Trayvon Martin

[seemslikeadream]

I don't know about you guys but where I come from this is what ya get when ya beat the hell out of someone

[seemslikeadream]

it's in the link click on A police surveillance video

shitty video
so who broke his nose?
who cut the back of his head?
the loominati?

please pay attention....georgie the child killing liar did

[David]

it's in the link click on A police surveillance video

shitty video
so who broke his nose?
who cut the back of his head?
the loominati?

please pay attention....georgie the child killing liar did

wat?
who hurt georgie?

[seemslikeadream]

georgie the child killing lying racist own gun made those marks on georgie the child killing racist nose


note what it looks like when someone beats the hell out of you

[seemslikeadream]

AND REMEMBER NO DNA

BEAT THE HELL

[8bitagent]

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/after-trayvon-will-there-be-justice-for-floridas-other-stand-your-ground-victim-20130717

Holy crap! Never heard of this case. This is even crazier than the Trayvon case!!! Why isnt a big deal being made of this? See, just goes to show how weirdly selective the media and pop culture is

[compared2what?]

C2W, I was going to reply with multiple quotes but it was a headache to properly nest all the quote tags.

You're right, there's no evidence TM attacked GZ. Neither is there any evidence of the reverse. Nobody knows who threw the first punch, who attacked who.

My point was, the evidence is consistent with GZ being attacked. He didn't have to change any part of his initial story because the evidence contradicted it. It all "supported" what he said (by not contradicting it - I think it was my laymanesque use of this word that you took such umbrage to.)

No umbrage taken. I agree that there's no evidence at all about exactly how the immediate confrontation that ended with GZ shooting TM began.

But not as much as I disagree with the pretense that the first punch was the only precipitating event that matters. He was an innocent teenager walking home from the convenience store with a bag of candy. He didn't follow Zimmerman. And he was not posing a threat to anyone or anything that merited intervention by Mr. Neighborhood Watch.

It's unjust that he died for that. And that the guy who shot him was acquitted easily and to the surprise of no one really isn't a happy or satisfying thing, imo.

So we have a real difference of opinion. It's not personal, though. I'm sorry if I came across as umbrage-y.

[seemslikeadream]

[stevie ray]

Exerpt from the following: JEFFRIE G. MURPHY -Punishment and the Moral Emotions: Essays in Law, Morality, and Religion

Murphy discusses in illuminating detail whether there is an "honorable emotional basis for retribution", taking up Nietzsche's warning that one should "mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful". For Nietzsche that impulse is driven, not by the requirements of justice and desert, but by base, hateful, and irrational passions. Murphy also rejects Michael Moore's claim that proper retributive judgments are based on guilt rather than the dark emotions exposed by Nietzsche. Murphy believes that our attributions of guilt are often misplaced and irrational, and might mislead us to demand severe punishment for conduct that is objectively trivial, or even unobjectionable. He rejects Moore's version of retributivism, which he calls "character retributivism", the view that wrongdoers are to be punished in proportion to their inner wickedness. He believes that once we think that we are competent to make negative judgments about a person's deep character, then we are psychologically inclined to treat him contemptuously and cruelly. He expresses skepticism about our capacity to make reliable judgments about the deep character of criminals. He also raises the objection that some who make confident judgments about the deep character of wrongdoers have the potential for evil within themselves, and have been lucky because of favorable social circumstances to avoid legal and moral wrongdoing.

[Wombaticus Rex]

^^And that has definitely been on display here in this thread. A valuable contribution, thank you.

SLAD, I don't know what you think you're doing with a single sentence and picture being repeated and repeated, but it's not a "conversation." You've made it abundantly clear you have vast, vast contempt for Zimmerman and there is nothing to be gained by belaboring this any further. This kind of hit-and-run repetition is a major contribution to thread bloat and degrades the discussion as a whole.

[seemslikeadream]

I have 119 posts in this thread.....and there's three of them that are a problem....duly noted

oh I do get to posted it once at least, huh?


so that would be 2?

[Wombaticus Rex]

Well, I'll put it like this: You post a .jpg and a single sentence. Someone questions your content and you responded by....posting the same stuff again. Generally an actual conversation moves a little differently.

Any time threads start feeling like 4chan, I worry that we're losing focus on what makes RI great. I'm not sure what that precisely is, of course, but that's part of the charm.

Also, per your pm, I should make it clear: David, I deleted one of your posts. Self-love is an important part of any man's day, but nobody here cares -- feel quite free to keep that to yourself in the future.

[seemslikeadream]

OK then at least it is acknowledged that David said a very unsavory thing to me...I've deleted my "big" picture so not to offend anyone here ...in the future I will only post little ones with lots of words....lots of words posts seem to go over big here even when they are pretty repetitious and don't convey a damn thing

Did you even see page 33? Talk about making things difficult a la 4chan

I just see that whole page as a parade of black and white photos...a word salad with lots of dressing.... Babushka Semenov dolls..... but beauty is in the eye of the beholder


I'd take 2 pics over that whole page anytime but whatever

[DrVolin]

I am certainly no fan of Obama and his administration, but I have to say that his little speech on the Trayvon thing was very good. I think for the first time I felt like there was actually a human voice in there. This was coming from him.

As for the case itself, what I think happened is very different from what a prosecutor can prove in a court of law. I accept that.

[Jerky]

Seconded. I find SLAD's rhetorical technique, if a tad simplistic, nevertheless EFFECTIVE. And far less offensive than the sneering, smarmy, utterly slimy TRIPE to which these supposedly offensive posts are replying.

Let's get a little looser with the so-called "oversight" here, shall we? There was nothing offensive about what SLAD has done in this thread, ANYWHERE. Period. Personal tastes of certain moderators notwithstanding.

Sincerely,
YOPJ

OK then at least it is acknowledged that David said a very unsavory thing to me...I've deleted my "big" picture so not to offend anyone here ...in the future I will only post little ones with lots of words....lots of words posts seem to go over big here even when they are pretty repetitious and don't convey a damn thing

Did you even see page 33? Talk about making things difficult a la 4chan

I just see that whole page as a parade of black and white photos...a word salad with lots of dressing.... Babushka Semenov dolls..... but beauty is in the eye of the beholder


I'd take 2 pics over that whole page anytime but whatever