Boy killed for walking while black

Frankly, whenever I think Gary Busey now, I think of Rifftrax's merciless parodies of him.

Well Freezer, seeing that GB's epic Aw Yeaaah face, even if the image is mental, while reading mikey's treacherous.... hmm, what would you call some of the garbage he spits out anyway?


Well it makes it hilarious for me.

More to the subject...

Well, according to the news, they are looking to charge Zimmerman and he’s turned himself in. Y’all can go to bed happy now, right? Granted, we can speculate all we like, but the fact still remains that Zimmerman wasn’t actually looking to kill some kid “for walking while black”.

We have politics and the media to thank for that more than anything.

Oh, and on that note...the whole story I pointed out here where Zimmerman was one of the only non-black faces to stand up and be counted—to marshal the local black community—over the beating of a black homeless guy by Sanford police?

Completely overlooked by the media. What. A. Shocker.

Once again, what doesn’t paint the picture is left off the palette when you’re talking about a crucial Swing State like Florida; the white guy who got beat up in Toledo, the black guy who was beaten to death by admitted, racist idiots...don’t matter to our Manchurian Candidate.

In-deedy. Some are more equal than others.

Perhaps, now that the media’s circus has had its run in the rings, the Families involved can grieve. Soon as the attention goes cold, so will the interests of the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, the NBPP...and hey, the National Black Caucus has managed to get its foot in the door to chip at laws that’ll force the citizens who normally obey the law to lie down and take it like good little victims. The criminals (no matter their melanin count) won’t be any less armed than they already are, but will be given greater license since the general population may not be legally able to defend itself as readily.

Right up there with how criminals can sue if they gen injured during a home invasion or how the person who owns the land is "responsible" if a crook trying to escape injures him or herself on their property. This goes beyond the pale.

Like the old phrase goes:

Quote :

When they outlaw guns, I’ll become a criminal.

No, scratch that. Because I don’t toe the line, I already am.

Un1t 0n3 wrote:

More to the subject...

Well, according to the news, they are looking to charge Zimmerman and he’s turned himself in. Y’all can go to bed happy now, right? Granted, we can speculate all we like, but the fact still remains that Zimmerman wasn’t actually looking to kill some kid “for walking while black”.

We have politics and the media to thank for that more than anything.

Oh, and on that note...the whole story I pointed out here where Zimmerman was one of the only non-black faces to stand up and be counted—to marshal the local black community—over the beating of a black homeless guy by Sanford police?

Completely overlooked by the media. What. A. Shocker.

Once again, what doesn’t paint the picture is left off the palette when you’re talking about a crucial Swing State like Florida; the white guy who got beat up in Toledo, the black guy who was beaten to death by admitted, racist idiots...don’t matter to our Manchurian Candidate.

In-deedy. Some are more equal than others.

Perhaps, now that the media’s circus has had its run in the rings, the Families involved can grieve. Soon as the attention goes cold, so will the interests of the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, the NBPP...and hey, the National Black Caucus has managed to get its foot in the door to chip at laws that’ll force the citizens who normally obey the law to lie down and take it like good little victims. The criminals (no matter their melanin count) won’t be any less armed than they already are, but will be given greater license since the general population may not be legally able to defend itself as readily.

Right up there with how criminals can sue if they gen injured during a home invasion or how the person who owns the land is "responsible" if a crook trying to escape injures him or herself on their property. This goes beyond the pale.

Like the old phrase goes:

Quote :

When they outlaw guns, I’ll become a criminal.

No, scratch that. Because I don’t toe the line, I already am.

Like hawaiian said earlier... The skin-heads got involved and are behind zimmerman, it doesn't matter that if the case was in self defense and that Martin was really being aggro towards zim. Once the skin-heads are involved, the case is pretty much over. As MOST people hate and/or show animosity towards the Neo-nazi group.


Personally, I could give less of a fuck about this, and I'm half black, I don't see why the fuck this thing has been blown out of proportion. But then again, human stupidity in general never ceases to amaze me.

Un1t 0n3 wrote:

More to the subject...

Well, according to the news, they are looking to charge Zimmerman and he’s turned himself in. Y’all can go to bed happy now, right?

In a word: yes. That's all most of us wanted. And if the local DAs hadn't dragged their feet on the issue, this never becomes the (inter?)national cause celeb it's grown into.

Un1t 0n3 wrote:

Oh, and on that note...the whole story I pointed out here where Zimmerman was one of the only non-black faces to stand up and be counted—to marshal the local black community—over the beating of a black homeless guy by Sanford police?

Completely overlooked by the media. What. A. Shocker.

I've been lurking here for ages and I've not responded to anything because - well - I can't be arsed to read your big-ass posts.

I've gotta ask: What is the point of this argument?


Zimmerman did something nice once. So? He's being charged with manslaughter not with aggravated support of a public movement.

