Zimmerman on the ground taking punches to the face...

[hudsonvalley]

How about the New York State Senators showing their lunacy two days ago?

Eric Adams on the right...former NYC cop and founder of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement...here is what he's done lately:

Brooklyn Pol Fights Crack By Way of Sagging Pants: Gothamist
2010_03_stopthesag.jpg

Brooklyn politician Eric Adams is hoping get crack use down by urging Crown Heights youth to pull their pants up. To that end he’s spending $2,000 in campaign cash to erect six giant bill boards issuing the commandment “Stop the Sag!” There’s an accompanying Youtube video (below) in which Adams announces “If we raise our pants we raise our image,” and “We are better than this.” Supposedly the trend has its origins in prison culture, where inmates’ pants sag because they aren’t permitted to wear belts.

Adams himself says he’s never sagged. "On a practical level, how do they even walk?" said the perplexed ex-cop. One Crown Height male explained: "It's more comfortable below the hip," 19-year-old Saquan Spaulding told the News. "It's a young thing."

Here's the video......Stop the Sag. - YouTube

So hoody's are okay but saggy pants no? I am so confused...is Gold the color this season? Idiots...

[944turbo]

19-year-old Saquan Spaulding told the News. "It's a young thing."

Um...no. People are laughing at you. It's a dork thing.

[IDF]

Florida's "stand your ground" statute:

Title XLVI CRIMES

Chapter 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

View Entire Chapter

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—


(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

that law should be in the constitution for EVERY state

[305tillimove]

Z. did not violate any laws by approaching him. He has done so in the past, resulting in several arrests. Just because a dispatcher told him to back off doesnt make it a law magically. He had every right to approach him just as T had every right to ignore Z. Since there is only one testimony to base the case on, police cannot arrest z. Because they do not have resonable cause to do so. The DA also declined to prosecute due to insufficient evidence as well. All in all both partys involved were ass holes; had trayvon not responded the way he did he might still be alive. Like-wise if z didnt feel the need to be a condo commando T. Might still be alive. The story is sketchy, the facts are blurred and the media is full of ****.

Fact of the matter is the leftist media is putting a spin onto this story to promote their own agenda. As gun owners we need to see past the media hooplah and understand that this is a clear cut attack on our rights to defend ourselves. FL legislators are calling for a special session to re evaluate the stand your ground law. This will NOT help us in any way...

[mnstrbetle]

Im having a hoodie printed up tomorow that says... you can wait to get your Fkin skittles in the morning when the sun comes up.

[klarowe]

This is actually a pretty good read: Misconceptions in the Trayvon Martin Case

[meketrefe]

[Bob]

Slightly off-topic, but slightly related...

Where's the outrage for Allen Goin?

Police: Pair Set 13-Year-Old Boy On Fire - Kansas City News Story - KMBC Kansas City

[Jetster]

I remember that case meketrefe.amazing what a human can do to another in these days and times!

[TradersBASE]

Saggy pants and a hoodie aren't comparable at all IMO. I'm 35 and wear hoodies often, when it's raining or chilly especially. The police report said Zimmerman's back was wet and had grass stains leading me to believe it was raining and overcast, probably a bit chilly even. I think the politicians wearing hoodies is lame, but not as lame as some considering a hoodie as grounds to approach and engage a "suspicious" person.

I think Zimmerman was well within his rights to call if he felt the kid was suspicious and unknown to the neighborhood. i don't think he was within his rights to become an aggressor while armed and nobody facing imminent danger. Imminent danger would sway my opinion almost 180 but that hasn't been reported as the case...at all...in any of the 100 versions floating around out there.

I was a skateboarder that wore baggy clothes and to some probably considered a hoodlum or nuisance. I was frowned upon by elders in many cases but never approached for my clothing choice. Using some folks logic it would have been ok for me to be approached aggressively and I just cannot agree with that.

Besides walking with a hood up at night what else was "suspicious" to the point he needed to approach as an armed "captain" of the watch team?

[Gunner57]

Maybe the fact that he did not recognize him and there had been a string of robberies in the neighborhood.

[Gunner57]

Trader - I have not picked any sides here since I don't think any of us could possibly know what really went on that night.

I am curious though as to how you know that Zimmerman was the aggressor.

[coolbreez67]

Why are so many people speculating that Zimmerman thought Martin looked suspicious because he was wearing a hoodie? If I'm not mistaken, the only time he mentioned a hoodie is when the dispatcher asked for a description. Zimmerman never mentioned a hoodie as his reasoning for thinking the kid looked suspicious. If I'm wrong, someone show me.

