Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ShumaGorath wrote:How is no mod doing anything about this? Why am I the one that keeps getting banned for this stuff

You can go ahead and stop trying to make this about you. I think you'll find an in-thread warning specifically about the language you're referencing. As you very well know, all non-public moderation is confidential.

Manchu wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:How is no mod doing anything about this? Why am I the one that keeps getting banned for this stuff

You can go ahead and stop trying to make this about you. I think you'll find an in-thread warning specifically about the language you're referencing. As you very well know, all non-public moderation is confidential.

Confidential, except when you make an edit to the thread which implies action was taken. I still see people talking about feeding a kids body to alligators.

Unless that metaphorical kid is posting on the site, that doesn't break any of the rules, right?

@ShumaGorath:

Personally, I prefer to forestall exactly the kind of moral outrage you are venting right now by editing posts. When the comment has been talked about and passed over and the discussion continues, there is neither a need nor is it appropriate to subtract that part of the discussion. The hope is that someone like you will come along, looking for a fight, and see something like that and then continue to read and realize the fight is over and your side has already won. So there's no need to mount the soapbox yourself. If you wish to continue this discussion, please PM me.

Shuma, I was taking the slash because reading this thread it seems people think if you disagree with ass-raping the guy who it was deemed by the authorities wasn't worth prosecuting, your some sort of weirdo who thinks murder is A-OK.

As I said, if the authorities do feth all, then I don't believe there is an issue 99.9% of the time, America isn't a lawless country.

I full on don't believe that anything happened, because the guy didnt get prosecuted! How hard is that to grasp? It seems to be a circus, and it doesn't sound to me like it warrants a court case.

As I said, I dont think you get to be DA if your a dumb feth.

Why should I take notice of blokes on the internet, and not the DA and the local authorities? Why aren't you out "investigating" every crime the authorities don't decide to prosecute? This kind of thing happens tens of thousands of times a year, but your acting all butt hurt because Spike Lee and the mainstream media got involved?

Do me a favour!

You cant see my point here?! Your acting irrationally because you read all the bs in the media and decided its an enormous travesty of justice! How do you know what really happened? And your sure it was a cold blooded murder of a lovely young kid despite the fact that the actual legal professionals didn't decide to charge the guy initially?!

Hogwash I say. Maybe the DA got it wrong (very slim chance) but it still doesn't warrant all of the gak that this thread and the media have ran up.

As I said, I hope the bloke gets off scot free, proves me right again.

ShumaGorath wrote:
The cowardice of the people on this forum is shocking sometimes. That not only are so many people ok with letting justice be abandoned, that they're somehow appalled that there is even an attempt at a trial is appalling. There is no moral high ground in this country anymore. You know what I'd do if a kid half my size was suspicious? I wouldn't confront him with a gun. You know what I would do if he attacked me without a weapon? I wouldn't murder him point blank with my little push button problem solver. Zimmermans actions were those of a coward. If he's innocent then he's innocent, the court will decide. But he's a coward and so are his supporters.

I mean, look at this. You're discussing how you would bury a teenagers body after aiding in his murder. How is no mod doing anything about this? Why am I the one that keeps getting banned for this stuff

I have bolded some of your text; I'll answer you by make biggering the text that applies below.

CptJake wrote:

AustonT wrote:I think we two have actually run around this horn together before, and you have convinced me that Zimmerman did not actively provoke Martin.

I still believe that Zimmerman approached the situation with malice aforethought. It's a personal conviction though not a legal one. Legally speaking I'm pretty sure Zimmerman is golden. The trial will only waste the time and money of the State of Florida and the breath of countless demagogues.

Here I disagree with you. It probably is not a waste of money if it brings a resolution either way. No decision is going to please everyone, BUT a decision by a judge does force both sides to present their evidence and the public will end up better informed (if they allow themselves to be) and the official answer will be given. There is worth to that in my mind.

The case doesn't have the evidence to support prosecution and I have little doubt it will lead to unanimous acquittal, if not dismissal. At this point with the State AG acting as a Special Prosecutor the case isn't about the law anymore it's pure politics. Bypassing a grand jury for a second degree murder charge just highlights how weak the case really is. With the situation charged the way it is I doubt anyone who hasn't already become better informed, will come away with anything more than a heated opinion. Just another wedge to drive us apart.

ShumaGorath wrote: Zimmermans actions were those of a coward.

This got written as I was posting..

Leading on from what I wrote about your "certainty" and me merely siding with the guys who we trust to do this gak for a living, first of all, how does that make a coward?