Are you trying to say something like: "Zimmerman did something nice once so he can't possibly be guilty of manslaughter?" Is that it?

Because I totally did some volunteer work for the British Heart Foundation once - does that mean I can hold up a corner store? Just a small one?


The media probably "overlooked" it because it has shit all to do with his charge of manslaughter. Ever think of that? I can't think of even a Fox news "Researcher" looking at this case and saying to his bosses: "Well, yeah - he's been charged with manslaughter, but we should totally protect his image because he backed a public movement once."


Like I said - I really haven't been arsed to read your other posts but I honestly get the impression that this is your only point of contention. "Criminal charged with X totally misunderstood because the Liberal, George Soros-backed Media Empire (TM) totally buried all the good things he ever did before the alleged crime."

Freezer wrote:

And because so many of us have Mikey on Ignore, yours are the only posts we see.

Wait, wait. You're saying that someone who actually uses their Ignore function would put Mikey on it, but not Chris? What madness is this?

Okay, by show of hands: how many people (excluding those who have felt personally attacked) have put Mikey on Ignore but chosen to keep Chris visible??? I don't mean if you have both, or none, that's fair enough. But if you have a preference?!


See the thing is, Mikey can be offensive, but he can also be funny. Chris, on the other hand, is sometimes boring and sometimes stupid and always lame, and he makes me sigh and hang my head and make quiet crying sounds.

grmblfjx wrote:

Okay, by show of hands: how many people (excluding those who have felt personally attacked) have put Mikey on Ignore but chosen to keep Chris visible??? I don't mean if you have both, or none, that's fair enough. But if you have a preference?!

I just gloss over Mikey's posts. His avatar, everytime I see it, I swear to God is going, "WWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!" every time. I just don't give a shit about anything Chris has to say.

WD40 wrote:

Un1t 0n3 wrote:

Oh, and on that note...the whole story I pointed out here where Zimmerman was one of the only non-black faces to stand up and be counted—to marshal the local black community—over the beating of a black homeless guy by Sanford police?

Completely overlooked by the media. What. A. Shocker.

I've been lurking here for ages and I've not responded to anything because - well - I can't be arsed to read your big-ass posts.

I've gotta ask: What is the point of this argument?


Zimmerman did something nice once. So? He's being charged with manslaughter not with aggravated support of a public movement.

Are you trying to say something like: "Zimmerman did something nice once so he can't possibly be guilty of manslaughter?" Is that it?

Because I totally did some volunteer work for the British Heart Foundation once - does that mean I can hold up a corner store? Just a small one?


The media probably "overlooked" it because it has shit all to do with his charge of manslaughter. Ever think of that? I can't think of even a Fox news "Researcher" looking at this case and saying to his bosses: "Well, yeah - he's been charged with manslaughter, but we should totally protect his image because he backed a public movement once."


Like I said - I really haven't been arsed to read your other posts but I honestly get the impression that this is your only point of contention. "Criminal charged with X totally misunderstood because the Liberal, George Soros-backed Media Empire (TM) totally buried all the good things he ever did before the alleged crime."

Actually, I think here the point was that Zimmerman may not have shot Martin for racist reasons.

This whole thing went from a tragedy to a major clusterfuck, with too many people left, right, and center trying to use it for their own reasons, rather than focusing on the real point--an unarmed kid was shot and killed. I'm glad that Zimmerman has been arrested and charged--maybe now the justice system can get to the bottom of it and determine why the incident happened, who did what when and why, etc.

Or maybe I'm being too optimistic. One would hope that a trial would focus only on the incident itself, but undoubtedly other things that have no relevance will get dragged in--Martin's multiple suspensions, for example, or Zimmerman's past jail time.

WD40 wrote:

Zimmerman did something nice once. So? He's being charged with manslaughter not with aggravated support of a public movement.

Are you trying to say something like: "Zimmerman did something nice once so he can't possibly be guilty of manslaughter?" Is that it?

Because I totally did some volunteer work for the British Heart Foundation once - does that mean I can hold up a corner store? Just a small one?

About that nice thing that Zimmerman supposedly did: Did he really do that? The only report on that from an actual news source I can find on this says that Zimmerman's family claims he did, but isn't this the same crew that claimed Martin broke Zimmerman's nose when he clearly hadn't?

(Not that is really matters.)

Hot Cancer wrote:

You are a moron, Chris. A complete fucking moron.

If I were, I might actually be crazy enough to think I could afford to keep quiet in the face of blatantly false accusations against me.

Hot Cancer wrote:

Drop it. Actually don't. Don't even pick it up in the first place.

Letting your enemy have the last word in an argument is a sign of weakness. Strong people always defend themselves.

