Another Stellar Day for Gun Owners

I feel great. I have a gun, and there's a lot of suspicious people in the neighborhood to report to the police. I'll make sure those thieving bastards don't get away. You can count on that.

 

I encourage you to call the police, but if anyone confronts you, attacks you, beats you and threatens to take your life, please do what you feel is necessary to defend yourself.

 

The cops in my area are in on it. I don't trust them to do their job. Good thing the law protects me from them too.

 

The jury found that there was a reasonable doubt as to Zimmerman's guilt in regards to the charges for which he was being tried, and nothing more. Trumpeting that the dead young man was "aggressive," and that "Zimmerman has been proven in a court of law to have acted in self-defense," is bullshit and spin. Party on!

 

Since when does a trial guarantee that justice has been served? For one thing, the jury has not seen all of the evidence. Juries never do. The jury saw only that evidence that was allowed in court. And nothing has been proven here beyond the fact that Sheriff George shot and killed Trayvon Martin in the course of some sort of scuffle. A jury has simply chosen to buy into a certain narrative regarding the nature of that fight. All that's happened is that the legal forms have been met. The questions of guilt, innocence, and justice are still open and barring the truth at some point emerging from the lips of George Zimmerman they always will be.

 

Let's see. A liberal gets released because of a mistake the justice system makes. Therefore, he is innocent even after confessing. Then the jury goes with the conservative view and acquits the man but he is guilty because the jury did not hear all the evidence. Make any sense to you?

 

A jury only ever finds beyond a reasonable doubt in any case. What's so different about this one? And, yes, Martin WAS aggressive (at least based on witness accounts). If the jury found that Zimmerman had not acted in self-defense, they would have have concluded differently. Or do you disagree with the jury's verdict?

 

Justice is served when the accused is tried by judge and jury.

Well no shit, Sherlock. Did you want evidence presented that WASN'T allowed in court?

Wrong. What HAS been proven is that Zimmerman is not guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter.

What exactly do you want from the criminal justice system? Do you want anything beyond what "legal forms have been met"?

Hardly. The question of guilt is no longer even a question. He is not guilty. Innocence was never anything the court even considered. The question of justice is a moot point since all the requirements of justice have been met. The state presented its case and the defense presented theirs. The trial was not a mistrial. The jury deliberated based on the evidence and concluded by finding him not guilty. What more do you want?

 

He wants justice to be what he says it is. And Obama and company the same. That is why the DOJ is investigating the case for further prosecution. But they are not prejudiced or racist, are they?

 

I was contrasting your bullshit with the reality of the result of the trial. Do try to keep up.

Yeah, eyewitness accounts are so reliable.

They found that there was a reasonable doubt regarding his guilt, which is all that is required for a "not guilty" verdict. I imagine that the issue of self-defense had bearing on that finding, but the jury did not render a verdict in regard to whether Zimmerman acted self-defense or not. Any opinion I might express regarding the validity of their verdict would be me talking out of my ass, because I wasn't there to hear all the testimony. Of course other people are more than willing to show off the stuff they've extracted from their rectums.

 

The reality of the trial is that he was found not guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter. Do you think he would have been found guilty had the jury thought that he acted with malice? The case has proven that he acted in defense of his life.

Sometimes, that's the only thing available to prove that a person is not guilty.

In this instance, it might be more pleasurable to hear from your ass instead of your mouth.

 

I'd actually like to hear what he considers justice to be. The man received a fair trial. What more justice does he want?

 

He wants it his way. Period! The liberals want everyone to run by their rules regardless of the facts. The facts were presented and it does not agree with their mantra. So teh jury was wrong. Isn't that perfectly logical to you - NOT!

 

I think you've pegged them perfectly.

 

Martin likely would have been acquitted too. There was reasonable doubt as to whether or not the seventeen year-old was justified in attacking the "creepy-assed cracker" who was stalking him.

Since the "creep-assed cracker" who was stalking him by his own admission put a bullet into his heart, he can't be brought to trial for the alleged attack though.

Too bad, the trial would have been interesting. The funeral was just sad.

 

As I mentioned in the other thread, the police were pressured into filing charges before they could fully investigate the shooting & the prosecutor was pressured into overcharging Zimmerman....pressured by complete idiots similar to a couple of members, here, who already had Zimmerman convicted & strapped into an electric chair before they looked at a single shred of evidence.

 

Then it's not all the evidence, is it. Or does the other evidence magically vaporize once the court has disallowed it? Does a little bell tinkle in the background when this happens?

Weren't you the one who was crowing the Sheriff George was "proven innocent", You're backtracking on that one.

And I would like some information on Florida's regulations regarding hunting Black people. Is there a season or can you hunt them all year round? Is legally owning a gun all the license you need do those nasty money grubbing bureaucrats in Tallahassee make you spend extra for a tag? What's the limit? Once you've tracked one down and shot it can you keep the body as a trophy if you want or do you have to give it up to the family.
I suppose I could google this but I'd assume it's something you guys would be familiar with.

 

Total & utter nonsense! This is precisely the type of hyperbole that incites the riots & other violence.

 

In most cases, the investigating agency keeps it for a while in their property room. But, you need to remember that if an item isn't allowed into evidence, it never actually becomes "evidence" to the court. It's simply property, not evidence.

I said Zimmerman was proven "not guilty". There is a difference.

Now, that's just stupid.

Regardless, the man had a fair trial. I'll ask my question to you again, "What more justice do you want?"

 

Personally, I would have thought that a white law-man wannabe stalking and killing an unarmed black kid and then being acquitted of murder by a (white) small town Florida jury would be the greater incitement to riots and other violence. But that's just me. Seriously, between you and Coin, with a little rlm thrown in, the stench of racist filth around this place is getting a little thick. Might be time to take a break.