And most importantly, where does your certainty come from? There is no ambiguity in your statement. How is it that you are so utterly utterly certain? Did you see some camera footage or something? If so, direct me to it. Ill happily admit if Im wrong, but..well.. it seems a bit silly to display that kinda certainty surely?

mattyrm wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: Zimmermans actions were those of a coward.

This got written as I was posting..

Leading on from what I wrote about your "certainty" and me merely siding with the guys who we trust to do this gak for a living, first of all, how does that make a coward?

And most importantly, where does your certainty come from? There is no ambiguity in your statement. How is it that you are so utterly utterly certain? Did you see some camera footage or something? If so, direct me to it. Ill happily admit if Im wrong, but..well.. it seems a bit silly to display that kinda certainty surely?

Certainty of what? That the act of killing a youth with a lethal weapon when said youth himself was unarmed is cowardly? I have certainty of that because insofar as I can deem things to be acts of cowardice that one certainly applies. About his guilt? I'm not certain either way. I said in my post that whether he is prosecuted or not is an issue of law. Laws don't have opinions. They aren't intelligent arbiters, they're just rules. Rules can be missaplied, but this is a nation of laws and any judgement set down by the courts is something I'll have to deal with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The case doesn't have the evidence to support prosecution and I have little doubt it will lead to unanimous acquittal, if not dismissal. At this point with the State AG acting as a Special Prosecutor the case isn't about the law anymore it's pure politics. Bypassing a grand jury for a second degree murder charge just highlights how weak the case really is. With the situation charged the way it is I doubt anyone who hasn't already become better informed, will come away with anything more than a heated opinion. Just another wedge to drive us apart.

Better a wedge cast in a court of law than a wedge hit home in a DAs office without public oversight. The courts exist to determine truth, there is reasonable public outcry in an event that is anything but cut and dry. This never should of been ignored in the first place. Were his wounds deemed impossible to self inflict? By the very nature of the situation "Stand your ground" doesn't apply, so there never should of been a lack of trial to begin with. This is justice, whether for Zimmerman or Martin. It shouldn't of had to come to this, but it did. Here we are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:
As I said, I dont think you get to be DA if your a dumb feth.

Why should I take notice of blokes on the internet, and not the DA and the local authorities? Why aren't you out "investigating" every crime the authorities don't decide to prosecute? This kind of thing happens tens of thousands of times a year, but your acting all butt hurt because Spike Lee and the mainstream media got involved?

Do me a favour!

I'm acting "butt hurt" because people are showing their true colors and having fun at the death of a kid. It speaks volumes that you think I'm the one out of line. I'm not going to blankly believe the DA because the facts of the case don't line up. They mishandled it from the beginning and are now being coerced into action by public opinion. I have respect for the law system in this country, but I'm not going to blankly believe that the practitioners of it are somehow flawless. People make mistakes. This was an apparent one. Deal with it.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Certainty of what? That the act of killing a youth with a lethal weapon when said youth himself was unarmed is cowardly? I have certainty of that because insofar as I can deem things to be acts of cowardice that one certainly applies. About his guilt? I'm not certain either way. I said in my post that whether he is prosecuted or not is an issue of law. Laws don't have opinions. They aren't intelligent arbiters, they're just rules. Rules can be missaplied, but this is a nation of laws and any judgement set down by the courts is something I'll have to deal with.

Yes exactly, and that's why we have people to make the big decisions. As I said, I can understand where your coming from, if you have catalogued the events in your head and the bloke shot an unarmed kid for no reason at all, then nobody would say the guy wouldn't deserve to go to prison, the point I am trying to get across is that we cant be everywhere at once, so we trust the professionals to get gak done, and thus the world keeps turning.

So, obviously laws don't have opinions, but legal professionals do, and they get trusted to do their jobs and exercise their professional opinions.

That being the crux of my argument, if none of us where there, and none of us witnessed the event, but the local authorities deemed there no need to prosecute, then why should we not listen to the guys who are paid to make those calls for a living?

The simple fact is, gak happens every day. Thousands of crimes and non-crimes cause incidents each and every day, and people do and don't get prosecuted depending on the opinions of the people who are paid to uphold the law, ergo, is it not pointless to instantly presume foul play when it is far more likely that there wasn't any, and the DA didn't prosecute him because the guy didn't need prosecuting?

