REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-17-2013, 03:02 PM   #201
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,731
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by stewie View Post
Everyone is racist. Some just act like they're not to make them feel better about themselves
Posted via RS Mobile
I'm not racist... I'm speciest.

I'm not racist... I own a coloured TV!

I'm not prejudiced... I hate everyone equally!
Advertisement
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-17-2013, 03:06 PM   #202
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
parm104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,779
Thanked 2,599 Times in 672 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by The7even View Post

Either way, I'm out of this convo. I cannot reason with people who have their minds already made up a long time ago, like the media.

inb4 HURRRR NOTHIGN ELSE MATTERS ONLY WHAT MEDIA FED ME MATTERS !

Good day, sheep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The7even View Post
You're just a racist! BLATANT RACISM!

It's not racism when it's against whites!

Becareful, your racism is showing.
LOL!! Welcome back kiddo...
__________________
Clicky Clicky For my Feedback
parm104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 03:37 PM   #203
RS.net PIMP
 
7seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Vancouver/LA
Posts: 4,903
Thanked 3,067 Times in 828 Posts
I love how idiots confuse The7even and me, and send me angry PMs ability to read much
__________________

13 Range Rover SC
11 Yukon Hybrid
13 Accord V6 Coupe
7seven is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 03:43 PM   #204
rebuild you say?
 
Not really racist!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,150
Thanked 3,532 Times in 1,172 Posts
^ post dem PMs

__________________

\\ ______
  \(ಠ益ಠ)
   >  ヽ
   /   へ\
   /  / \\
   レ ノ   ヽ_つ ayyy lmao
  / /
  / /|
 ( (ヽ
 | |、\
 | 丿 \ ⌒)
 | |  ) /
`ノ )  Lノ
Not really racist! is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-17-2013, 04:19 PM   #205
I signed up to a Zionist website and all the Illuminati gave me was this lousy usertitle
 
CharlesInCharge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,612
Thanked 527 Times in 292 Posts
edit - what thought was a coverup ended up being consistent with the before and after pictures.

-----

George Zimmerman Surveillance Day Of Arrest "no obvious sign of injury
_www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk4Px56Yag8
http://i.imgur.com/R6a0taU.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/UkV2fKo.jpg


Cover up?
ABC?s Enhanced Video Shows Cuts on Zimmerman?s Head | EURweb - Part 1

Sharpened video shows no signs of blood blotches but then looks like a photoshoped picture is inserted.
http://i.imgur.com/ngRp3NN.jpg
__________________
*My post highlights* *CIC confronts propaganda prodigies*
In reply to members 4444 & StylinRed on 911
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70427...ml#post8658229
jasonturbo & westopher in the election thread
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70467...ml#post8668948
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70467...ml#post8667115
Real news
www.tinyurl.com/kpg44bc

Last edited by CharlesInCharge; 07-17-2013 at 09:04 PM.
CharlesInCharge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 04:35 PM   #206
I signed up to a Zionist website and all the Illuminati gave me was this lousy usertitle
 
CharlesInCharge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,612
Thanked 527 Times in 292 Posts
http://i.imgur.com/q9vODYw.jpg

edit
Never-mind, these pictures are consistent with each-other.

Last edited by CharlesInCharge; 07-17-2013 at 08:52 PM.
CharlesInCharge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 04:39 PM   #207
The sound of inevitability
 
The7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,490
Thanked 682 Times in 244 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7seven View Post
I love how idiots confuse The7even and me, and send me angry PMs ability to read much

Sorry about that, mate.
It's not the first time they did that with you and I.
You always seem the get flak for my posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by parm104 View Post
LOL!! Welcome back kiddo...
LEL

How is 'I'm out of this convo'

the same as

'I'm out of this thread'.

