Zimmerman arrested again

[Gulo Blue]

I think you're misunderstanding the point of his post, and also the nature of crime in Chicago.

EDIT: and as thumb points out, you also don't realize that Chicago is not a state.

I get that that he wants you go to somewhere more dangerous, while I think going somewhere safer is a good move. That wasn't a mistake; I'm just not a hater.

But if you want to tell me about how Chicago is a relatively safe place, lecture away.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I get that that he wants you go to somewhere more dangerous, while I think going somewhere safer is a good move. That wasn't a mistake; I'm just not a hater.

But if you want to tell me about how Chicago is a relatively safe place, lecture away.

Everywhere is relatively safe, and relatively dangerous.

That's why it's relative.

The Middle East is relatively safe.

Except when when ISIL has you in front of a iPhone in an orange jump suit.

Then it's relatively dangerous.

That's why it's relative.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Everywhere is relatively safe, and relatively dangerous.

That's why it's relative.

The Middle East is relatively safe.

Except when when ISIL has you in front of a iPhone in an orange jump suit.

Then it's relatively dangerous.

That's why it's relative.

Ah. Good one. The Islamic State is less safe than the State of Chicago.

 

[Michchamp]

...

But if you want to tell me about how Chicago is a relatively safe place, lecture away.

I don't want to lecture you, but I think you need to understand that Chicago is a big place, and crime rates vary greatly from one part of the city to the next.

I can count on one hand the number of violent crimes that took place in our neighborhood last year; and there hasn't been a homicide in it since 2011.

Don't be a 70-year-old woman, sitting home in Peoria, calling her nephew in Lincoln Park and telling him to be careful because she saw on the news that 12 people were shot in Chicago last night...

This is you:

 

[tigersofjustice]

No. Those are not the facts. The stalking is pure speculation. All the available evidence indicates that Zimmerman did not pursue Martin after he lost site of him. The 911 operator told him they don't need him to pursue Martin, to which Zimmerman said "OK". Then he gives vague directions on where the police can meet him because he didn't know the street name and address of his location. He got out of his car to get an address and street name so police could meet him at the site and was assaulted by a guy much bigger and stronger than him.

According to the autopsy report Trayvon Martin was 5'11" 158 lbs at the time of death. Time of booking George Zimmerman was 5'7" 185 lbs.

He was 4 inches shorter and outweighed Martin by over 25 lbs. Yet Martin was "much bigger and stronger"? You are reaching so hard. Not to mention you have filled your little narrative with "he got out of his car to get an address and a street name so police could meet him at the site" which is so opinionated it is ludicrous to suggest it as some kind of fact and only further exemplifies your incredibly high bias in this instance.

Admittedly, at this point, I really just want to know why? Why is it you are so biased in favor of Zimmerman when he's done at least enough to fall into the "thug" category you are so willing to give some of the deceased of the shootings mentioned? What is it about Zimmerman that makes you want to defend him? I mean the officer push is surely worse than anything you know Trayvon Martin did (possession of a marijuana pipe, truancy, ect.)?

 

[tigersofjustice]

i'm not implying that it is.

Edit: I shouldn't even try to correct this. I admit it. I thought chicago was state.

aha!

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't want to lecture you, but I think you need to understand that Chicago is a big place, and crime rates vary greatly from one part of the city to the next.

I can count on one hand the number of violent crimes that took place in our neighborhood last year; and there hasn't been a homicide in it since 2011.

Don't be a 70-year-old woman, sitting home in Peoria, calling her nephew in Lincoln Park and telling him to be careful because she saw on the news that 12 people were shot in Chicago last night...

This is you:

It is a big place.Which makes the per capita stats all the more significant.

 

[Spartanmack]

According to the autopsy report Trayvon Martin was 5'11" 158 lbs at the time of death. Time of booking George Zimmerman was 5'7" 185 lbs.