Alls it boils down to is, I'm a sceptic. And if the guy didn't get prosecuted in the first place, then I think its highly unlikely he should be prosecuted at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:[
I'm acting "butt hurt" because people are showing their true colors and having fun at the death of a kid. It speaks volumes that you think I'm the one out of line. I'm not going to blankly believe the DA because the facts of the case don't line up. They mishandled it from the beginning and are now being coerced into action by public opinion. I have respect for the law system in this country, but I'm not going to blankly believe that the practitioners of it are somehow flawless. People make mistakes. This was an apparent one. Deal with it.

I don't think your out of line... Your entitled to your opinion, and you aren't doing anything malevolent, so its hardly out of line.

I think your being a bit childish and naive, but not out of line.

ShumaGorath wrote:\
Better a wedge cast in a court of law than a wedge hit home in a DAs office without public oversight.

That particular ship has already sailed so your point is kind of moot. DAs routinely decide to or not to prosecute cases imagine what would happen if EVERY person arrested was tried for their alleged offenses, that is the entire reason the DA choses which cases go to trial and which do not.

That being the crux of my argument, if none of us where there, and none of us witnessed the event, but the local authorities deemed there no need to prosecute, then why should we not listen to the guys who are paid to make those calls for a living?

Because sometimes they feth it up, when they do it's our job. The job of the public, to reign back in their failure.

The simple fact is, gak happens every day. Thousands of crimes and non-crimes cause incidents each and every day, and people do and don't get prosecuted depending on the opinions of the people who are paid to uphold the law, ergo, is it not pointless to instantly presume foul play when it is far more likely that there wasn't any, and the DA didn't prosecute him because the guy didn't need prosecuting?

No, it's not. This wouldn't be so big if there wasn't something special about it. Black on white crime isn't uncommon, but the defense of "stand your ground" to excuse the killing of an unarmed teen is bs and you better expect people to demand that extra precautions be taken to ensure that everything was on the level. Pretending that we should just move on with out lives is defeatist and lazy.

Alls it boils down to is, I'm a sceptic. And if the guy didn't get prosecuted in the first place, then I think its highly unlikely he should be prosecuted at all.

How a skeptic can be the one that is certain of a lack of wrongdoing or failure is beyond me.

I foresee Zimmerman experiencing a Reginald Denny moment at some future date...

AustonT wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:\
Better a wedge cast in a court of law than a wedge hit home in a DAs office without public oversight.

That particular ship has already sailed so your point is kind of moot. DAs routinely decide to or not to prosecute cases imagine what would happen if EVERY person arrested was tried for their alleged offenses, that is the entire reason the DA choses which cases go to trial and which do not.

This case isn't routine. The idea of a DA deciding that a case involving a killing doesn't need to go to trial isn't even routine. People killing people isn't routine. Adults killing unarmed teens is extra not routine. Adults killing unarmed teens after being in contact with the police and being instructed not to confront the teen and then getting off because of a law that requires that the killer not be the initiator of confrontation is really really not routine.

Punk got shot. Punk deserved it. I don't see whats so difficult here.

It was proper justice right there.

I don't think your out of line... Your entitled to your opinion, and you aren't doing anything malevolent, so its hardly out of line.

I think your being a bit childish and naive, but not out of line.

This world is what we make it. If you can't insist that it be a good and just world and take all the effort that such an endevour involves than you shouldn't comment on the justness of it.

Mr Hyena wrote:Punk got shot. Punk deserved it. I don't see whats so difficult here.

It was proper justice right there.

And here I was thinking no one was going to say something stupid like this.

So, Mr Hyena, why did Martin deserve to be shot?

ShumaGorath wrote:
Because sometimes they feth it up, when they do it's our job. The job of the public, to reign back in their failure.

And thus, we arrive at my point.

If this was like.. Rodney King-esque footage or something, then yeah, I'm all up for action at that point. But if your going to jump onto gak this early, there's probably about another ten thousand cases you should be getting outraged about.

Oh yeah but we didn't have a circus, and Spike Lee never got involved for those.

I am clearly not defending first degree murder, I'm just saying its ridiculous getting excited about this gak at the moment, and when the guy gets off scot-free, ill be proven right, and you will have gotten outraged for nothing.

If Im wrong of course ill hold my hands out, but I've got the DA and you've got a movie director.. whos judgement do you trust on legal matters?

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Punk got shot. Punk deserved it. I don't see whats so difficult here.

It was proper justice right there.

And here I was thinking no one was going to say something stupid like this.

So, Mr Hyena, why did Martin deserve to be shot?

