I'm still curious about this so called "MMA style" beating. Was Trayvon in full mount
or just had top control?
.
or just had top control?
.
The entire story doesn't make sense to begin with.Extra Medium wrote:
Would it make more sense if Trayvon killed Zimmerman?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I know what the idiom is but I don't see how it applies to George Zimmerman. I still find "Zimmerman won. He zapped the kid and lived to tell about it. Just goes to show, the best gun is the one you have" confusing in this case.
The best concrete sidewalk is the one your smashing a guys brains into.
According to the witnesses it was option A.Macbeth wrote:
I'm still curious about this so called "MMA style" beating. Was Trayvon in full mount
or just had top control?
.
Fuck Israel
Gun rights activist really are a simple bunch of people. The site of a massacre of small children isn't a place to protest in support of the right to own AR-15s. And a fat guy who was too weak to defend himself isn't a hero to rally around.Starbucks says a Newtown, Conn., store closed early Friday before advocates on both sides of the gun issue planned to gather there.
Starbucks vice president Chris Carr said on the company website that the decision was made out of respect to the community, where 20 school children and six educators were slain in December.
Organizers of a “Starbucks Appreciation Day” said in a Facebook ad that they wanted to thank Starbucks for standing up for their rights to bear arms and would meet at the store.
Gun control supporters were not pleased with Starbucks’ decision for closing the Newtown store.
“I came here to support Starbucks for supporting the Constitution,” Dom Basile, of Watertown, told the News Times. “Now, they’re not supporting us.”
Newtown Action Alliance, a gun control group, objected, saying the community was still healing and asked Starbucks to evaluate its policy allowing guns into their stores.
“Our community is still healing and we find it reprehensible that they are picking Newtown to rally,” David Ackert, founder of the Newtown Action Alliance, told the News Times.
Yeah but I'm not showing up on the scenes of tragedies to rant about tangently related politics. I'm in our small corner of the internet.
What is behind that logic? Weak people shouldnt be allowed to defend themselves? So who should be allowed?Macbeth wrote:
....... a fat guy who was too weak to defend himself isn't a hero to rally around.
***edit- I understand what your saying, about him being classified as a hero. Im just wondering how someones physical capanilities and or limitations are relavent...
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2013-08-11 19:02:28)
Malloy must go
They aren't. Gun rights activists love framing the firearm as the "great equalizer." The circumstances leading up to and the result of Trayvon and George's confrontation are only tangentially related because a gun was involved, but that doesn't stop some of the right wing internet from flocking behind the guy as some sort of unprovoked self-defense hero.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Im just wondering how someones physical capanilities and or limitations are relavent...
See thats where I differ in my opinion. A lot of people are quick to label GRA's for gravitating towards Zimmerman as a hero but I personally think it was a product of our media. These things happen a lot every week but nobody jumps on a soap box. Would the gra's have even given a shit if the NAACP didnt get involved politically? Or how about the white sherriff who was fired for not making an arrest or the white DA who was "stepped aside" for not making a case only to have it all come back as a not guilty verdict? The President getting on national television? I think the politicians and the press were using it as their nitrous button to get across the gun grabbing finish line which is why gra's came out in full force. My wife, who is white, was with our two kids shopping 18 months ago in Hartford and was mugged at knife point by two black men. She carries a smith and wesson .308 semi automatic and nuetralized the two attackers killing one and injuring the other. One was 17 and the other 19. Different circumstances, different escalation, same result, not on national news. Thats my opinion though.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
They aren't. Gun rights activists love framing the firearm as the "great equalizer." The circumstances leading up to and the result of Trayvon and George's confrontation are only tangentially related because a gun was involved, but that doesn't stop some of the right wing internet from flocking behind the guy as some sort of unprovoked self-defense hero.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Im just wondering how someones physical capanilities and or limitations are relavent...
Side note- its a mistake to fuck with momma bears cubs, but its a huge mistake when her husband is a Marine and has spent countless hours with her at the range. Just sayin.
Malloy must go
But then again we don't carry so we can follow around people we have no business following around, we carry because its our job to protect this.....
Malloy must go
deez, i don't have children.
one night my wife forgot to shut the garage door (our access to the house normally) and i heard someone open the fire door between the garage and the kitchen.
my blackhawk takes 38 shells, and i have 6 shot shells loaded.
i keep it handy.
i was exonerated by the local PD for having a smart choice loaded, when my firearm will take 357 magnum rounds.
i hear the wounds might heal by the time they are paroled.
one night my wife forgot to shut the garage door (our access to the house normally) and i heard someone open the fire door between the garage and the kitchen.
my blackhawk takes 38 shells, and i have 6 shot shells loaded.
i keep it handy.
i was exonerated by the local PD for having a smart choice loaded, when my firearm will take 357 magnum rounds.
i hear the wounds might heal by the time they are paroled.
Last edited by Steve-0 (2013-08-11 21:15:02)
So if option A, then how did the gun get out of the holster? Seems to me that the legs would prevent that.Macbeth wrote:
I'm still curious about this so called "MMA style" beating. Was Trayvon in full mount
or just had top control?
.
On the hand if the gun was already out, and they were fighting for control of it...
