Printable View
Sexy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I don't know if Zimmerman's side of the story is gonna be a big seller. People are wrapped up in this image of a racist white man stalking and gunning down a young black child in cold blood. That's what people want to believe. The truth of what happened isn't as sexy.
I tried to avoid these cause majority of people are idiots. I like Charles Barkleys opinion on this.
The liberty to defend yourself, your family, your property. The freedom to protect yourself. Why do you think that is wrong? You can't uninvent the gun, criminals WILL get them. But hey you go trust the government and call the police and WAITQuote:
Originally Posted by impWhat liberty and freedom are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongYou don't believe in liberty? Aaaaand there's the problem with England and the whole of Europe. You're scared of your own freedomQuote:
Originally Posted by impThats the kind of mentality that we dont have..and dont want.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongOh you find it "disturbing" :gay5:Quote:
Originally Posted by imp
America IS a big place and gun laws DO vary from state to state and where you see the most strict gun laws is where you see the worst, most violent crimes...most often using guns.
It's NEVER happened in the UK?!?!? Dude in 2005 police IN ENGLAND shot a guy 8 times and he was just standing there being Brazilian in the middle of the day.
Americans love guns because Americans believe in liberty and individuality. The gun levels the playing field when it comes to crime, the idea that any private law abiding citizen could be packing heat really sinks into the mind of a criminal and they want nothing to do with robbing someone who could draw down on them.
The media play up gun violence to try and get Americans to give up their guns but I tell you you're safer WITH a gun than without one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=682JLrsUmEM
The police had guns that killed the brazillian.
Do you have a gun big boy?
Stop beating around the bush.
You can not compare the USA and the UK. The general population here have no desire to own firearms. We are not afraid of "freedom" and it is a fact that because of their general unavailability fewer criminals are armed. The US have a long history and different culture in which Gun ownership is deeply enshrined. This is partly why the Zimmerman/Martin case is seen very differently by both countries. It is not the case that all Brits want to oversimplify and misrepresent it as a race issue, it is seen as both a busybody/vigilante sticking his nose in and then using disproportionate force. Most are happy to leave law enforcement to the Police here and pulling out a gun in a fist fight/brawl is seen as bad form and cowardly even amongst scallys.
If we can't compare them then why is there a constant push to get the US to be more like the UK? Also it should be pointed out that Democrats are always moving to make the US more like Europe in general. Higher taxes, more welfare, etc. Granted these are RHETORICAL questions from me about Liberal Democrats in the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
As far as gun ownership goes all it takes to understand the differences in cultures is to look and see how the countries and governments were founded and WHEN they were founded. England and all the old school European nations were well established before the gun was even invented and they've seen the gun add to anarchy rather than peace which is the complete opposite of America. In America settlers were on their own, they had little protection in terms of law enforcement and as they worked their way west that was more and more the norm. The protection for those settlers was in their own hands, not in the numbers of a group, not in the confines of a city, but in the wilderness by themselves with GUNS. Guns for hunting, guns for protection...guns were the sole reason they could raise livestock, you can't fend off wolves, coyotes, mountain lions, rustlers, etc with a knife. Guns were used to fend off attacks from Indians, outlaws, any kind of unwanted pests or criminals. If you were a settler you depended on your gun and the importance of firearms has not diminished at all to the people of America. We still hunt, we still farm, we still protect ourselves. That self reliance is something to be cherished and not frowned upon.
The Zimmerman/Martin case is SIMPLY explained. Both parties were in the wrong, but not to a criminal extent. Zimmerman was overzealous in trailing Martin, but had the Police done their fucking due diligence perhaps this situation could have been avoided. If there are constant robberies and break ins then park your fat doughnut eating lard asses in that neighborhood and catch someone or at least be a nuisance to crime with your presence. As for Martin, it is not a logical or rational act to sucker punch someone who is following you. A vocal or verbal confrontation is understandable, but a physical altercation is not the A#1 thing you do. A simple "Hey, are you following me?" would have likely ended the matter quickly and peacefully. I don't get in street fights or have many violent confrontations simply because I have tact, I never act with force from the get go and it strikes me as very odd that so many people seem to think Martin was justified in the physical attack of Zimmerman.
What, are you going to take that literally and suggest I find the death of Trayvon sexually stimulating? Is that what you're getting at? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzSexy?Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerQuote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I don't know if Zimmerman's side of the story is gonna be a big seller. People are wrapped up in this image of a racist white man stalking and gunning down a young black child in cold blood. That's what people want to believe. The truth of what happened isn't as sexy.