He was 4 inches shorter and outweighed Martin by over 25 lbs. Yet Martin was "much bigger and stronger"? You are reaching so hard. Not to mention you have filled your little narrative with "he got out of his car to get an address and a street name so police could meet him at the site" which is so opinionated it is ludicrous to suggest it as some kind of fact and only further exemplifies your incredibly high bias in this instance.

Admittedly, at this point, I really just want to know why? Why is it you are so biased in favor of Zimmerman when he's done at least enough to fall into the "thug" category you are so willing to give some of the deceased of the shootings mentioned? What is it about Zimmerman that makes you want to defend him? I mean the officer push is surely worse than anything you know Trayvon Martin did (possession of a marijuana pipe, truancy, ect.)?

Am I reaching so hard? Here's the testimony of the guy that owned the gym where Zimmerman worked out for a year:

Adam Pollock, a gym owner and a trainer in the mixed martial arts and its component disciplines, testified that he had taught the "physically soft" Zimmerman some elementary grappling, boxing and conditioning classes for about a year. He said Zimmerman was a "rank beginner" whose overall skills he would rate as "point-5," less than 1 on a scale of 1-to-10. Zimmerman, he said, was diligent in practice, lost weight and got into better shape. But because of his lack of previous athletic prowess, Pollock testified, he only reached about a 1 before ending training in January 2012.

And you've seen this, right?

Is the trainer lying or the photos or both? Everything you've said about what happened that night is pure speculation and you sit there and accuse me of being "opinionated" although I'm not sure you know what that word means. Perhaps you meant speculative? It's not, it's based on testimony of the only person that was there and the 911 transcript which I bet you still haven't read but still choose to speculate that Zimmerman pursued Martin and shot him in cold blood.

And like I've said at least three times, zimmermans behavior since the incident is a product of what he went through with the trial. He's has countless death threats, had his and his parents addresses tweeted by celebrities, had to go into hiding, has a target on his back wherever he goes, endured 4 investigations, and a trial and a massive media storm of constant misinformation designed to make him out to be a racist murderer which only you guys believe - the SPD, DA and FBI all said otherwise as did a jury of his peers. When judging his character, what matters is his behavior before the case and the testimonials of his neighbors. Pushing the officer was 7 years before the incident and there are no other real incidents of violence after and there are plenty of testimonials from his neighbors who indicate he was not a violent person. So why? Why are you so biased in favor of Trayvon?

 

[tigersofjustice]

Am I reaching so hard? Here's the testimony of the guy that owned the gym where Zimmerman worked out for a year:



And you've seen this, right?

Is the trainer lying or the photos or both? Everything you've said about what happened that night is pure speculation and you sit there and accuse me of being "opinionated" although I'm not sure you know what that word means. Perhaps you meant speculative? It's not, it's based on testimony of the only person that was there and the 911 transcript which I bet you still haven't read but still choose to speculate that Zimmerman pursued Martin and shot him in cold blood.

And like I've said at least three times, zimmermans behavior since the incident is a product of what he went through with the trial. He's has countless death threats, had his and his parents addresses tweeted by celebrities, had to go into hiding, has a target on his back wherever he goes, endured 4 investigations, and a trial and a massive media storm of constant misinformation designed to make him out to be a racist murderer which only you guys believe - the SPD, DA and FBI all said otherwise as did a jury of his peers. When judging his character, what matters is his behavior before the case and the testimonials of his neighbors. Pushing the officer was 7 years before the incident and there are no other real incidents of violence after and there are plenty of testimonials from his neighbors who indicate he was not a violent person. So why? Why are you so biased in favor of Trayvon?

Well lets take this point by point.

First, I have said very little about the 'facts' of what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. I don't go around presuming to know and imparting my biased opinion to deduce what happened.

Next, your logic is extremely faulty about Zimmerman's fighting skill as compared with Martin. You provide statements that indicate an MMA type trainer thinks Zimmerman was a poor fight. Wonderful. How does that compare to a 17 year old giving up 25+ pounds? Since you've provided no evidence of his ability to fight your statements are meaningless because they are like an object in empty space, without a reference point.