The US economy is a giant Ponzi scheme. And 'to big to fail' is code speak for 'niahnahniahniahnah 99 percenters'
Depends where the holster was and exactly what happened.
All the information was given to the jury, they acquitted based on an arguement of simple self-defence, not 'stand your ground', if you want to second guess it all I'm sure all the statements are available somewhere.
All the information was given to the jury, they acquitted based on an arguement of simple self-defence, not 'stand your ground', if you want to second guess it all I'm sure all the statements are available somewhere.
Fuck Israel
Im still on the fence. One part of me asks why Zimmerman was close enough in the first place. Why didnt he just wait for the police? I understand about the previous break ins and such but he could have observed him from afar and waited. If Martin ended up vandalizing or breaking in to something the police would have escalated the call as a higher priority and responded.
But..... If Zimmerman was so "trigger happy" why did he wait until he got a thorough ass whippin before pulling the trigger? Why didnt he just brandish his firearm when he was approached? It seems like he took a few lumps until it got to the point where he feared for his life. These are common sense questions that were not answered to the general public because of the media turning it into a right vs left/white vs black circus.
But..... If Zimmerman was so "trigger happy" why did he wait until he got a thorough ass whippin before pulling the trigger? Why didnt he just brandish his firearm when he was approached? It seems like he took a few lumps until it got to the point where he feared for his life. These are common sense questions that were not answered to the general public because of the media turning it into a right vs left/white vs black circus.
Malloy must go
I was listening at work today as some older guy was talking about suspicious kids in his neighborhood. Another person asked if he would follow them around to make sure they weren't up to no good and the first guy essentially said "Hell yeah. I have every right to look after my neighborhood." He's a card carrying member of the NRA, too; so there's that.
Is he ready to defend his country from the government's tyranny?
That's what doesn't make sense about this story to me, and it all comes back to terrible decisions on Zimmerman's part. A fact that is obfuscated by gun control and gun rights activists, and racial hype. In this respect, you don't differ much from me at all. I own guns. In fact, I own some with personal and familial self-defense in mind, the most portable being a stubby hammerless revolver. I know many others who own guns who are disgusted with the whole series of events. But I also know plenty of people who throw their all behind Zimmerman and try to portray him as some sort of all-American hero. In fact, one of them has boasted about being a poacher on your hunting/trapping thread.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Im still on the fence. One part of me asks why Zimmerman was close enough in the first place. Why didnt he just wait for the police? I understand about the previous break ins and such but he could have observed him from afar and waited. If Martin ended up vandalizing or breaking in to something the police would have escalated the call as a higher priority and responded.
But..... If Zimmerman was so "trigger happy" why did he wait until he got a thorough ass whippin before pulling the trigger? Why didnt he just brandish his firearm when he was approached? It seems like he took a few lumps until it got to the point where he feared for his life. These are common sense questions that were not answered to the general public because of the media turning it into a right vs left/white vs black circus.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6539|Graz, Austria
A drive-be poacher.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
one of them has boasted about being a poacher on your hunting/trapping thread.
They both made bad decisions, one getting out of his car, the other physically attacking a stranger.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
That's what doesn't make sense about this story to me, and it all comes back to terrible decisions on Zimmerman's part. A fact that is obfuscated by gun control and gun rights activists, and racial hype. In this respect, you don't differ much from me at all. I own guns. In fact, I own some with personal and familial self-defense in mind, the most portable being a stubby hammerless revolver. I know many others who own guns who are disgusted with the whole series of events. But I also know plenty of people who throw their all behind Zimmerman and try to portray him as some sort of all-American hero. In fact, one of them has boasted about being a poacher on your hunting/trapping thread.
Fuck Israel
The two are not the same.
No, people do have a right to get out of ther car.
Fuck Israel
And thats why Im on the fence. If I was driving home and saw someone in my neighborhood that didnt belong there I would call the police, I dont see any racial profiling there. I know everyone who lives on my street, and I know who doesnt. I see no problem with being a concerned citizen, especially if our tax dollars are spent on "if younsee something,say something ads".
But I personally, knowing that I have a firearm, would not put myself in a position where confrontation is involved. Thats a job for the cops not me. But then again if I was getting my ass kicked you can be sure someone is going to meet the working end of my M&P Shield .40 cal, I just try to exhaust all possible means to never unholster it.
I think the lesson we can all learn here is that Skittles just arent worth it.
But I personally, knowing that I have a firearm, would not put myself in a position where confrontation is involved. Thats a job for the cops not me. But then again if I was getting my ass kicked you can be sure someone is going to meet the working end of my M&P Shield .40 cal, I just try to exhaust all possible means to never unholster it.
I think the lesson we can all learn here is that Skittles just arent worth it.
Malloy must go
Yeah I'm pretty sure that I'd be in the right for stalking someone around the neighborhood with a gun at my hip. Not intimidating at all.Dilbert_X wrote:
No, people do have a right to get out of ther car.
THIS.But I personally, knowing that I have a firearm, would not put myself in a position where confrontation is involved.
I reckon so, and today he was actually going on about Indian reservations as well. He must read BF2s. Hi, Dennis.Macbeth wrote:
Is he ready to defend his country from the government's tyranny?