Bigfatbillsfan
-
Posts
1,211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Bigfatbillsfan
-
-
This is still freaking awesome. People are arguing over some dumb punk getting killed and some guy with an IQ equal to a rock shooting the dumb punk. At this point anyone can argue right or wrong, legal or not, but there is no way in hell this guy gets found guilty with what is already known. Unless there is some special evidence to show George in a video torturing little black babies, drowning puppies in Arizona Iced Tea and throwing skittles at nuns...he walks. That people debate this, that it stays in the news is sad. How many more worthy people have lost their lives since? The only solace I take away from this event is that we are not discussing a fat Kardashian spawning.
What we should be taking away from this event is that the "stand your ground" law needs to be tweaked at the very least.
Imagine if you were that the opposite of what happened happened. Let say GZ didn't get to his gun in time and TM beet him to death there on the sidewalk. Should TM get off with nothing? after all, he would have been "standing his ground" wouldn't he?
Once that fight started who ever ended up killing the other could claim self defense under "stand your ground".
The law needs to be tweaked. Not removed, just tweaked.
What we should be taking away from this event is that the "stand your ground" law needs to be tweaked at the very least.
Imagine if you were that the opposite of what happened happened. Let say GZ didn't get to his gun in time and TM beet him to death there on the sidewalk. Should TM get off with nothing? after all, he would have been "standing his ground" wouldn't he?
Once that fight started who ever ended up killing the other could claim self defense under "stand your ground".
The law needs to be tweaked. Not removed, just tweaked.
*beat* not beet. !@#$ you dyslexia. !@#$ you right to hell!
-
I'm just glad this schitt wasn't happening when I was in college as I'm certain I'd have been in a "look at the dumbass" video or two.
How is that different from you now?
-
Actually, you said the town's racism was central to the case.
I believe you speculated a cover-up of a hate crime by the town, as well, but that could have been someone else.
Oh dear god, you are so, so confused.
-
Hey, remember when BF-squared blamed THE ENTIRE TOWN and its 100-year history of racism for causing this incident?
Good times...
So, Martin was "standing his ground" when he followed GZ back to his vehicle? Or was he "standing his ground" when he punched GZ in the nose, breaking it? Maybe Martin was "standing his ground" when he was smashing the back of GZ's head into the concrete?
From what info has been made public, it would appear that the prosecution has no case. I didn't come to this conclusion overnight. I was one of the several posters urging caution, believing that the facts needed to come out before figuratively lynching GZ. You were one of the hissy fitters claiming "cold blooded killing", "hunting poor Trayvon down with his Skittles and ice tea", "GZ outweighed poor Trayvon by 100#s", "coon", blah, blah, blah. Now you're all over the board stating that GZ should be charged with manslaughter and then claiming that we have to wait for the facts.
Hey, remember when I didn't do those things but you guys were so !@#$ing retarded you claimed I did?
Yes, the town has a history of racism that feeds into public reaction.
Yes, I think we discussed this earlier in this thread. A 100 years ago a white person refused to shake a black guy's hand and nearly 70 years ago Jackie Robinson wasn't allowed to play in an exhibition game. That was the entire town's published history of racism. Now I see why the town's history of racism coupled with a White-Hispanic that weighed over 100 pounds more than cherubic Trayvon hunted him down and executed him in cold blood as the coon he was, depriving him of his Skittles and ice tea.
Now you've gone and confused yourselves so much that don't can't even remember who killed who.
-
No offense bub, but your analysis of criminal law is kind of like my mom's analysis of a football game; and my mom doesn't know what first and ten means.
None taken. I'm not an DA prosecuting the case. I though we needed more investigation into the matter and we got it. The DA thinks they have a case. Let's see if they can make their case.
Well, they could always charge Martin with attempted murder in absentia.
When GZ turned around and headed for his vehicle Martin then became the agressor and followed GZ, got him to the ground (most likely with the punch that broke his nose) and started smashing the back of his head to the concrete. To me that's attempted murder. The physical evidence that has been released to the public backs this story up. If someone is trying to kill you don't you have the right to kill them?
