Damn and I thought I was the only heartless basstard that felt this way, I'm scared now that there are more of us out there!Originally Posted by DEVOREFLYER
Damn and I thought I was the only heartless basstard that felt this way, I'm scared now that there are more of us out there!
Sorry, but don't let THE FACTS get in the way of your endless attempts at ridicule...
Hmm. Maybe you shouldn't have any Drank after all. I think I have some gold paint around here you can huff on....
Meh. Facts brought up by one group can be seen as ridicule by another. Works both ways. Funny ain't it?
And watch out there HawgZ - you are using those facts to make a circumstantial case. Just like the one against Zman.
So the results of an autopsy are circumstantial? That's new to me...
That's not what I said. Try again.
I know what you were saying.
Character, the media and the left are trying to hide it. Trayvon was NOT an innocent 13 year old. That's all I'm saying. Should he be dead because of his character? No. Is he dead because of HIS own actions? Yes...
It's all circumstantial. In a circumstantial case, one has to weight the evidence at hand and determine how events ultimately unfolded. I find the case against Zman compelling. You are entitled to disagree with me.
The idea that their is some conspiracy to hide Trayvon's background is ludicrous. It's been in the public knowledge since well before the case began. And in the era of the intarwebz, once information is disseminated, it's impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. And as I said previously, you have an anti-Martin camp which is just as (if not more) vociferous as the anti-Zman camp. Meh.
No, it's not anti-Martin. At least not in my camp. It's pro 2nd amendment and the right to defend oneself. Sadly, this GZ/TM case is being used by those with an agenda to repeal stand your ground laws, and is another brick in the anti-gun nuts wall. It's also being used to further divide our nation by certain "groups" who believe our country's laws don't fit in with their agenda...
Last edited by HawgZWylde; 07-22-2013 at 11:37 AM.
...I think the question - if one cares to examine it - is what were his actions, exactly? Was he the assailant or was he defending himself? Like I've posted before, this case is something of a Rorschach test insofar as the assumption of what cannot be known sheds light on the mind-set of those doing assuming.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote