Another Vigilante Case.......We Knew It Was Coming .....

Ok, you sour grapers are getting really whiny. YOu have tried every trick in the book to show how this was racist. You point to the woman in Florida that went to jail for shooting a gun at a wall while her abusive husband was present. YOU FAILED to point out THE woman was in violation of the restraining order AND she left the room her abusive husband was, went OUT to the garage and then CAME BACK to her abusive husband and opened fire. SHE LEFT THE DANGER, was in violation of the law by being there but this is why florida is racist. Do I believe that Zimmerman was blameless in all this, FUCK NO, but you lefties wanted him convicted regardless of the evidence presented.

I would like all of you liberals to take some time and go back and read about the SCOTUS under Chief Justice Warren. Look at the cases that strengthened criminal procedure. Try to wrap your minds around what the Warren court did, despite the fact that some guilty people actually walked on a crime. Then look at the history of who hated Warren and who loved him. Those of you on the left appear more like those on the right did back during the Warren Era. It saddens me that non, the left only applauds criminal procedural rights when they LIKE the defendant, rather than when the police and the prosecutor fucks up.
 
Attila the Hun said:
It's his property kiddo. I know you don't understand the concept of property yet kiddo, because you don't have any property of your own kiddo, but kiddo, when you ask someone to leave your property kiddo (assuming you do well enough in school to afford property kiddo), and they refuse kiddo, well kiddo, then yeah, you can escalate the situation kiddo. Assuming of course that's what happened. I don't know what happened kiddo, and I'm not going to say one way or the other what did happen kiddo. You see kiddo, rational adults like to have facts before making a decision kiddo. I'd say ask your parents about that kiddo, but they let you on the internet kiddo, which means that they can't be rational individuals kiddo.
Click to expand...

Why are you posting on this topic if you don't know anything about it bone head?

He approached the crowd with the gun in his hand. Read the link and learn about a topic before discussing it kiddo. :fu:

I'm logging off. Can't fix stupid...why try.
 
I challenge everyone to look at case with the information now. Not wait for Fox News to tell you what to think. Let's go over the basics and tell me if they are right or not.

Did the land owner have a right to have a gun out waving it around or not, but in his hand when asking people to exit his land. Let's try to ignore that this was on a river and probably a median style property where the land owner probably has to share the river and bank.

I don't think it's illegal to have a gun out waving it around when telling someone to leave your property. But I bet SOME don't realize that there is a difference between legal actions and actions that cause people to guard or defend themselves..
 
Last edited:
Anti-Party said:
You were correct that the law states it has to be on multiple occasions to be considered "stalking" but that is just using technicalities of law to justify a wrong doing. Any law loopholes on the term harassment? I don't give a FUCK what laws use as loopholes. It is what it is.

Under Florida law, it's technically not stalking but maybe it's harassment, both are illegal.

Under the general definition of stalking though; "Stalking is unwanted or obsessive attention by an individual or group toward another person."

So open a beer on your win that stalking has to be repeated in Florida. :)
Click to expand...

See kiddo, that's the problem you have kiddo. You don't understand law kiddo, you just want to emote on issues kiddo. But law isn't based on emotion kiddo, it's based on being rational kiddo. Now I know I'm expecting a lot of you kiddo to understand the concept of rationality kiddo, especially considering you demonstrated none thus far kiddo, but kiddo, if you think laws are loopholes, then kiddo, you have a problem.
 
Attila the Hun said:
See kiddo, that's the problem you have kiddo. You don't understand law kiddo, you just want to emote on issues kiddo. But law isn't based on emotion kiddo, it's based on being rational kiddo. Now I know I'm expecting a lot of you kiddo to understand the concept of rationality kiddo, especially considering you demonstrated none thus far kiddo, but kiddo, if you think laws are loopholes, then kiddo, you have a problem.
Click to expand...

So in your entire rant you didn't answer my question.....Do you consider what Trayvon did by Florida law Harassment? And is Harassment illegal in Florida? Might want to use your brain and debate me like a man instead of a 12 year old kiddo.
 
So easy..

Hey, don't respond right away. Google it, look it up. Is Harassment illegal and does law in Florida bla bla bla.

Why not just use your brain on what is right or wrong nut fuzz. It's only PEOPLE who write the laws, not immortals. PEOPLE interpret what is right and wrong through debate, not by googling it kiddo.

*looks for a way to like own post*
 
Anti-Party said:
So in your entire rant you didn't answer my question.....Do you consider what Trayvon did by Florida law Harassment? And is Harassment illegal in Florida? Might want to use your brain and debate me like a man instead of a 12 year old kiddo.
Click to expand...