I was commenting on Geoc's post. Not yours. Nor was I arguing with you.
Now be on your merry little way.
__________________

The only ocean creature you can call yourself is the giant squid. He's the destroyer of ships, and the eater of seamen. At least you share one of those traits.
-Hypa


mixed girls that look predominatly asian with subtle caucasian features=what i'd give my left nut for
-6chr0nic4
The7even is offline   Reply With Quote
This post FAILED by:
Old 07-17-2013, 04:59 PM   #208
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
What are you talking about?
voluntary/involuntary/aggravated manslaughter main categories

Im not the only btw one who found it possible (let alone proven) for him to be convicted of manslaughter all the other lawyers on cnn etc felt the same

but here's the law

Quote:
782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3) A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(2)(b) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

782.11 Unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.—Whoever shall unnecessarily kill another, either while resisting an attempt by such other person to commit any felony, or to do any other unlawful act, or after such attempt shall have failed, shall be deemed guilty of manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.—s. 13, ch. 1637, 1868; RS 2388; GS 3213; RGS 5043; CGL 7145; s. 719, ch. 71-136.
if any of these are true to you he's guilty

his pursuit of Trayvon wasn't justified
his act of pursuing Trayvon resulted in death
he was negligent in his actions ('reasonable care' and i think that was proven)
he intentionally killed Trayvon and it wasn't excusable or justified

certainly there's an argument for Zimmerman as to why he killed Trayvon but like i said from the beginning i don't buy his story and his story had obvious holes and lies in them
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-17-2013, 09:18 PM   #209
I signed up to a Zionist website and all the Illuminati gave me was this lousy usertitle
 
CharlesInCharge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,612
Thanked 527 Times in 292 Posts
Right, I dont think this kid would've killed Zimmerman... Zimmerman thought he was a cop to shoot an unarmed teenager and get away with it.
I think many Americans supporting this killing have a fear of the on going degenerate culture in their society (thanks to Hollywood)... compounded with the large gap in economic inequality, they think this "self defense" murder will give them some security from criminals but Americas problems are far deeper.

---

I found Zimmermans wounds consistent after all but his feet have been blacked out in the original photo and pointed out in better detail in some blogs.
http://i.imgur.com/lSqVJpv.jpg
__________________
*My post highlights* *CIC confronts propaganda prodigies*
In reply to members 4444 & StylinRed on 911
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70427...ml#post8658229
jasonturbo & westopher in the election thread
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70467...ml#post8668948
http://www.revscene.net/forums/70467...ml#post8667115
Real news
www.tinyurl.com/kpg44bc

Last edited by CharlesInCharge; 07-17-2013 at 10:14 PM.
CharlesInCharge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 09:53 PM   #210
The sound of inevitability
 
The7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,490
Thanked 682 Times in 244 Posts
I'm just going to leave this here...


Dem statistics at 1:30-1:40.
__________________

The only ocean creature you can call yourself is the giant squid. He's the destroyer of ships, and the eater of seamen. At least you share one of those traits.
-Hypa


mixed girls that look predominatly asian with subtle caucasian features=what i'd give my left nut for
-6chr0nic4
The7even is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
This post FAILED by:
Old 07-17-2013, 10:06 PM   #211
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
? all he does is try to justify racial profiling and call Rachel Jeantel an idiot...


edit: also by posting a video of larry elder you're baiting CiC to go into a tirade of his usual btw

Last edited by StylinRed; 07-17-2013 at 10:20 PM.
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 10:33 PM   #212
The sound of inevitability
 
The7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,490
Thanked 682 Times in 244 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
? all he does is try to justify racial profiling and call Rachel Jeantel an idiot...


edit: also by posting a video of larry elder you're baiting CiC to go into a tirade of his usual btw
In what interest is it to him.. as a black man.. to try and justify the profiling of people.. exactly like him self?

Take some time and think about that.

Or, could it be, that he is actually saying...what I have been trying to tell you all along.
While you think about this, remember the statistics mentioned between 1:20ish - 1:40.
__________________

The only ocean creature you can call yourself is the giant squid. He's the destroyer of ships, and the eater of seamen. At least you share one of those traits.
-Hypa


mixed girls that look predominatly asian with subtle caucasian features=what i'd give my left nut for
-6chr0nic4
The7even is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2013, 10:57 PM   #213
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
There are always those within targeted groups who agree with the those doing the targeting regardless of the matter

regardless of the argument and whatever truths ppl try to dig up or warp to support their views you cannot justify racial profiling period (which is what Elder seems to be supporting here)


weren't you defending muslims in past threads? (sorry cant really remember) if so aren't you being hypocritical?
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-18-2013, 03:00 AM   #214
The sound of inevitability
 
The7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,490
Thanked 682 Times in 244 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
weren't you defending muslims in past threads? (sorry cant really remember) if so aren't you being hypocritical?
I'm not sure how defending muslims would make me a hypocrite.
But I'll address that issue as well and I'll tie this all up at the end and get back on topic.

In about 9/10 of the threads that I'm involved in regarding muslims, I denounce their ignorance, unwillingness to assimilate, anti-semitism, homophobia, racism, hatred of christians, disregard for law when they immigrate, sexism and any other stupidity they might harbor.

I call them out, and they don't like it.

Go for it, I encourage you or anyone to go through my history and look at my stance on muslims.
I call them out on their bullshit and so should you. Because you're a muslim and it is in your interest to present the real Islam, to both them and others.

I fully support the idea of kicking out any muslim in .. for example.. england... that publicly carries a sign "behead those who insult islam".. because 1, he should be beheaded right there on the spot were I to take what his sign said literally and 2, because those people are openly and publicly racist and violent. Protesting and threatening to kill some guy in Holland because he drew Muhammad.. and screaming how you will kill anyone that does this.. that is so stupid, it's offensive. The prophet would be ashamed, he'd never call those people muslim. They're a disease and they're spreading. They try to use the freedom that either England or Canada or whatever other european country granted them to opress and take away that same freedom from others. Yeah, no.

But that's just one example of how I view things regarding muslims.. there is the other part.
Where I defend Islam.
But defending Islam is rare for me.. because Islam doesn't need defending. I only call out anyone when they're being totally ignorant about what Islam is.

When I get called out on being anti islamic, I just kindly point it out to them that I am muslim too. And that shuts them the fuck up because they realize their racism card is ineffective.
And I don't say that just to shut them up, I say it because I really am a muslim.

Now.. with all of this said, this is why I will always speak the truth.
I don't care if I appear racist. I will speak it.
And the numbers speak with me.

What people need to realize is that "stereotyping" or whatever you want to call it is human nature. It is NOT a bad thing.

How it is good:

Yes, it is bad to label a certain group as "evil" or "bad". That is retarded.
It is however a completely other thing to use data that your brain gathers from the environment you are in and creates a general idea of what kind of people to avoid or look out for.
If you ignore that.. you can die. You have 1 life only on this planet. That is all. One. No one is sure of any afterlife or whatver. Your brain certainly isn't. So it is designed to protect you from external threats.

His neighborhood was burglarized 8 times. Each and everytime by someone black.
Yes, this does give him the right to "stereotype" , because there are billions of people on this planet, but you have to come to a conclusion on who the thread could be. It's common sense.

For example. If I see a black man wearing a hoodie, pants sagging, walking like a retard, you are damn right I'll be cautious.
But if I see a black man with a sweater and jeans and walking like a human being, I won't even notice that person, because it would never hit me as 'Hey, that person could be a threat to your safety'.

I automatically assume if you dress like a thug that you might be one. So sorry, I have a defense mechanism that tells me to be vary of assholes who fit a certain description because my brain taught me that people who fit that description have a tendency to commit crime.. if I see a pattern, I notice it.
Most people that commited a burglary in that area wore hoodies.


To suggest that "oh just because he looks like a thug, doesn't mean he should have followed him" is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. He was active in his community, he wanted to help his neighborhood, so he mistaked one young adult as a criminal and followed him to make sure that when the police arrive, they can find him.
Doesn't anybody take accountability for anything anymore? Of course not, they just yell out racism because thats easier than facing the numbers and statistics that I and the guy in the video I posted pointed out earlier.

You can't dress like a cop and then be upset when people try to come to you for help..

What I am not: HURRRR ZOMG ALL BLACKS R EVIL LOLOL NI***RS!!! ALL GO BACK TO AFRIKA KEKEKEKE XD XDXD



Oh, you're also 100% wrong.. again.
Elder supports fixing his communities problem .. which is, and you won't believe this..
EVERYONE IGNORING THE FACT THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITHIN SAID COMMUNITY.

But nah.. hes just a racist sympathizer LOL what a silly guy, silly him.
__________________

The only ocean creature you can call yourself is the giant squid. He's the destroyer of ships, and the eater of seamen. At least you share one of those traits.
-Hypa


mixed girls that look predominatly asian with subtle caucasian features=what i'd give my left nut for
-6chr0nic4

Last edited by The7even; 07-18-2013 at 03:11 AM.
The7even is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-18-2013, 03:53 AM   #215
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
Hurricane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BC
Posts: 312
Thanked 263 Times in 100 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
voluntary/involuntary/aggravated manslaughter main categories
Wrong. There are two types - as I said before. If you read deeper than the first page of the Florida Statutes you would have known that.

Yes, you can break down the Voluntary and Involuntary further, but its one or the other. Notice the aggravated term you posted applies to elderly, disabled, children, and emergency services. These are special statutes for things like child abuse, and caregiver negligence.

Quote:
Im not the only btw one who found it possible (let alone proven) for him to be convicted of manslaughter all the other lawyers on cnn etc felt the same
Not sure whether to slap you for horrible English, laugh at you for watching CNN and taking it seriously, or punch you for introducing more irrelevant hearsay to a factual discussion.

Quote:
but here's the law

[I]782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.ó
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
So this is the only one that we need to look at. Did you even read the provisions in chapter 776?

If you did, you would have found some explanations of when such force is justified.

A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or


Now, would you like to sit there and tell me that Zimmerman did not reasonably believe he was preventing 'great bodily harm' by shooting Trayvon? (assuming we take into account the accepted version of the events by the courts).

Quote:
(3) A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(2)(b) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Just in case you want to refer to this one. I'll save you the time - its for child abuse.

Quote:
his pursuit of Trayvon wasn't justified
his act of pursuing Trayvon resulted in death
he was negligent in his actions ('reasonable care' and i think that was proven)
he intentionally killed Trayvon and it wasn't excusable or justified
So you are arguing for Culpable Negligence, correct? Do you have the first clue what that means?

It's not like you leaving your garden hose on in the summer and getting a warning from the by-law officer. No its quite different. Allow me to share:

Culpable negligence means recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something with the same consequences).

It is the omission to do something which a reasonable, prudent and honest man would do, or the doing something which such a man would not do under all the circumstances surrounding each particular case. [State v. Emery, 78 Mo. 77, 80 (Mo. 1883)]

"The term culpable negligence should be construed to mean a negligence of a higher degree than that which in civil cases is held to be gross negligence, and must be a negligence of a degree so gross as to be tantamount to a wanton disregard of, or utter indifference to, the safety of human life." [Smith v. State, 197 Miss. 802 (Miss. 1945)]


so gross as to be tantamount to a wanton disregard of, or utter indifference to, the safety of human life.

Yes....following around a guy you think is trying to burglarize your neighbors is exactly that. Wait.

Quote:
certainly there's an argument for Zimmerman as to why he killed Trayvon but like i said from the beginning i don't buy his story and his story had obvious holes and lies in them
Wow...spoken like a true fool. No one cares what story you buy, or what makes you feel good. Or that your mom bought single-ply toilet paper this month, and you are mad as hell.

In fact, luckily the world operates in a slightly more sophisticated way for the most part.

Since we are sharing our opinions - the part that annoys me the most, is that you are too damn lazy to ever do any actual research in your online arguments. You run away every time someone calls you out - you bring nothing to the table. In fact, if I spent more than 0.001% of my time online with people like you, I would seriously be questioning what I am doing with my life.

CLIFFS
-StylinRed is an idiot - as usual
Hurricane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 08:54 AM   #216
WOAH...shut the music off...
 
GLOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,802
Thanked 4,708 Times in 1,890 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7seven View Post
I love how idiots confuse The7even and me, and send me angry PMs ability to read much
they're visually attracted to your avatar more than his...and click on your username thinking

__________________
Feedback
http://www.revscene.net/forums/showthread.php?t=611711

Quote:
Greenstoner
1 rat shit ruins the whole congee
Quote:
[04-06, 11:34]radiomanI'm doing happy hour with bj#3 today
[07-04, 10:27]radiomani need just the tip
[22-12, 08:51]mellomandidnt think and went in straight..scrapped like a bitch
[17-09, 12:07]FastAnna glowjob
[17-09, 12:08]FastAnna I like dat

GLOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 03:08 PM   #217
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
Wrong. There are two types - as I said before. If you read deeper than the first page of the Florida Statutes you would have known that.