Hot Cancer wrote:

I've toyed with the idea that you're in fact a troll, since your responses to anyone saying anything even slightly mean to you are so over the top, formulaic and predictable, but if you are, you've waited 4 years for the pay-off of telling everyone. Hard-pressed to think anyone would bother with the shtick for that long without coming out with "lol I troll you!!!" by now. So I'm left to conclude that a 45 year old man in Massachussets sits in front of his computer genuinely thinking that saying "you've offended me, I demand an apology" and then insisting to others that it's someone else's fault will achieve a postive outcome, or is somehow necessary to save face. On an internet forum. That, sir, quite frankly, is sad.

What's truly sad is the idea that you actually think I had any choice other than confrontation after Mikey launched his latest flame war against me.

Hot Cancer wrote:

Since you get out of joint about so little, I genuinely wonder what sort of explosion of rage I'd induce from you if I just plain out called you a piece of shit.

It wouldn't seem "so little" to you if you were in my shoes buddy.

P.S. That "troll" comment was totally out of line.

Chris, Mikey flames everyone. He can't help himself. He's like gasoline on a barbecue.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

The New York Rangers are predominately white. Therefore, everything not New York Ranger is not white. Therefore not whites are bad.

So you basically approve of racially motivated murder. Wonderful.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

I'll tell you exactly what you're going to do. You're going to fling shit around indiscriminately like a mentally addled chimp....

If I were truly mentally addled, I might actually be willing to hold fire when somebody attacks me for no reason.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

It's like you know what you're doing as you're doing it and don't give a fuck that, seven years later, YOU'RE STILL DOING IT.

.

Quit trying to make me the villain in your little soap opera. You know as well as I do that you're totally to blame for this mess.

Lady Anne wrote:

Chris, Mikey flames everyone. He can't help himself. He's like gasoline on a barbecue.

But he always saves his worst attacks for me.

Chris91 wrote:

Lady Anne wrote:

Chris, Mikey flames everyone. He can't help himself. He's like gasoline on a barbecue.

But he always saves his worst attacks for me.

Which makes it all the more funnier, since you're gonna step right up and bend right over, then proceed to flail for weeks on end

grmblfjx wrote:

Freezer wrote:

And because so many of us have Mikey on Ignore, yours are the only posts we see.

Wait, wait. You're saying that someone who actually uses their Ignore function would put Mikey on it, but not Chris? What madness is this?

For reasons I can't really articulate, Chris has never annoyed me the Mikey can. Which is odd when I think about it, because, as annoying as Mikey can be, his posts tend to be on point far more than Chris' do.

Maybe it's because, up till now, I've somehow avoided the threads where Chris really got rolling. Maybe his habit of coming in a day late and a dollar short meant I'd stopped paying attention by the time he did show? I don't know.

But I do know that's changed now. *Runs off to Ignore list*

Reidmar wrote:

Chris91 wrote:

Lady Anne wrote:

Chris, Mikey flames everyone. He can't help himself. He's like gasoline on a barbecue.

But he always saves his worst attacks for me.

Which makes it all the more funnier, since you're gonna step right up and bend right over, then proceed to flail for weeks on end

You wouldn't think it was so funny if you were the one being targeted. It's not like I can just walk away.

P.S.: I've been known to have shouting matches with my own parents when they say something to me that sounds like an insult or an unfair criticism. If I'm willing to get in their faces, what makes you think I'll tolerate personal attacks from a total stranger?

grmblfjx wrote:

Freezer wrote:

And because so many of us have Mikey on Ignore, yours are the only posts we see.

Wait, wait. You're saying that someone who actually uses their Ignore function would put Mikey on it, but not Chris? What madness is this?

I had, but not any more.

Chris, if you're paying attention: Quit sniffing Mickey's farts and then going on and on about how bad they smell. We already know that. People would actually not think less of you if you just ignored them too.

Of course they would. Only cowards let false accusations go unchallenged.

Chris91 wrote:

Reidmar wrote:

Chris91 wrote:

Lady Anne wrote:

Chris, Mikey flames everyone. He can't help himself. He's like gasoline on a barbecue.

But he always saves his worst attacks for me.

Which makes it all the more funnier, since you're gonna step right up and bend right over, then proceed to flail for weeks on end

You wouldn't think it was so funny if you were the one being targeted. It's not like I can just walk away.

P.S.: I've been known to have shouting matches with my own parents when they say something to me that sounds like an insult or an unfair criticism. If I'm willing to get in their faces, what makes you think I'll tolerate personal attacks from a total stranger?

Scroll back up, idiot. I said I would laugh, read:LAUGH at mikey's posts insults that are directed towards me.

Besides, why would I care about how some thirty/fourty young manchimp/child can get in his parents face and whine to them.

Reidmar wrote:

Besides, why would I care about how some thirty/fourty young manchimp/child can get in his parents face and whine to them.

Who's whining? Like I said in one of my previous posts, only weak people shy away from defending themselves when somebody else is verbally attacking them.