Yes... What trayvon did was harassment AND assault.

So easy
 
Anti-Party said:
So easy..

Hey, don't respond right away. Google it, look it up. Is Harassment illegal and does law in Florida bla bla bla.

Why not just use your brain on what is right or wrong nut fuzz. It's only PEOPLE who write the laws, not immortals. PEOPLE interpret what is right and wrong through debate, not by googling it kiddo.

*looks for a way to like own post*
Click to expand...

Two minutes. Thats the span of time between this post and your previous one you mouth breathing retard. Yes tray on violently assaulted Zimmerman, and that's against the law everywhere you retard. Aady stated and PROVED that Zimmerman's actions did not constitute harassment, you fucking moron.
 
Attila the Hun said:
Two minutes. Thats the span of time between this post and your previous one you mouth breathing retard. Yes tray on violently assaulted Zimmerman, and that's against the law everywhere you retard. Aady stated and PROVED that Zimmerman's actions did not constitute harassment, you fucking moron.
Click to expand...

What? No response you fuck faced retard? Can't debate me? Coward.
 
Attila the Hun said:
Two minutes. Thats the span of time between this post and your previous one you mouth breathing retard. Yes tray on violently assaulted Zimmerman, and that's against the law everywhere you retard. Aady stated and PROVED that Zimmerman's actions did not constitute harassment, you fucking moron.
Click to expand...

You don't spell so well kiddo. And you never answered my question in all your incoherent responses. You simply stated that "Aady" deemed it was not harassment, you never told me your perspective. But that is what I get for asking a Republican a question. They believe in less government until you ask them "Do the people make the decisions, or the government" They reply government. Pathetic.

Make your own choice you robot easily persuaded pushover kid!
 
Attila the Hun said:
If you didn't want to debate (not that you know HOW to debate), you should just said so instead of running away.
Click to expand...

I stepped away kid....maybe chill a bit. You seem to be very emotional when debating me. I understand why, but you need to grow up and be an adult. Control your emotions and make decisions based on what is right and what is wrong. Not on what someone tells you to say.

Settle down, breath........control yourself.

Drop your party and make a decision on your own in your mind. Your copy/paste answers only win on certain terms. Your inner belief is what politics is about, not copy/paste. The PEOPLE run this Government, not the other way around.
 
Anti-Party said:
You don't spell so well kiddo.
Click to expand...
It's called a phone dick breath.
And you never answered my question in all your incoherent responses
Click to expand...
Probably because you don't know how to read.
You simply stated that "Aady" deemed it was not harassment, you never told me your perspective.
Click to expand...
It was supposed to state "And I ALREADY STATED" you retard.
But that is what I get for asking a Republican a question.
Click to expand...
Who's the Republican? Me? You're even dumber than I thought you drooling retard.
They believe in less government until you ask them "Do the people make the decisions, or the government" They reply government.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'm going to ask this again. I know you don't have an answer because you can't think of one (or anything, at all) but WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Decisions about what? About law? Yeah, the government makes decisions about law, that's the power invested in them.

Seriously, you're on your way to being proclaimed king of the retards.
 
Seriously dude, you are retarded. You went and claimed that Zimmerman was stalking Treyvon (which has nothing to do with this thread, a thread YOU started by the way), and when it was pointed out that, no, Zimmerman didn't, you threw a hissy fit and called the law a loophole. If you can't understand how important definitions are in law, then you're an even bigger retard than desh.
 
Attila the Hun said:
Seriously dude, you are retarded. You went and claimed that Zimmerman was stalking Treyvon (which has nothing to do with this thread, a thread YOU started by the way), and when it was pointed out that, no, Zimmerman didn't, you threw a hissy fit and called the law a loophole. If you can't understand how important definitions are in law, then you're an even bigger retard than desh.
Click to expand...

I stated that the Zimmerman case and this one were similar because Zimmerman stalked Trayvon. You cleared it up that Florida law means it's necessary to harass multiple times to be considered stalking. I'm willing to admit my mistake in terminology even though the rest of the Country has a different definition. But you never debated me that it wasn't harassment...The leading part of "stalking" but only if it happens "multiple times". You basically stated that it is harassment, but not stalking according to Florida Law. Tomato wins.

I'm going to give YOU the Liberty to give me the term that describes what Zimmerman did. I'll guess it will be "followed" but I will let you pick the term kid. Chose the term it takes to describe the actions that Zimmerman made. Then explain why........................THIS is where you coward and leave because you don't have that in you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top