After that, Zimmerman's fighting ability really isn't relevant as to whether he was acting or is/was/continues to be more 'thug' like that Martin which is the entire point of criticism that I am laying on you that you continue to dodge. In fact, the criticized 'fact' was your statement that Martin was "bigger and stronger" which I showed was inaccurate. It had nothing to do with his MMA skills.

Finally, you claim to be reporting 'facts' rather than being opinionated....then you go into a long diatribe about how Zimmerman's problems are all related to the aftermath of this trial. Since you are not his psychiatrist to the best of my knowledge, I'm going to throw that right into the OPINION category. An opinion you seem all too ready to assume.

Again regarding your definition of thug. Seven years before or not, pushing a police officer >>> possessing a marijuana pipe and/or truancy in the 'thug' spectrum.

You are clearly not holding Zimmerman to the same standards as the deceased and fail to acknowledge that you are doing the same. By your own statements, Zimmerman should easily be able to fall into the 'thug' category, as would many many adults and probably most if not all persons under the age of 20.

 

[Spartanmack]

Well lets take this point by point.

First, I have said very little about the 'facts' of what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. I don't go around presuming to know and imparting my biased opinion to deduce what happened.

Next, your logic is extremely faulty about Zimmerman's fighting skill as compared with Martin. You provide statements that indicate an MMA type trainer thinks Zimmerman was a poor fight. Wonderful. How does that compare to a 17 year old giving up 25+ pounds? Since you've provided no evidence of his ability to fight your statements are meaningless because they are like an object in empty space, without a reference point.

After that, Zimmerman's fighting ability really isn't relevant as to whether he was acting or is/was/continues to be more 'thug' like that Martin which is the entire point of criticism that I am laying on you that you continue to dodge. In fact, the criticized 'fact' was your statement that Martin was "bigger and stronger" which I showed was inaccurate. It had nothing to do with his MMA skills.

Finally, you claim to be reporting 'facts' rather than being opinionated....then you go into a long diatribe about how Zimmerman's problems are all related to the aftermath of this trial. Since you are not his psychiatrist to the best of my knowledge, I'm going to throw that right into the OPINION category. An opinion you seem all too ready to assume.

Again regarding your definition of thug. Seven years before or not, pushing a police officer >>> possessing a marijuana pipe and/or truancy in the 'thug' spectrum.

You are clearly not holding Zimmerman to the same standards as the deceased and fail to acknowledge that you are doing the same. By your own statements, Zimmerman should easily be able to fall into the 'thug' category, as would many many adults and probably most if not all persons under the age of 20.

First, I never said you claimed they were facts. I merely stated you are speculating more than I am because other than a dead body, you have nothing to corroborate your suspicion.

Next, this is just plain stupid. This whole paragraph is ridiculous. Do I need to spell out the reference point for you. Look at the pictures of Zimmerman and read the autopsy report. Theres your reference point. Zimmerman was getting the shit kicked out of him and other than the GSW, Martin was basically unharmed. Zimmerman was a tubby un athletic wimp. 25lbs of lard is meaningless - Martin was 4" taller and clearly stronger than Zimmerman. Nit picking the fact that Zimmerman outweighed because he was a soft, tubby wimp proves nothing.

I'm not dodging anything. All the neighbor testimonials say that George was a nice, helpful, concerned neighbor and all the evidence re: Martin (outside of a misleading picture taken 7 years ago) - his FB page, pictures of him and his homies flashing gang signs, text messages about dealing drugs and selling guns, etc indicates trayvon was a thug. If you can't see the difference then there's really no point in arguing.

Finally, I never claimed to be reporting facts. I've said all along I based my opinion on the facts and evidence that were available. What I said was you don't know what opinionated means unless you think I'm being conceited. But I didn't have an arrogant tone in my posts until now after reading your most recent asinine post. Honestly it's beyond stupid.