For sure, and I said from day one that I'm not standing up for Zimmerman as a guy. He sounds like a douchey, wanna-be cop busy-body. He's also said a lot of messed up shit (this was god's plan, ect). On a personal level, I don't like Zimmerman.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
But the fact is, LEGALLY there was only one crime committed on that night, and the crime was committed by Treyvon. There's really nothing you can punish Zimmerman for legally. It's fine to say "well common sense says he shouldn't have followed", ect, but legally he did nothing wrong. You can follow anyone you want unless they have a restraining order against you.
I just don't see Zimmerman making good with this. Even with OJ Simpson, where OJ quite clearly was guilty of those two murders, he was such a beloved figure that he had tons of people on his side.
How do you sell Zimmerman to the public? Everyone hates him.
George Zimmerman is royally screwed. He's in a very tough spot partly because of his own actions but MAINLY due to an overzealous media.
If Zimmerman was wrong for following Trayvon then the media is even MORE wrong in how they initially covered the story. The way the media covered the story I was surprised that George wasn't strung up by the highest tree in all of Florida people were just that angry because of what the media had whipped up and ON PURPOSE! They edited 911 tapes for fucks sake!
I don't trust the media, they are slaves to their ratings and to their liberal ideals and believe you me every single news anchor on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and even a few on Fox News are liberal hacks. They don't report the news they create a Soap Opera storyline for the idiots that still pay attention to them to follow. They don't present facts they present a view of the world filled with their biases and agendas. And that's why there was outrage over what the 'Duck Dynasty' guy said and what Paula Deen said and 0 outrage over what Alec Baldwin and Al Sharpton have said.
For sure. We live in such a highly-sensitive, righteously indignant culture and that is perpetuated by mainstream media.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
IMO it's a sickness. It's like Tony Montana said, everybody wants to be able to point their finger and say "see, that's the bad guy".
Well we kinda did have a black George Zimmerman, named Roderick Scott.Quote:
Originally Posted by imp
40 year old Roderick Scott, a black man, confronted a 17 year old white kid who was breaking into cars on his neighbourhood. Roderick pulled out a gun and ordered the kid to freeze until the cops came. The kid apparently started coming towards Scott, so he opened fire, killing the kid.
Charges were completely dropped.
I doubt many people (if any) here have heard about this case. It doesn't make for such a compelling story when it's the other way around.
Doesn't fit the media agendaQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerWell we kinda did have a black George Zimmerman, named Roderick Scott.Quote:
Originally Posted by imp
40 year old Roderick Scott, a black man, confronted a 17 year old white kid who was breaking into cars on his neighbourhood. Roderick pulled out a gun and ordered the kid to freeze until the cops came. The kid apparently started coming towards Scott, so he opened fire, killing the kid.
Charges were completely dropped.
I doubt many people (if any) here have heard about this case. It doesn't make for such a compelling story when it's the other way around.
For sure.
I was reading about an anti-Zimmerman painting that got taken off of Ebay a week or so ago.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/wp-conten...12/hoodies.jpg
The painting itself sums up the ignorance perpetrated by the media: the big, bad, card-carrying Klan member who was just YEARNING to off a black person for years stalks and guns down a tiny black child.
You can count on one hand the national media outlets that saw it fit to include little facts like...
-Zimmerman is half Latino, and has always identified himself as "latino" on any official form that asks for race.
-Zimmerman has black people in his family.
-Zimmerman took a black girl to his prom.
-Zimmerman tutored/mentored young black youth.
-Zimmerman helped organize/participate a movement to have a white man who pummeled a homeless black man charged with a hate crime.
But hey, that doesn't get people watching. Race wars get people watching.
@Andre they found all the guns in Australia. I'd like to point out some stupidity though. There is no glock that costs 10k and I've never heard of a modern rifle worth 50k.
Australian police find 328 guns, 4.2 tons of ammo at farm - World News
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerWell we kinda did have a black George Zimmerman, named Roderick Scott.Quote:
Originally Posted by imp
40 year old Roderick Scott, a black man, confronted a 17 year old white kid who was breaking into cars on his neighbourhood. Roderick pulled out a gun and ordered the kid to freeze until the cops came. The kid apparently started coming towards Scott, so he opened fire, killing the kid.
Charges were completely dropped.
I doubt many people (if any) here have heard about this case. It doesn't make for such a compelling story when it's the other way around.
That would have been met with the same disbelief here in Europe and in the UK people would expect to see him charged with murder. Its not about race. The idea that only white people are capable of racism is also a ridiculous one, some latinos and asian bigots are often much more vociferously anti black than white people, so that is a red herring.
Maybe one of the Aussies got hold of one of Saddam's gold plated AK's?Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlie
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/ph...10/30/ak47.jpg