Yes, you can break down the Voluntary and Involuntary further, but its one or the other. Notice the aggravated term you posted applies to elderly, disabled, children, and emergency services. These are special statutes for things like child abuse, and caregiver negligence.
i know...i was adding the break downs :P

Quote:
Not sure whether to slap you for horrible English, laugh at you for watching CNN and taking it seriously, or punch you for introducing more irrelevant hearsay to a factual discussion.
my point was that mine is not a unique viewpoint

Quote:
If you did, you would have found some explanations of when such force is justified.
yes and as i said in my comment i dont believe he was justified nor do i believe his story
Quote:
(assuming we take into account the accepted version of the events by the courts).
is it the accepted version by the courts? i dont agree with that wording. its the accepted view of the jury certainly, if we were to just look at the aftermath and take everything the jury believes as fact than there would be nothing to discuss in here it would simply be "nothing to see here move along"

Quote:
So you are arguing for Culpable Negligence, correct? Do you have the first clue what that means?
of course...

Quote:
[B]Culpable negligence means recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death

It is the omission to do something which a reasonable, prudent and honest man would do, or the doing something which such a man would not do under all the circumstances surrounding each particular case. [State v. Emery, 78 Mo. 77, 80 (Mo. 1883)]
a reasonable person would listen to the dispatch officer and not pursue

also use of force for defense is limited to the aggressor and deadly force isn't allowed

read up 776.041 Use of force by aggressor.

you want to argue that Zimmerman wasn't the aggressor go ahead

Quote:
Wow...spoken like a true fool. No one cares what story you buy, or what makes you feel good. Or that your mom bought single-ply toilet paper this month, and you are mad as hell.
actually this is what the discussion is actually about in here or else there would be no discussion, the facts of the case and the 2 stories and which we believe to be true

Quote:
Since we are sharing our opinions - the part that annoys me the most, is that you are too damn lazy to ever do any actual research in your online arguments. You run away every time someone calls you out - you bring nothing to the table. In fact, if I spent more than 0.001% of my time online with people like you, I would seriously be questioning what I am doing with my life.
lol

Last edited by StylinRed; 07-18-2013 at 03:30 PM.
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 03:59 PM   #218
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
 
pinn3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vαncouver
Posts: 1,476
Thanked 5,231 Times in 586 Posts
i'll just leave this here...

this guy makes a good point

__________________
pinn3r is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-18-2013, 04:04 PM   #219
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
^^^its true, that's why the media especially US media sucks but since it is the topic of discussion right now may as well
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 04:29 PM   #220
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
Hurricane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BC
Posts: 312
Thanked 263 Times in 100 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
i know...i was adding the break downs :P
No, you weren't. The breakdown for Florida would be
1) By Act (Voluntary)
2) By Procurement (Voluntary)
3) By Culpable Negligence (Involuntary)

Aggravated just means with a weapon - and doesn't change the fundamental criminal process, just adds time to the sentence if convicted.

Quote:
my point was that mine is not a unique viewpoint
It is not a unique viewpoint that the world is a few thousand years old either.

Quote:
yes and as i said in my comment i dont believe he was justified nor do i believe his story
It's not up to you (especially with your obvious limited knowledge of the facts) to believe whether or not he was justified. It's up to the interpretation of the legal protocols as they relate to the best understood circumstances of the case.

Quote:
is it the accepted version by the courts? i dont agree with that wording. its the accepted view of the jury certainly
The jury are the 'Finders of Fact,' so what they say determines the outcome of the court proceedings. And yes, it is accepted by the court. What else is the accepted version? The prosecutions? Defendants? You may have just a slight bias problem there.

Quote:
a reasonable person would listen to the dispatch officer and not pursue
This is bullshit for the following two reasons:

1) The dispatcher (not an officer by the way - so stop using that term) did not tell him not to pursue. He told him 'We don't need you to do that.' Do you understand the difference? To anyone with half an ounce of sense, it was essentially a legal statement. If the dispatcher had said 'Don't let him out of your sight' and George had been killed, his family would have received a huge payout from the city. There was no direct order that was disobeyed. Even if there had been, it was not coming from an officer of the peace, nor would it have been unreasonable for a person in the same circumstances to disobey it.

2) As we established a long time ago where someone got shot outside your house, and you sat inside playing Starcraft while blogging about how scared you were, there are two major types of people in the world. Those willing to put themselves in some level of harms way for the benefit of other people - yes even strangers, and people like you. So while I agree I fall into the former category, I would still say we are both reasonable.

Finally, even with that said - there is no evidence that George pursued Trayvon after it was suggested he needn't do such a thing. So your point is moot to begin with.