One single incident more than 7 years old vs a clear pattern of thuggish behavior indicates I'm not holding Zimmerman to the same standard? Again, that is absurd. Equally absurd is your belief that a drunk pushing a cop 7 years ago with a clean record since who apparently goes out of his way to help his neighbors is more thuggish than a kid who talks about drug and gun deals, gets suspended for fighting and drug possession, posts pictures of himself flashing cash and guns, his gold teeth and his tatts and getting high and dresses like a thug. But hey, Zimmerman pushed a cop 9 years ago when he was drunk, let's label him a thug because that's just applying the standard equally. One word - DUMB.

This is probably my favorite of all your nonsense:

By your own statements, Zimmerman should easily be able to fall into the 'thug' category, as would many many adults and probably most if not all persons under the age of 20.

Do you really believe this? You think all or at least most kids under 20 not only get high, abuse prescription drugs but also post pictures of themselves doing it, flashing cash, drugs and guns and that it's ok because everybody is doing it? I hope you don't have kids because if this is what you're saying is not only not thuggish but acceptable behavior, you're not fit to be a parent.

 

[Spartanmack]

I think he meant the state of safety, or the state of the lack thereof.

That's probably why "state" wasn't Capitolized.

I was referring to any of the 50 states and the lower case "s" is acceptable in that context. I believe neither is incorrect when "state" has more of a general purpose. If we were discussing a particular state or using "States" as short form for the United States, then the upper case should be used - i.e. it should be capitalized (w/ an second "a" not an "o"). That's what Google tells me anyway...

 

[tigersofjustice]

First, I never said you claimed they were facts. I merely stated you are speculating more than I am because other than a dead body, you have nothing to corroborate your suspicion.

Next, this is just plain stupid. This whole paragraph is ridiculous. Do I need to spell out the reference point for you. Look at the pictures of Zimmerman and read the autopsy report. Theres your reference point. Zimmerman was getting the shit kicked out of him and other than the GSW, Martin was basically unharmed. Zimmerman was a tubby un athletic wimp. 25lbs of lard is meaningless - Martin was 4" taller and clearly stronger than Zimmerman. Nit picking the fact that Zimmerman outweighed because he was a soft, tubby wimp proves nothing.

I'm not dodging anything. All the neighbor testimonials say that George was a nice, helpful, concerned neighbor and all the evidence re: Martin (outside of a misleading picture taken 7 years ago) - his FB page, pictures of him and his homies flashing gang signs, text messages about dealing drugs and selling guns, etc indicates trayvon was a thug. If you can't see the difference then there's really no point in arguing.

Finally, I never claimed to be reporting facts. I've said all along I based my opinion on the facts and evidence that were available. What I said was you don't know what opinionated means unless you think I'm being conceited. But I didn't have an arrogant tone in my posts until now after reading your most recent asinine post. Honestly it's beyond stupid.

One single incident more than 7 years old vs a clear pattern of thuggish behavior indicates I'm not holding Zimmerman to the same standard? Again, that is absurd. Equally absurd is your belief that a drunk pushing a cop 7 years ago with a clean record since who apparently goes out of his way to help his neighbors is more thuggish than a kid who talks about drug and gun deals, gets suspended for fighting and drug possession, posts pictures of himself flashing cash and guns, his gold teeth and his tatts and getting high and dresses like a thug. But hey, Zimmerman pushed a cop 9 years ago when he was drunk, let's label him a thug because that's just applying the standard equally. One word - DUMB.

This is probably my favorite of all your nonsense:



Do you really believe this? You think all or at least most kids under 20 not only get high, abuse prescription drugs but also post pictures of themselves doing it, flashing cash, drugs and guns and that it's ok because everybody is doing it? I hope you don't have kids because if this is what you're saying is not only not thuggish but acceptable behavior, you're not fit to be a parent.

Ok, so at least you finally gave a reason. I personally think it's a silly reason but a reason none the less.

Martin is a 'thug' because he publicized himself flashing cash, and promoting drugs and guns on twitter or some other form of social media.

To you, that trumps somebodies actual actions that effect other people. I strongly disagree with the notion that someone is more of a thug based on what they do on twitter than what they do with other people.