Besides spelling aggressor wrong...
Doesn't Martin have the right to stand his ground? That's the problem I see with the law here.
-
No, by all means, offend! His analysis of everything is like your mom's analysis of football.
Again, there's a reason he's BFBF - he's twice the retard BF in Indiana every was.
Is this one of the people that like to correct my spelling and grammar?
-
Tom, you can have your cat toy back now. I'm bored.
Are you the one that's always accusing me of not having a sense of humor?
I'm not basing my arguments on my great spelling and grammar. That's a joke by the way. I've never claimed to have even decent spelling and grammar.
-
You didn't even think to look up the word before replying? That's not the word you actually mean.
Never mind, your still correcting spelling and grammar.
-
Zimmerman is going to claim that he was attacked by Martin. The publicly known facts bear that out. The prosecution will claim that the cherubic Trayvon would never do such a thing. Is it not right that the jury gets a glimpse of the real Martin in order to judge Zimmerman's culpability?
Zimmerman is being accused of a crime. Martin is not.
Well, you did say this below and I asked you a question in response:
Bigfatbillsfan, on 16 May 2013 - 08:05 PM, said:I don't think what happened was murder. I did at first but as more information about the case came out I think GZ should be charge with manslaughter not murder. He didn't get out of the car intending to kill TM, but following TM after being asked not to escalated the situation.
My question:
Specifically, from what is confirmed public knowledge of the facts of the case, why should George Zimmerman be guilty of manslaughter?
Do you need someone to draw you a picture? An unarmed teenager laying dead in a side yard, shot by a guy that got out of his car to follow him because he looked suspicious.
Getting your ass kicked in a fight isn't an excuse for killing someone.
-
Other than everything I wrote, I still stand by what I wrote!
Soooo.....it all comes full circle. Thug attacks neighborhood watch guy and gets shot for it. Just like the locals assumed on day 1 before it became the Facebook cause du jour for bored whiners who need to direct their 'outrage' at someone to distract from their unfulfilling lives.
All that's left now is to see how hard the current Administration wants to continue to exert its influence on this one cherry-picked non-crime.
You may want to go back and read what I said again. That wasn't all I had to say.
The case is not over. Let's let the trial play out. From what I have read over the past year, most eyewitnesses claim that Martin struck first, but why?
The number one thing I called for was further investigation of the case when it looked like the local police force dropped the ball. (and they did) Now we've had further investigation. That doesn't mean GZ is guilty of murder.
-
Well, you should have said "there are" some parents rather than "there is". At least I got you to read the article this time before commenting on it.
Oh, what is a "perspective" runner?
Well, we could start arguing semantics, but I would say it's a person who may, or may not run.
-
I wonder what the poor people are doing tonight.
Using their food stamps to buy guns maybe?
-
Seems a little excessive but would you feel differently if he missed practices for a legitimate reason? What if he was a top talent and getting kicked off the team was going to prohibit him from any scholarships?
Wow, I'm surprised you didn't correct my grammar.
But getting to the point:
I think the father is correct in saying that the reasons for his dismissal are an excuse. But looking at the situation as a whole we need to understand that the coach is (or at least should be) making decisions that are best for the team as a whole and not for one perspective runner. The kids a Sophomore and the coach might have felt that his particular strengths fit nicely into an area where the team was weak and plugged him in there rather than place him as another competitor in a race where the team is already strong.
Sounds like the kid was making enough of a stink about it to distract the team from competition. So once again, the coach makes a decision to take him off the team.
-
...his son was kicked off the track team for missing practices:
http://www.philly.co...track_team.html
Not allowing his son to participate constitutes bullying, harassment, and an "abusive school environment" in which the sophomore's rights to due process and freedom of speech were impeded, the suit says.
"I felt in a way, disrespected," Mawusimensah, 16, said Friday. "At practice, I work hard and I try to be the best athlete I can be, but at meet time, I didn't get the respect that I thought I deserved."
Wow, there's some parents that are going to make their kid's life suck.