Quote:
also use of force for defense is limited to the aggressor and deadly force isn't allowed
read up 776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
you want to argue that Zimmerman wasn't the aggressor go ahead
The stupidity in your posts is increasing by magnitudes.

Fortunately I have read up on the statute you quoted. Let me first say, you are making the assumption that George was the aggressor. That means George was committing a forcible felony, or that he had provoked the use of force against himself. Even if you believe the second point is true, there is an exception for situations where the aggressor has tried to escape, and then in fear of incurring great bodily harm, is entitled to the same rights as a non-aggressor.

These arguments were brought up and addressed clearly during the trial.

Quote:
actually this is what the discussion is actually about in here or else there would be no discussion, the facts of the case and the 2 stories and which we believe to be true
No, not really. Its about you getting all your information from third party sources. It's all very vague, but certainly pulls at our emotional strings. Then you develop a closed subjective mind, and no matter what else is said, your opinion will never change.

Also, there are not two stories. There is one. There is only one person alive who knows exactly what happened. Maybe if Trayvon was alive he would say 'Yeah I beat Georges ass, he would have been unconsciousness in about 30 more seconds had he not been packing a gun.' We don't really know. Just because the prosecutors have written their own story in an attempt to directly discredit Georges does not mean it is true.

There were no independent witnesses that would have led me to believe any of the things you are continually regurgitating are or were true.
Hurricane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 04:59 PM   #221
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
It's not up to you (especially with your obvious limited knowledge of the facts) to believe whether or not he was justified. It's up to the interpretation of the legal protocols as they relate to the best understood circumstances of the case.
Im sorry do you know what's going on here? we're having a discussion on this case and what we believe

as for my limited knowledge of facts that's ur opinion

Quote:
The jury are the 'Finders of Fact,' so what they say determines the outcome of the court proceedings. And yes, it is accepted by the court. What else is the accepted version? The prosecutions? Defendants? You may have just a slight bias problem there.
so what you're basically saying is there should be no discussion and we should just ignore everything because the jury has spoken
and that's precisely why you are wrong

Quote:
This is bullshit for the following two reasons:

1) The dispatcher (not an officer by the way - so stop using that term) did not tell him not to pursue. He told him 'We don't need you to do that.' Do you understand the difference?
its my understanding he called the non-emergency line and spoke to an officer not a simple operator i may be wrong though but regardless if he disobeyed the officer telling him not to pursue

the mere fact that he pursued and confronted (as we know there were words exchanged) marks him as the aggressor and acting recklessly
Quote:
Those willing to put themselves in some level of harms way for the benefit of other people - yes even strangers, and people like you.
if u recall i had actually gone outside and then gone back in as there was a crowd and i couldnt handle it i wished i could have done more or would have been able to handle it better but until something like that actually happens you don't know how you'll react

willing to throw yourself in danger for the good of the community is a stupid argument and in the example you used of mine there was an obvious incident of crime whereas in Zimmermans case it was mere profiling of a kid walking home that he didnt recognize there's so much more to it in his case than simply throwing yourself out there to help the community

in regards to a reasonable person, reporting to police someone you find suspicious and not currently involved in criminal activity seems like the reasonable thing to do... pursuing someone and confronting someone you find suspicious but isn't doing anything illegal seems rather unreasonable no? but that is open to interpretation
Quote:
Finally, even with that said - there is no evidence that George pursued Trayvon after it was suggested he needn't do such a thing. So your point is moot to begin with.
the fact that he got out of his vehicle and walked towards where trayvon was heading was evidence of his pursuit



Quote:
The stupidity in your posts is increasing by magnitudes.
just keep on attacking personally when you get a rebuttal you dont want to deal with...

Quote:
Fortunately I have read up on the statute you quoted. Let me first say, you are making the assumption that George was the aggressor.
if you had read the comments from the beginning of the conversation my argument is in the view that George is the aggressor based on what facts we have
Quote:
That means George was committing a forcible felony, or that he had provoked the use of force against himself. Even if you believe the second point is true, there is an exception for situations where the aggressor has tried to escape, and then in fear of incurring great bodily harm, is entitled to the same rights as a non-aggressor.
yes glad you read it...

Quote:
These arguments were brought up and addressed clearly during the trial.
yes they were...


Quote:
No, not really. Its about you getting all your information from third party sources. It's all very vague, but certainly pulls at our emotional strings.
no...you're assumptions here are too great third party as in watching the trial and reading up on any nuances in florida law?
Quote:
Then you develop a closed subjective mind, and no matter what else is said, your opinion will never change.
sounds like....wait for it...you?

Im willing to accept that the jury has spoken and he's free but even still, as ive mentioned, i believe he should have been found guilty of manslaughter

Quote:
There were no independent witnesses that would have led me to believe any of the things you are continually regurgitating are or were true.
simply consider the stories consider what lies were revealed and consider witness testimony
its your opinion that zimmermans sentence was the correct one and its mine that it wasnt but nothing you've said has shown, to me, that mine is the incorrect one we've both interpreted the details of the case with the law differently

Last edited by StylinRed; 07-18-2013 at 05:12 PM.
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:02 PM   #222
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
Hurricane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BC
Posts: 312
Thanked 263 Times in 100 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
the mere fact that he pursued and confronted (as we know there were words exchanged) marks him as the aggressor and acting recklessly

if you had read the comments from the beginning of the conversation my argument is in the view that George is the aggressor based on what facts we have

Im willing to accept that the jury has spoken and he's free but even still, as ive mentioned, i believe he should have been found guilty of manslaughter
Let me lay this out in the simplest terms possible...

YOUR POINT #1 - ZIMMERMAN WAS THE AGGRESSOR

George Zimmerman was NOT the first aggressor.

Here are the sufficient provocations:

Assaulted the deceased;
Unlawfully arrested the deceased;
Fires the first shot in a standoff;
Leaves a fight, only to return with a weapon; and
Is caught sleeping with the deceasedís wife.

And the insufficient:

Demands an explanation of offensive words or conduct;
Discusses settlement of a claim;
Discusses a sensitive subject;
Hurls inappropriate language and insulting epithets;
Engages in an inconsiderate act;
Travels near a neighbor who has previously threatened him;
Arms himself to repel an anticipated attack, while going about normal business;
Provides an opportunity for conflict, but does not cause it; and
Arms himself with the intent to cause a conflict with the deceased, but does not perform an act manifesting his subjective intent to cause the conflict.

There is not a single shred of evidence to suggest one of the sufficient provocations were met. Just because you feel he 'provoked' the situation, does not mean (thank god) the legal criteria was met.

YOUR POINT #2 - ZIMMERMAN WAS RECKLESS

First of all the correct term was Culpable Negligence for this case. So stop saying he was reckless, it has zero relevance to anything, and is the incorrect terminology.

Culpable negligence is basically doing something so ridiculously wrong, it would be easily punishable by law. So wrong it is completely unreasonable and grossly reckless. Do you need examples? Can you please try to wrap your head around this? It seems very difficult for you to comprehend.

Following around people you think are potential burglars will never fall into this category. Confronting someone walking between the houses in your neighborhood to find out who they are, will never be culpable negligence.

If it feels a little reckless to you - fine. It feels quite normal to many of us.

Just because you disagree with the tactics George used, does not mean he should be guilty of a crime and in jail for the better part of his life. He should be guilty of a crime and in jail if he broke the law according to its interpretation.

I agree, the law is not always upheld in all cases, but in this one, there is absolutely no way he could have been convicted, hence the reason, the case was dismissed in the very beginning before charges were even brought.

Imagine the kind of things that could have been accomplished, if all the energy put forth by the Trayvon supporters, was actually put towards a relevant and useful cause.

Quote:
so what you're basically saying is there should be no discussion
We can absolutely have a discussion.

What if I had the opinion that Trayvon was the first aggressor because he was wearing a hoody. How would you respond? Exactly.

Thats because, luckily the law along with case-law is there to help us see exactly what these terms mean.

So instead of inserting your own version of what legal definitions are, why not talk about how you would like the laws to change - which parts of the stories you agree or disagree with etc. But don't tell me we have different interpretations of what Culpable Negligence is, because we are nowhere in the same ballpark. At that's not a discussion point.

Maybe you want the definition to be revised...fine.

I hope you understood some of this.
Hurricane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 09:59 PM   #223
Cant Stop Modding Fat Cars w/ Cheap Pasts!
 
StylinRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 23,046
Thanked 9,234 Times in 3,293 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
Just because you feel he 'provoked' the situation, does not mean (thank god) the legal criteria was met.

YOUR POINT #2 - ZIMMERMAN WAS RECKLESS

First of all the correct term was Culpable Negligence for this case. So stop saying he was reckless, it has zero relevance to anything, and is the incorrect terminology.
<< you're incorrect here sorry maybe pull out your law definitions book and look up culpable negligence


Anyway I'll repeat myself i guess... given what we know of the case, given we really only have Zimmermans side of the story (we have Jeantel and some other witnesses etc but anyway)
given Zimmermans lies and his aggressive history I believe he was the aggressor in their confrontation
following someone isn't illegal no but zimmermans actions imo could have been construed as aggressive couple with whatever events occurred during their encounter Trayvon could was driven to defend himself (this was spoken about near the end of the trial i believe but the judge ruled in the prosecutions favor here)

you can bitch and moan about how you dont agree with me and attack me personally have at it but at the end of the day i was remarking on the facts and my beliefs on how things likely played out and so i believe he should be guilty of manslaughter




edit: Interestingly there's an article at huffpost almost exactly like ours

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alafai...b_3596685.html

and the commentary seems to take your view too
StylinRed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2013, 10:49 PM   #224
...in the world.
 
Ronin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Richmond
Posts: 28,460
Thanked 7,646 Times in 2,324 Posts
You and I can disagree all we want on Trayvon Martin but I fucking love this post.

It is the exact way I feel about religion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The7even View Post
Spoiler!
__________________
- edeats.com <-- my food blog
- edlau|photo <-- photos
- Instagram <-- moar photos
Ronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2013, 09:15 AM   #225
Captain Happy Bubble is my Homeboy
 
Hurricane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BC
Posts: 312
Thanked 263 Times in 100 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StylinRed View Post
I believe he was the aggressor in their confrontation

following someone isn't illegal no but zimmermans actions imo could have been construed as aggressive couple with whatever events occurred during their encounter Trayvon could was driven to defend himself (this was spoken about near the end of the trial i believe but the judge ruled in the prosecutions favor here)
Fuck man, comprehension much?

Sufficient Provocation
  • Assaulted the deceased;
  • Unlawfully arrested the deceased;
  • Fires the first shot in a standoff;
  • Leaves a fight, only to return with a weapon; and
  • Is caught sleeping with the deceasedís wife.

These are the acceptable provocations from the Criminal Law treatise. So unless you believe he did one of those mentioned things (which I haven't heard any sane person say) he is NOT the first aggressor by rule of law.

It's NOT about how we feel about his actions. Its clear cut. How the fuck can you not understand this point??

Also, there was no evidence submitted in the Affidavit of Probable Cause that described George doing anything remotely close to the acceptable provocations. If the prosecution was hoping to label George as the First Aggressor, surely there would be some kind of factual evidence in the Affidavit of Probable Cause to support this claim.

Quote:
edit: Interestingly there's an article at huffpost almost exactly like ours

Alafair Burke: What You May Not Know About the Zimmerman Verdict: The Evolution of a Jury Instruction

and the commentary seems to take your view too
Wow...news much??

That is the worst left wing liberal newspaper on the face of the earth. I heard it was dead last in the American Consumer Rating index as well - god if a majority of Americans even know its that bad, what does that tell you? Not surprised this is a main information source for you.

Also, did you read the article?

The article is like ours? What does that even mean, we are not writing an article, I am trying to explain what law is to you.

If you read it, you would notice, they do not take my point of view. The crime novelist who wrote the article starts out very sane and reasonable. Then near the end, they go off the deep-end.

They fail to mention the fact I just alluded to above. We already have established case law for what being the First Aggressor entails.

So of course the judge didn't need to waste time giving instructions to a jury. She could see there was no one in the room who was arguing George had fulfilled any of the sufficient provocations.

And...yes, I do agree the possibility of a reversal would have become a reality, because we have already established that calling George the aggressor goes against the established case law.

It wasn't that the judge was scared - its that she had a brain.

ADDITIONALLY - as I have already mentioned in this thread, and you somehow conveniently keep glossing over, even if he somehow was the first aggressor, Florida law also has an exception 776.041 that states the first aggressor can use that force after they have exhausted their means of escaping if they believe they are in danger of receiving great bodily harm.

This significant piece of information was conveniently left out of the crime novelists article.

I want to say I give up...but I'm optimistically hoping you are going to have an epiphany, and say 'Ah, I finally get it.' I guess I am becoming the stupid one.
Hurricane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net