When I said every person under 20 is a 'thug' according to you, it was based on the presumption that truancy and/or some weed was a basis for the 'thug' label.

So no, not every person under 20 does this, but if you've been on twitter lately, and I'm guessing you probably have not, it is still a substantial amount of the youth population that does exactly the kind of none sense on social media. So while my first statement is a bit of an exaggeration it is not far off. At this point I tend to think you are mostly discriminatory towards young/stupid people more than anything. Being young and stupid isn't a crime and doesn't make you a thug IMO.

Also enough with the name calling. I don't engage in that type of crap and frankly it is an argumentative cop out that loses the person doing it credibility pretty much every time.

 

[Spartanmack]

Ok, so at least you finally gave a reason. I personally think it's a silly reason but a reason none the less.

Martin is a 'thug' because he publicized himself flashing cash, and promoting drugs and guns on twitter or some other form of social media.

To you, that trumps somebodies actual actions that effect other people. I strongly disagree with the notion that someone is more of a thug based on what they do on twitter than what they do with other people.

When I said every person under 20 is a 'thug' according to you, it was based on the presumption that truancy and/or some weed was a basis for the 'thug' label.

So no, not every person under 20 does this, but if you've been on twitter lately, and I'm guessing you probably have not, it is still a substantial amount of the youth population that does exactly the kind of none sense on social media. So while my first statement is a bit of an exaggeration it is not far off. At this point I tend to think you are mostly discriminatory towards young/stupid people more than anything. Being young and stupid isn't a crime and doesn't make you a thug IMO.

Also enough with the name calling. I don't engage in that type of crap and frankly it is an argumentative cop out that loses the person doing it credibility pretty much every time.

Interesting, so you ignore the suspension for fighting and drug possession so you can discount his online persona as him simply role playing - you know, as kids do. Afterall, most if not all kids his age have that online persona and posting pictures of yourself getting high and having text history about dealing drugs and selling guns and recent suspension from school for violent behavior and drug possession is not at all indicative of thug behavior.

If someone says something stupid and you tell them what they said is stupid, that's not name calling. And I didn't finally give a reason - if you've followed this thread at all, nothing I said above is new. The silliest thing in this conversation is your assertion that Zimmerman, who was a neighborhood watch captain, liked by his neighbors, gainfully employed, etc, etc is more of a thug because he got drunk and did something stupid 9 years ago than a drug abusing, violent criminal who went out of his way to promote his own thuggish persona.

 

[tigersofjustice]

Interesting, so you ignore the suspension for fighting and drug possession so you can discount his online persona as him simply role playing - you know, as kids do. Afterall, most if not all kids his age have that online persona and posting pictures of yourself getting high and having text history about dealing drugs and selling guns and recent suspension from school for violent behavior and drug possession is not at all indicative of thug behavior.

If someone says something stupid and you tell them what they said is stupid, that's not name calling. And I didn't finally give a reason - if you've followed this thread at all, nothing I said above is new. The silliest thing in this conversation is your assertion that Zimmerman, who was a neighborhood watch captain, liked by his neighbors, gainfully employed, etc, etc is more of a thug because he got drunk and did something stupid 9 years ago than a drug abusing, violent criminal who went out of his way to promote his own thuggish persona.

Again now you are going back to actual acts now. You point out fighting in school as evidence he's a thug. Lots of kids get into fights. Very few people assault police officers. I don't see how you think you are making a point by trying to justify the latter and hold up the former as proof someone is a bad apple. The silliest part of this whole conversation is your repeated failure to admit that you are consistently directly contradicting yourself on this issue.

Now are people who get into fights in high school thugs? People who smoke pot in high school are thugs? But if you are a drunk guy who assaults a police officer as an adult you are ok? Do you see how that makes no sense?

 

[TheVictors]

Zimmerman was then, and is now, a total shitbag fuckwad and deserves prison for killing a teenager

#karma

 

[Michchamp]

Zimmerman was then, and is now, a total shitbag fuckwad and deserves prison for killing a teenager

#karma

I don't know... in this thread some have made real convincing arguments that Zimmerman is a great guy who just happened to find himself in a bad situation that was not of his making, and is now suffering for it. Like he has PTSD or something, so his repeated wife-beating/assaults on other people since then aren't reflections of his true character. He's practically an American hero.

At least I've been persuaded...

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't know... in this thread some have made real convincing arguments that Zimmerman is a great guy who just happened to find himself in a bad situation that was not of his making, and is now suffering for it. Like he has PTSD or something, so his repeated wife-beating/assaults on other people since then aren't reflections of his true character. He's practically an American hero.

At least I've been persuaded...

At least you're getting back to your original line of propaganda as you twist and put your usual lefty spin on the arguments to make them about something they've never been about, which is that Zimmerman is somehow held out as a hero to conservatives when that's not even close to the truth and never has been. Not one prominent conservative has stood up for him, nobody has asked for his endorsement, nobody has organized any rallies on his behalf, nobody is selling George Zimmerman t-shirts...but he's a hero to the right.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't know... in this thread some have made real convincing arguments that Zimmerman is a great guy who just happened to find himself in a bad situation that was not of his making, and is now suffering for it. Like he has PTSD or something, so his repeated wife-beating/assaults on other people since then aren't reflections of his true character. He's practically an American hero.

At least I've been persuaded...

Who made those arguments? "some" would be plural, right?

 

[Spartanmack]

Again now you are going back to actual acts now. You point out fighting in school as evidence he's a thug. Lots of kids get into fights. Very few people assault police officers. I don't see how you think you are making a point by trying to justify the latter and hold up the former as proof someone is a bad apple. The silliest part of this whole conversation is your repeated failure to admit that you are consistently directly contradicting yourself on this issue. That makes so much more sense now that you put it that way. My bad.

Now are people who get into fights in high school thugs? People who smoke pot in high school are thugs? But if you are a drunk guy who assaults a police officer as an adult you are ok? Do you see how that makes no sense?

Oh, I didn't realize actual acts aren't indicative of one's personality. And if a kid who gets high isn't a thug and another kid gets in a fight isn't a thug and another kid who posts thuggish pictures of himself on social media also isn't a thug then it stands to reason that if one person does ALL of those things plus sells drugs and guns, he's probably not a a thug.

Or are you saying what matters is your personal biased conjecture, which after ignoring actual acts, you've decided Zimmerman was the thug and Trayvon was just a sweet little boy? Or are you saying that I'm the one fixating on a single "act" to draw an unrealistic conclusion? I'm not, that's what you're doing. But if so, let's try a little exercise. Here's a list of all the things two people have done. Take a look at the them, study 'em for a bit, then tell me which person you think is a thug:

Person A
- suspended for fighting and drug possession at school
- posts photos of himself getting high on social media
- has text exchange w/ friends on his phone re: narcotics deals such as codeine, marijuana, etc
- has text exchange w/ friends about putting together gun deals
- posts photos of himself w/ his homies flashing gang signs, flashing cash and his gold teeth, tattoos and guns

Person B
- pushed a cop 7 years ago when he was drunk and just 21 years old (do college aged kids do stupid stuff when they're drunk?) but is now a neighborhood watch captain who regularly voluntarily helps out neighbors in need.

By the way, have you ever spoken to a cop? People resist arrest ALL the time and they get "assaulted" quite regularly. Maybe not in whatever sleepy little suburb you may live in where they hand out speeding tickets and bust drunk drivers

 

[Spartanmack]

Who made those arguments? "some" would be plural, right?

Nobody made those arguments. Nobody is holding GZ out to be a hero. Nobody is celebrating the things he did before, during or after that night. Nobody is even saying he's a great guy. But Champ's side lost - every law enforcement agency that investigated the case except Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson's DOJ plus a jury of Zimmerman's peers determined Zimmerman acted in self defense. All he has left is spin.