[Gunner57]

Cool - it's because that is what the moron race baiters what everyone to believe. It's the old saying, if you say something often enough, people will believe it's true.

[TradersBASE]

Trader - I have not picked any sides here since I don't think any of us could possibly know what really went on that night.

I am curious though as to how you know that Zimmerman was the aggressor.

First, thank you for taking a civil approach. I highly respect you and hope I've earned your respect as well.

One undisputed fact is that he stepped out of his car and approached which automatically makes him the aggressor in the situation. He put himself and others in harms way by his actions, made even worse by him packing. I'm not saying he swung first or grabbed the kid, don't misunderstand my use of "aggressor" please. My hunch is that given his 911/police call history he's a tad paranoid, needs alot of attention and is a wannabe cop. I imagine he went up to the kid and said something like "what the hell are you doing in here" given the circumstantial evidence. That's my opinion but the aggressor part is factual. I also don't buy his story of getting out of the car, looking and not seeing the kid and just walking back to his SUV before being put on the defensive. If it looks and smells like duck $hit there is probably a duck around.

This is the issue I have with the "stand your ground" law...at what point and who decides who is the aggressor before it's too late and what constitutes self defense and what amounts to crossing the line? I don't think the average American is capable of making the right decision under pressure quite honestly. Police go through specific training for a reason and that is why Zimmerman should have let the police handle this suspicious activity.

Again, I would be singing a different tune if he was stopping a rape, beating, robbery, break in etc... Nothing has been reported of the sort, just that a kid with a hoodie in the dark didn't seem to belong in the area. I look at things contextually and the suspicious factor alone does not grant a right to approach & confront, not as a private citizen. I understand to some this is more opinion than fact but it's logical enough that I consider it damn near fact. We pay police for a reason and they are trained to deal with facts and evidence, hard evidence. Private citizens aren't held to the same standard of accountability.

[TradersBASE]

Cool - it's because that is what the moron race baiters what everyone to believe. It's the old saying, if you say something often enough, people will believe it's true.

This is VERY true, especially when it comes to racism. I loathe Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Obama for feeding into the racism movement. They do more to CAUSE racism than any other group. The divide is made worse by the media pitting groups, races etc... against each other. The insistence to divide and polarize is the key reason Americans fail to unite for our greater good.

[Wacky Worm]

coolbreez67

Why are so many people speculating that Zimmerman thought Martin looked suspicious because he was wearing a hoodie? If I'm not mistaken, the only time he mentioned a hoodie is when the dispatcher asked for a description. Zimmerman never mentioned a hoodie as his reasoning for thinking the kid looked suspicious. If I'm wrong, someone show me.

Geraldo and his take on "hoodies", from last week I think.

[TradersBASE]

Geraldo and his take on "hoodies", from last week I think.

From the same media sensationalist that brought us...
GERALDO RIVERA BREAKS HIS NOSE - SKINHEAD BRAWL 1988 - YouTube

I'm not shocked he's stirring the pot. One of the funniest things I've seen was his hype over the Capone vault that proved to be empty. ROFL...on national TV. Epic Fail!

[coolbreez67]

Geraldo Rivera is an idiot. Anytime his mouth opens, I tend to tune him out. I don't know why he is still on television. He has no credibility. I remember when Shasta and Dylan Groene were abducted by Joseph Duncan in Northern Idaho. He killed the mother, boyfriend and older brother and took the young kids. Then he killed Dylan. Luckily the girl was found. Rivera said on TV that Duncan didn't kill those people, he just abducted the kids. He wasn't a murderer, just a pedophile. That and the deal with the Al Capone vault sealed his stupidity in my mind.

[lmtless2]

this was my Facebook status today LOL

[default14845]

First, thank you for taking a civil approach. I highly respect you and hope I've earned your respect as well.

One undisputed fact is that he stepped out of his car and approached which automatically makes him the aggressor in the situation. He put himself and others in harms way by his actions, made even worse by him packing. I'm not saying he swung first or grabbed the kid, don't misunderstand my use of "aggressor" please. My hunch is that given his 911/police call history he's a tad paranoid, needs alot of attention and is a wannabe cop. I imagine he went up to the kid and said something like "what the hell are you doing in here" given the circumstantial evidence. That's my opinion but the aggressor part is factual. I also don't buy his story of getting out of the car, looking and not seeing the kid and just walking back to his SUV before being put on the defensive. If it looks and smells like duck $hit there is probably a duck around.