Look at Zimmerman's head.

Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Mr Hyena wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Punk got shot. Punk deserved it. I don't see whats so difficult here.

It was proper justice right there.

And here I was thinking no one was going to say something stupid like this.

So, Mr Hyena, why did Martin deserve to be shot?

Look at Zimmerman's head.

Yes, when people get into physical conflicts they get injured.

Your point?

Two people know the facts and one of them murdered the other one. How convienant...

Mr Hyena wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:Punk got shot. Punk deserved it. I don't see whats so difficult here.

It was proper justice right there.

And here I was thinking no one was going to say something stupid like this.

So, Mr Hyena, why did Martin deserve to be shot?

Look at Zimmerman's head.

Looks like he got into a fist fight with someone. What evidence exists that supports a claim that Zimmerman's use of deadly force was justified?

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Violence deserves a zero acceptance policy with the most extreme of measures. For too long 'justice' (if we can call it that) has been far too light hence why disgusting gang culture is such a big problem.

Looks like he got into a fist fight with someone. What evidence exists that supports a claim that Zimmerman's use of deadly force was justified?

The lack of any counter evidence. If someone starts violently attacking me, I'd certainly shoot them no problem if I had a weapon. Violence is the beginning of an attempt at murder.

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

I think I already said it in this thread but its incredibly easy to bash someones skull in. Especially in the rear. I also tangentially pointed out that the lack of copious blood from his skull wounds indicates extremely minor wounds, but the point remains...easy to bash in a skull.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Violence deserves a zero acceptance policy with the most extreme of measures.

I agree. So yes, Zimmerman should get the electric chair.

Wow look at this endless loop of illogic we are now trapped in...

CT GAMER wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Violence deserves a zero acceptance policy with the most extreme of measures.

I agree. So yes, Zimmerman should get the electric chair.

Wow look at this endless loop of illogic we are now trapped in...

Shame that Zimmerman has got more evidence on his side though.

I do think that people are making quick judgements from the safety of the internet as well btw.

If your a fat middle aged civvie who is unused to brawling, you have a firearm on you, and someone is beating you up, its perfectly reasonable to shoot them.

Not that Im saying thats what ahppened, I havent a clue and Ive not looked into it enough, as I said, I dont care enough to read too much at this point..

However, saying from the comfort of your chair "Ah! I wouldnt shoot him, Id just roll with the punch, tuck my chin in, and then follow it up with some punishing combinations!" is a bit ridiculous.

When untrained civvies are getting beaten, adrenalin and blind panic would have you shooting if you happened to be carrying a gun.

Well, unless you are hard as nails like me.. obviously I would just roll with the punch, tuck my chin in, and then follow it up with some punishing combinations!

Mr Hyena wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Violence deserves a zero acceptance policy with the most extreme of measures.

I agree. So yes, Zimmerman should get the electric chair.

Wow look at this endless loop of illogic we are now trapped in...

Shame that the only other person who can present a different story is dead though.

FIFY.

mattyrm wrote: I'm glad he shot the fether. If it was me I would have shot him and buried him in my back yard then pleased ignorance.

I think you are making up your position and just pushing buttons.
Allow me to demonstrate. For what? What would you, a Royal Marine, have shot him for exactly?
A 10-32(that's walking while being black according to a good black friend of mine.)?

No matter what we fine citizens of Dakka decide, we can't lose sight of the fact a child is dead.
Say whatever you want about whatever position, just don't forget that one little fact, please.

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

Violence deserves a zero acceptance policy with the most extreme of measures.

I agree. So yes, Zimmerman should get the electric chair.

Wow look at this endless loop of illogic we are now trapped in...

Shame that the only other person who can present a different story is dead though.

FIFY.

Exactly why Zimmerman is in the right. Also shame that the thug has no witnesses, no counter evidence, nothing.

No matter what we fine citizens of Dakka decide, we can't lose sight of the fact a thug is dead.

Fixed for truth.

AustonT wrote:

Manchu wrote:Even if you do believe in retributive justice, how does ending a life justly repay a non-maiming wound?

I think I already said it in this thread but its incredibly easy to bash someones skull in. Especially in the rear. I also tangentially pointed out that the lack of copious blood from his skull wounds indicates extremely minor wounds, but the point remains...easy to bash in a skull.

I'm not saying this as a criticism of what Zimmerman did in the heat of the moment but as a criticism of Mr. Hyena evaluating from a position of safety who deserved what now that everything is said and done.