walking home from the store minding his lawful business, but looked like the "fucking punk" in Zimmerman's mental space.

We can speculate til the seas dry whether that was a poor call from Zimmerman or whether he handled himself in a professional manner as to difuse the situation, or what Martin's motivation was for not heading straight home, and exactly who threw what punch when that made them end upwhere they were.

At that point, I agree that a shot was justified and that Zimmarman should not be convicted for it. But Martin's background is irrelevant to all this.
 
But Martin's background is irrelevant to all this.

I totally agree.....and to be fair so is Zim's. IDC if he was a KKK head boss.

The state cannot put someone away before PROVING (which contrary to current popular left wing belief means something more substantial than public fucking opinion) beyond a reasonable doubt that the cock sucker committed a crime.
 
So the trick to stand your ground laws is to make sure you kill the person you're aiming at in order to keep them from telling their side of the story, right?

But seriously, what kind of wholly immoral person would choose to shoot a 17 year old when they had the option to exit the situation?

But he did not have that option. The only other option he had was to lie on his back and get his head bashed in. TM did have an option, and he chose not to take it. He could have simply finished walking home and gotten out of the rain.
 
Be careful here. "Marxist Perineum" is uncomfortably close to "Fascist Asshole".

True. You'd have to be careful to hold your position. Once false sneeze...

I like "fascist asshole," though. Say it fast enough and it sounds like the name of a fancy pasta.
 
True. You'd have to be careful to hold your position. Once false sneeze...

I like "fascist asshole," though. Say it fast enough and it sounds like the name of a fancy pasta.

Oooooh, there was an article a few months back...I think it was in Mental Floss magazine...that had a 20 questions quiz "Italian insult or Italian pasta"? I will go see if I can link it here....... :D
 
Welcome to what some of us have had to deal with since jump street.
I had to Google that to realize you weren't talking about the tv series.

Does that make me white, or just non american? :D
 
I agree.....but in case that was a shot at me, I'm not a fucking REPO or a conservative. And pointing out left wing hypocrisy and downright stupidity over a subject doesn't make me part of the RWCJ club.

No shots. I've already known for a loooooooong time that you keep telling everyone that you are a part of that "fashionable mix of both and neither at the same time."

Don't hurt yourself....I know you think anyone who doesn't jump on the MSN bandwagon is a card carrying GOP member, but that's simply not reality.

I could give a fuck about an MSN bandwagon. I'm about verity, guy. And what the system does for the system's sake ain't verity.
 
Oooooh, there was an article a few months back...I think it was in Mental Floss magazine...that had a 20 questions quiz "Italian insult or Italian pasta"? I will go see if I can link it here....... :D

My wife is Italian (Sicilian) and her father keeps making this lame ass joke, "what are you Alfredo?"

Ugh.
 
The implication of posts like hers, going all the way back to Ish's first post in the never-ending Trayvon thread, is that Zimmerman had some sort of Jedi power which allowed him to know that Martin wasn't one of those "good blacks" like Allan West or Elbert Guillory.

You can't have it both ways: accusing people of being indifferent to gang-related shootings in Chicago where so many of the victims have criminal backgrounds, and then say that Zimmerman killing someone was no big deal because Martin smoked pot at some point in his life.

The RWCJ here has been trying to have it both ways here for years. That's why AJ can insist on no rules for him, but government control of womens' uteruses.

The Derpy Dozen (Ishmael, VatAss, Dazzle, JAMESBRACIST, koalabear, Vettebigot, braman69, miles, Dazzle1, AJ, Landslider and Jeninflorida) have treated the Zimmerman affair as one big Walter Mitty fantasy come true - someone actually had the guts to confront a black guy. They've been living vicariously through Zimmerman and view his acquittal as justification for their smug racial soooperiority.
 
The Derpy Dozen (Ishmael, VatAss, Dazzle, JAMESBRACIST, koalabear, Vettebigot, braman69, miles, Dazzle1, AJ, Landslider and Jeninflorida) have treated the Zimmerman affair as one big Walter Mitty fantasy come true - someone actually had the guts to confront a black guy. They've been living vicariously through Zimmerman and view his acquittal as justification for their smug racial soooperiority.

This is so fucking stupid...
 
So the trick to stand your ground laws is to make sure you kill the person you're aiming at in order to keep them from telling their side of the story, right?

Not necessarily ....sometimes the forensic evidence backs up the dead guy.

Some times it's an open shut case, like a home invasion/robbery. And not one wet fart is given grandma wasted the individual who kicked her door in and tried to rob her.

But without clear cut circumstances or irrefutable evidence one way or another, it's alive persons word v. dead persons word....and dead people cant testify.

How do you prosecute and subsequently incarcerate someone you can't prove committed a crime??

You can't....that's called a witch hunt.

But seriously, what kind of wholly immoral person would choose to shoot a 17 year old when they had the option to exit the situation?

The person who is being attacked/violated by said 17 y/o....

And depending on which state you live in, only an attack on person justifies it and in other states you have the right to protect your property as well.
 
So the trick to stand your ground laws is to make sure you kill the person you're aiming at in order to keep them from telling their side of the story, right?

But seriously, what kind of wholly immoral person would choose to shoot a 17 year old when they had the option to exit the situation?
I guess Zimmerman thought walking away and saving a life wasn't the macho thing to do.
 
Back
Top