This is the issue I have with the "stand your ground" law...at what point and who decides who is the aggressor before it's too late and what constitutes self defense and what amounts to crossing the line? I don't think the average American is capable of making the right decision under pressure quite honestly. Police go through specific training for a reason and that is why Zimmerman should have let the police handle this suspicious activity.

Again, I would be singing a different tune if he was stopping a rape, beating, robbery, break in etc... Nothing has been reported of the sort, just that a kid with a hoodie in the dark didn't seem to belong in the area. I look at things contextually and the suspicious factor alone does not grant a right to approach & confront, not as a private citizen. I understand to some this is more opinion than fact but it's logical enough that I consider it damn near fact. We pay police for a reason and they are trained to deal with facts and evidence, hard evidence. Private citizens aren't held to the same standard of accountability.

So by your logic, If I'm in public "packing" and I see a couple arguing to the point where it may get physical, I shouldn't try to deescalate the situation? primarily with verbal messaging nothing physical of course. Just call 911 and wait 5 to 15 minutes for the police? I must be the aggresor in that one too, or how about if I'm out with my friends in public or on my porch and someone takes something I said the wrong way and I get jumped? SYG makes sense to me, sounds like zimmerman was investigating, lost track of his subject and was flanked....sounds justifiable in that sense. Obviously none of this is relevent to us as we live in communist New York. But anyways continue......

[klarowe]

In most of the reports I've read, Zimmerman never "approached" Treyvon. He followed him, but never actually gained any ground on him. And according to the reports it was to maintain visual to be able to provide a location for the police. As soon as the dispatcher told him to discontinue following him, Zimmerman said "ok" and supposedly returned to his vehicle where he was then attacked. I don't see how he was the aggressor at all... if those facts are in fact true.

[TradersBASE]

So by your logic, If I'm in public "packing" and I see a couple arguing to the point where it may get physical, I shouldn't try to deescalate the situation? primarily with verbal messaging nothing physical of course. Just call 911 and wait 5 to 15 minutes for the police? I must be the aggresor in that one too, or how about if I'm out with my friends in public or on my porch and someone takes something I said the wrong way and I get jumped? SYG makes sense to me, sounds like zimmerman was investigating, lost track of his subject and was flanked....sounds justifiable in that sense. Obviously none of this is relevent to us as we live in communist New York. But anyways continue......

Please re-read what I said and try to think with your emotions turned off. No, in the example you provided there would be imminent danger present and stepping in is a noble and acceptable thing to do. Of course you're bound by local laws and restrictions on using your gun, aggressing etc... MOST Americans would do nothing, probably not even call 911 to be honest. I don't agree with the hands off, blind eye approach but with our overly litigated society that seems to be the best approach to protect oneself...financially and criminally.

Your closing comment sounded like strategic, well trained police talk. Flanked and lost track of the subject while "investigating". A private citizen on mere "suspicions" doesn't or shouldn't have the right to "investigate" without the above discussed imminent danger present. Private citizens aren't trained to handle that type of situation responsibly and when kangaroo court is in session sometimes the future becomes permanently altered.

If he killed the kid while he was robbing, raping and/or directly putting another life at risk I would call Zimmerman a hero. I'm not some tree hugging pu$$y here. Jeez. But that just isn't the case based on all accounts I've read, suspicion does not = imminent danger.

[TradersBASE]

In most of the reports I've read, Zimmerman never "approached" Treyvon. He followed him, but never actually gained any ground on him. And according to the reports it was to maintain visual to be able to provide a location for the police. As soon as the dispatcher told him to discontinue following him, Zimmerman said "ok" and supposedly returned to his vehicle where he was then attacked. I don't see how he was the aggressor at all... if those facts are in fact true.

This is the 1st I've heard about this twist on the chain of events. If the above is true I would be far more lenient towards Zimmerman, though I still feel he had no business following on foot without imminent danger present. Especially while packing.

[Bob]

So let me get this straight...

I have the knowledge that there has been in increase of burglaries in my neighborhood recently. My neighbor is out of town. As I'm pulling out of my driveway to pick up lunch, I see someone I've never seen in the neighborhood before hanging around my neighbor's house.

I don't have the right to get out of my car and approach them? If I do, I'm the aggressor?