-
Surely, you can't be serious.
I am serious. And please, don't call me Shirley.
-
3.5
I think we all know when crayonz is posting.
-
This is !@#$ing hilarious. You are TRULY an idiot.
From this you draw that I'm an idiot? You're a very special person.
I'm going to miss listening to your horseshit when I return to work. The members here are quite lucky that a person with your kind of intellectual superiority would bend down to grace them with your holy presence.
You're a published physicist
I mention CCM and you just happen to have copy if Siguara's paper on your desk, you know, like most physicists would I guess.
Climate change debate, what a coincidence you were just exchanging e-mails with a climate scientist.
You're also an expert in statistics ...that doesn't know what propter hoc correlation means (but I'm sure you discuss this every day with with experts in the field of statistics.)I'm sure an e-mail just came in.
You're so incredibly smart that you can look at someone that held the Lucasian professorship of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge and say: "eh, overrated".
You also claim that the Earth's orbit does not change over time regardless of countless papers and articles written astronomers, physicists, and other scientists that claim it does. I'm sure they are wrong, and you are right.
All this and you can spend your entire day posting on a message board? Unbelievable. And I mean the literally. You're unbelievable. You're full of ****.
-
I think you are missing the point. I'm not personally judging who is more in the right, I am making more of an argument of what is and isn't socially acceptable. Sanford did what many have done, which is he simply cheated. Weiner texted photos of pee pee to unknown women. That's just viewed as creepy. The general public is more sympathetic with your run of the mill infidelity as opposed to a dude that texts photos of his schlong to unknown women half his age. If you don't recognize the difference, then I don't know what to tell ya. In any case, I'm pretty certain my view is more in line with what most people think.
Really? I think I might be in trouble...
Don't worry, it'll come to you in time. From what I've heard, it takes awhile to come back from a lobotomy.
ACL surgery. But yeah, after reading half the **** you guys seem to post on a daily basis, it kind of feels like I just had one.
-
http://www.washingto...-is-inevitable/
After the article there are three more to look at down near the bottom. He's lost the late night tv comedians, several unions and even Chris Mathews. Who's next, Joe Biden?
Did he look behind the couch? Sometimes a newspaper can fall behind the couch.
-
I don't think Weiner will win but if Mark Sanford can get elected anybody can.
Hey, you know, in the past two weeks I've been on here a lot since I've been home from work recovering from surgery. I've learned some things that have turned everything I was ever taught in my past 36 years of life on it's head.
I've learned that consensus isn't science
Correlation isn't causation
The government is running an extortion racket to pay for the inexhaustible resources ...that it doesn't have
The Earth's orbit doesn't change over time
Tom lives in a hospital
If all this can be true, Weiner could win the election.
-
3.5 million, to be precise.
Are you !@#$ing serious?
-
I would rather vote for an actual wiener (sp) than Anthony Weiner.
-
No need, I'm still right. Strategy and organization define terrorism, ideology merely motivates.
Tom has given us his firmly stated opinion. As we all know, this constitutes fact.
I'm pretty sure most of those are not news papers. They are tabloids.
But yes, pretty chilling stuff.
You have to love the Islamic extremest mindset.
-
Wait a minute.. I'm one of those refuge neubs, and I came here BECAUSE we were still free to express ourselves...
And I may be more of a Conservative Consitutionist than almost anyone else here, far from a lib, and just don't post as often as most....
I love this board. Way better than the Politics board on the official site. It's allows my combative personality to shine!
Personally I like the new sniveling mewling bull **** crying that they can't take criticism when they suck at life.
It was brought on by a few newbie mods (who never really posted before becoming mods) going insane with infractions and interpreting what was an infraction differently each day. Apparently their widdle feewings got hurt that people started pointing out their stupidity.
The poor "adults" couldn't take criticism from the "children" for inconsistent and arbitrary application of the rules and are throwing a temper tantrum. Hysterical.
I still pop over there every once in a while just to see how it is. And it's totally turned into a pussyfest. (not the good kind)
Trayvon Martin Case
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted