magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 the one account is backed up by the evidence. not according to the prosecutor who charged Z with murder 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 we need a new user trophy for trolling. magz deserves it after this thread....we all know hes trolling and still end up sucked into it....well played sir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 not according to the prosecutor who charged Z with murder 2.I'm not so sure I would hitch my wagon on all prosecutors being competent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinHawk Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 not according to the prosecutor who charged Z with murder 2.like it wasnt forced down from above, being politically motivated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 I'm not so sure I would hitch my wagon on all prosecutors being competent.that's what a trial is for... unfortunately none of us can say, it's for a jury to decide now.like it wasnt forced down from above, being politically motivated. sure, it could be, but then maybe she really has the evidence to convict...bullet trajectory, video, eyewitness accounts, there might be something "off" on Z's story...if not, I have no desire for an innocent man to be sent to prison... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 we need a new user trophy for trolling. magz deserves it after this thread....we all know hes trolling and still end up sucked into it....well played sirI will re-iterate, I'm not trolling, this is how I really feel on the subject...I've never owned a gun, I don't need a gun, don't want a gun, not interested in shooting, or hunting, and I don't need that type of "personal protection" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted May 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 not according to the prosecutor who charged Z with murder 2....soon to go the way of Mike Nifong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 I will re-iterate, I'm not trolling, this is how I really feel on the subject...I've never owned a gun, I don't need a gun, don't want a gun, not interested in shooting, or hunting, and I don't need that type of "personal protection"*wink wink* gotcha 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 not according to the prosecutor who charged Z with murder 2.And being "charged" means what? It means he gets his days in court, and will let a jury of his peers decide. You have an obvious bias against guns, that is fine but to assume he went looking for trouble because he is carrying is just ludicrous. Lets see just what illegal actions that he did, Martin appears from what we know to have been the aggressor. Don't let the innocent little kid being portrayed as the victim cloud your common sense, that 17 year old punk kid was far from innocent. There are those of us that have thrown various facts in your face, yet you choose to believe this country is DisneyWorld and that you are ultimately safe. Look up the definition of victim, maybe that will make sense to you? Throwing elbows and knees can only protect you from the few. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 And being "charged" means what? It means he gets his days in court, and will let a jury of his peers decide. You have an obvious bias against guns, that is fine but to assume he went looking for trouble because he is carrying is just ludicrous. Lets see just what illegal actions that he did, Martin appears from what we know to have been the aggressor.Charged means exactly what it means, there is enough evidence in the prosecutors mind to say you are guilty of a crime. then that whole constitution thing comes into play, innocent until proven guilty, right to a speedy trial, right to a jury of your peers, etc... I'm not saying he went looking for trouble "because he was carrying a gun", I'm saying he likely went looking for trouble trying to "play cop" while he happened to be carrying a gun.As for who was the aggressor, again we only have one side of the story, dead men(boys) tell no tales.What if it happened differently? What if Z grabbed M and tried to "arrest" him, starting the altercation? Don't let the innocent little kid being portrayed as the victim cloud your common sense, that 17 year old punk kid was far from innocent.Far as I can tell he may have been innocent until he was harassed by some bully pretending to be a cop. Not saying that IS what happened but it's a possibility, and because he's dead, we'll never know. There are those of us that have thrown various facts in your face, yet you choose to believe this country is DisneyWorld and that you are ultimately safe. Look up the definition of victim, maybe that will make sense to you?Safe enough for me, I've walked the vegas strip at midnight, I've stopped for gas at all hours of the night from los angeles california to hartford, conneticut, from savannah georgia to niagara falls. You keep telling all these scary stories like I've never gone anywhere or done anything... I'm 28 yrs old, I've been places, I've done things. I'm 1000 times more likely to die because someone isn't paying attention to the road than someone actually attacking me out of malice. What are you so afraid of? Throwing elbows and knees can only protect you from the few.Hell, I haven't even had to do that much... I don't get into many altercations, I keep to myself, and I haven't had any real problems yet.I dunno what kind of mad max hellscape you're living in, but you might want to think about moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 that seems to be the opposite of what you're sayng...I don't fear guns, I understand them from a physics standpoint, but I don't understand them from a cultural standpoint. I guess it could be as simple as a big power trip "nobody better mess with me, I've got a gun" I'm not afraid of them, I'm not afraid of people who carry them, I'll take reasonable steps not to get shot by one if one is pulled and aimed at me, but I think I fear guns less than most here. (as demonstrated by my lack of will to obtain and/or carry one)Why is it that the only part you replied to? I keep asking questions and putting stuff out there and you keep deflecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fizzer Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Looks like some of the witnesses are changing their stories: http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/5633259-Witnesses-in-Zimmerman-case-change-stories/ One inadvertently admits it could be influenced by the media prescence though: "I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," Overall, the changes look to hurt Zimmerman's case though, if they can be believed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted May 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 I'm 1000 times more likely to die because someone isn't paying attention to the road than someone actually attacking me out of malice. What are you so afraid of?Annual violent crime rate in the US averages 500 victims per 100k population. About 40 times higher than the traffic fatality rate of 13/100k.Accounting for murder only, the rate is about 5 homicides per 100k population, about two-fifths the rate of traffic fatalities1000 times? If traffic fatalities are 1000 times higher than the homicide rate then that is 5000 deaths per 100k, or 5% of the population annually. In the US there would be 15 million deaths per year, and there are only 4 million births per year. Americans would be extinct in 27 years.That would mean that Ohio would see 575k deaths per year, or 1600 dead per day. 247 deaths per day in Columbus alone.Do you think before you open your mouth? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Yeah....Thanks to the media, this case is all jacked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Annual violent crime rate in the US averages 500 victims per 100k population. About 40 times higher than the traffic fatality rate of 13/100k.Accounting for murder only, the rate is about 5 homicides per 100k population, about two-fifths the rate of traffic fatalities1000 times? If traffic fatalities are 1000 times higher than the homicide rate then that is 5000 deaths per 100k, or 5% of the population annually. In the US there would be 15 million deaths per year, and there are only 4 million births per year. Americans would be extinct in 27 years.That would mean that Ohio would see 575k deaths per year, or 1600 dead per day. 247 deaths per day in Columbus alone.Do you think before you open your mouth? thanks for doing the math... obviously 100 times was a figure of speech... now do the math for my county... not the whole country... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted May 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 If the witnesses prove to be unreliable then we go with the physical evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Why is it that the only part you replied to? I keep asking questions and putting stuff out there and you keep deflecting.oh, are you saying something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted May 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 thanks for doing the math... obviously 100 times was a figure of speech... now do the math for my county... not the whole country...It was 1000. Not 100. You can't even remember your own BS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 thanks for doing the math... obviously 100 times was a figure of speech... now do the math for my county... not the whole country...Cause you NEVER leave your county?oh, are you saying something?Guess not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Cause you NEVER leave your county?it's where I work, and where I sleep... so there is 60 percent of the time by default, I do spend a lot of time at home so probably honesly 85-90% of the time i am here, most of my ventures out are on the roads on my bike, I do stop for gas, but that's 5 minutes of stopped time for 2-3 hours of ride time... and if I'm rolling in a group ride, we usually stop for food...add in winter time where I venture out very little, yeah, you could virtually say I never leave the county...I like my oddsI don't have a sharkbite suit, although I have been to sea world, and near the ocean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 It was 1000. Not 100. You can't even remember your own BS?more evidence pointing to "figure of speech" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 it's where I work, and where I sleep... so there is 60 percent of the time by default, I do spend a lot of time at home so probably honesly 85-90% of the time i am here, most of my ventures out are on the roads on my bike, I do stop for gas, but that's 5 minutes of stopped time for 2-3 hours of ride time... and if I'm rolling in a group ride, we usually stop for food...add in winter time where I venture out very little, yeah, you could virtually say I never leave the county...I like my oddsI don't have a sharkbite suit, although I have been to sea world, and near the ocean.I have a fire extinguisher in my house but its never burned down before. Guess I don't need one. I've walked the vegas strip at midnight, I've stopped for gas at all hours of the night from los angeles california to hartford, conneticut, from savannah georgia to niagara falls. You keep telling all these scary stories like I've never gone anywhere or done anything... I'm 28 yrs old, I've been places, I've done things. But you don't leave your county, remember? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I have a fire extinguisher in my house but its never burned down before. Guess I don't need one.do objects in your home routinely surpass the ignition temperature of other objects in your home? are there any safeguards or barriers keeping those objects from coming into contact? if not, it might be a good idea to have some sort of fire supression system. If it's just adults in your house, and you all have brains in your heads, a fire extinguisher probably isn't necessary.Now, how often are you assaulted and battered out of the blue?Shot at?if this is a problem, you might reconsider some of your lifestyle choices. But you don't leave your county, remember? not often, that's for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted May 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 I have a fire extinguisher in my house but its never burned down before. Guess I don't need one.I have a fire extinguisher in every room and my son learned to use one at age 6 (with instructions that he only use one on a fire that was stopping him getting out the house)I knew a guy who's house set on fire becuase a crack opened up in the chimney liner and embers made is through to the back of the wood siding. My older brother and I nearly died as babies because of a grease fire in the kitchen - the house partially collapsed and we were rescued by the fire department.I once used a flame weeder which apparently kicked up an ember into one of the railroad ties that border my driveway. 6 hours later, after two hours of rain, that ember (fueled by the creosote in the wood) set fire to the bush. I noteiced it within two minutes and used up 4 fire extinguishers keeping the flames low enough that we could get a water house out to it.They're always a good idea to have around because you never know when you need them. Nothing may happen for years and then eventually something may happen. You're either going to be ready or potentially injured or killed. Better to have and nod need, then need and not have. Did you notice when I switched over and started talking about guns again? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted May 24, 2012 Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 (edited) do objects in your home routinely surpass the ignition temperature of other objects in your home? are there any safeguards or barriers keeping those objects from coming into contact? if not, it might be a good idea to have some sort of fire supression system. If it's just adults in your house, and you all have brains in your heads, a fire extinguisher probably isn't necessary.Now, how often are you assaulted and battered out of the blue?Shot at?if this is a problem, you might reconsider some of your lifestyle choices. not often, that's for sure.Building electrical can fail, appliances can short circuit, cooking accidents can happen, I have a five year old... I have a couple of friends who lost their home, possessions and two dogs because their furnace malfunctioned. I find it too easy to keep some fire extinguishers for a little peace of mind. Is it 100% that I'll be able to put out a fire? No of course not but that's a bit more of an edge that I have because shit happens. I also don't run with scissors. This will be wear you say I should walk around in a bubble suit and never leave the house right. Last time I was shot at? About 3 weeks ago. My lifestyle choices are just fine. But the people you walk by on the sidewalk, or drive by, or sit next too at the burger joint, or in line behind at the grocery store...I get to see them at their worst and know what they are capable of. I'm lucky that I don't see the worst of the worst. Most people are good people, I'm just not under the illusion that there aren't people who will harm you for any reason whatsoever. Hell, Midget Todd and his gf were shot trying to get car jacked. His gun saved his life.Let me go this route, seeing what thread we are in anyways. Let us say that Martin is 100% innocent in his actions. He was not acting suspicious in any way and was only minding his business walking home. This was a decent neighbor hood too right? Yeah they had break ins but not murders and all that, right? Let's say that Zimmerman was the aggressor. This is what a large percentage of people believe and if IIRC, you do as well. So Zimmerman had the advantage because he had the gun. Martin was fighting and throwing elbows, as you say would be your response to a threat, as evident by Zimmerman's injuries. What did Martin's "throwing elbows" get him? Would it have evened up the odds had he been legally caring a firearm? What would have been a good option for Martin in this situation? Edited May 24, 2012 by chevysoldier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.