RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events 17 year old Trayvon Martin shot by Neighborhood watch guy Zimmerman

"dude...you know what would rawk right now?"
"skittles?"
"dude..."
"dude just chill. I'll go get some. there's like a circle k and shit like up the street. What's the worst that can happen?"
"What if a Mexican guy follows you because he thinks you're robbing a house or something..."
" you want anything else?"
"......."
"?"
"iced tea"
"awesome. Back in 5."

Not really related to the Martin incident, but my take on the whole marijuana thingie is that it's like alcohol in the sense that it can be the catalyst but it's not the root. It's not a magic elixir that can turn a person into someone they're not.

I mean, there are people who already have a tendency to do stupid things, but when they're perfectly sober, they still have the ability to second guess and prevent themselves because they know the consequences or it's the whole hardware vs software thingie about morality. But as soon as a catalyst enters the picture, whether it's alcohol removing inhibitions or marijuana making them more creative and insightful of what they really want to do - shit happens.

Marijuana is actually illegal in my country, and I don't know if it's correlation or causation but the number of crimes committed by people who have pot in their system is an issue. Marijuana users are usually those from the poverty class, since rich people have access to and prefer more expensive highs like e, cocaine, and crack. (note that the divide between the rich and the poor in here is wider than your country's. I make $12 US dollars a day and I'm still a few pesos above the government's mandated minimum wage, whereas we have politicians, CEOs and celebrities who are rich enough to make it to Forbes list of people I want to kick in the balls and rob.)

At least in here, the people who are committing crimes with pot on their system are the kinds of people who still invested money on marijuana, despite not having a job, or not having enough income to provide for their family. It's safe to say that they're the kind of people who are naturally predisposed to poor life choices. They'd have fucked up their lives (and someone else's) through some other catalyst, pot was just the first thing that came along.

I heard Lothar becomes heterosexual when he smokes pot. It's too bad he doesn't.

Science and fact would disagree, NAZIPUBICAN!!!

Spametheus

Shit, dude. Shit.

There's a de-facto fallacy in way you phrased the argument, but the name still escapes me.

For now, all I have to do is point out your presumptuousness. The question here wouldn't revolve around motives to either lie or tell the truth, but rather what one would typically expect from a given individual's character in relation to their view of friends and/or family. You really have no idea whether or not someone who lied about the case would necessarily put greater consideration into a level of risk over their own perception of social justice and revenge like, for instance, the parents when they lied about Martin's voice--or the prosecutor who only tried Zimmerman due to social pressure.

Furthermore, because the integrity of her statements can neither be confirmed nor falsified by anyone else but her, she's subject to little to no risk of being tried for perjury.

Pro, was your selfquote a reply to my post?

Probably having a rough time finding that name because what I said was pretty simple and recognizably true.




Why would you say Martin's parents lied or that the prosecutor only tried Zimmerman due to social pressure? At best those are your opinions and not facts as you state them.

No, not really. I was doing it to (A) annoy Jake, and (B) repeat my own personal experiences with marijuana and the (lack of) effects it genuinely has on a human body. Not all react the exact same, of course. And there's plenty of psycho's out there that could freak-out from drinking a Pepsi. AND, smoking weed and THEN adding alcohol or other drugs in your system could very well cause further issues. But, weed alone is relatively harmless. Even in smoke form, it has negligible effects on your lungs in comparison to tobacco. But, as with everything on the planet except pussy, moderation is the key.

I'm sure plenty of people arrested can have weed in their system. But, what else is in there? The kind of weed I've ever smoked would in no way, shape, or form gives any urges outside the lazy and apathetic symptoms well known to exist in pot. If people are committing crimes, I can say with 99% absolute authority and certainty from nearly 20 years of experience that retracting the marijuana from the situation would in no way improve or change the issues causing the problem. People can make mistakes, sure. But, that would be more like someone accidentally breaking something because they're so stoned they're clumsy. No way is someone going to smoke a joint and go "Oh man let's go cause some CRIME and kill some people! Yeah! I'm soooo jaazzed up!!" That's cocaine, man. That's crack-rock, which I once again mention that...according to the US Federal Government....is somehow more harmless than weed. Yet, absolutely ZERO scientific proof can be offered to support that. Just money, lobbyists, and a corrupt Corporate-controlled system of greed...

Fact.

You didn't do it to annoy me. You did it because that's what you do.

You've done it in tons of threads I've never posted in.

Don't make me the scapegoat for your lazy comment/spamming.

Stand by your spam. Give him two arms to cling to.

Have some conviction for something other than dirty hippies looking for a handout.

Go home to your parents! Cut your hair! Get a job!

Buy that house and car, get on the hampster wheel!

Buy land, pay your mortgage and taxes! Then pay more money to erect a structure like a shed in your own back yard!

Somebody somewhere voted in the asshole who suggested people need to pay the government to build shit on your own property.

I mean this is the USA, they must have voted that guy in, right?

That's the example of an elected government looking out for the best interests of it's people.

Okay, sorry dude. I'll wait until your cycle is over...

....I don't see the JPG of the Twin Towers falling...

So, why would you bitch at these same assholes to clean up "the system"?

You want these people to have more say over what corporations can and cannot do?

Look at the DMV. Are these exceptional people working behind these counters?

Those are the same idiots who are going to be behind the counters running government health care if politicians are left to their own devices.

Not to mention the waves of senators, congressmen, governors, mayors, and all other politicians who have been embroiled in some sort of scandal throughout their careers as politicians.

These are the same people you want more involved?

Let me get this strait Democrats, you want the government to fix shit?

If you have a problem with my point, I'll gladly discuss it.

If you just want to make fun, I can ridicule as well.

What the fuck are you talking about baby boy?

Basically, to trim my point/question down so a child like Pro can understand it;

What is the point of asking a bought and paid for government to police itself from being a bought and paid for government?

Using a negative to affirm a red herring as the deciding factor of an argument is a lot of things. A "recognizable truth" is not one of them. It's more like verisimilitude.



Common sense.

They flip-flopped on whether or not it was his voice.

And this prosecutor--against the better judgement of just about every single competent lawyer in the country--has the audacity to try him for second degree murder. There's no way in hell that would stick with the evidence at hand. She knows this and yet she still went through with it. She is a pandering cunt.

Stop it! Jut let him jerk his chains!!

What you said doesn't make sense but whatever. Zimmerman has a huge motive to lie about what happened. Martin's girlfriend really only takes a risk for the most part by not telling the truth. Maybe not a big one but just the same it's still a risk.



Sorry but they didn't flip flop. The father heard a cleaned up version and says he recognized Martin's voice from that. Martin's mom has as far as I know always said it was her son's voice. Glad I could help you with that bit of ignorance.




Please source this, otherwise I have to assume this is just untrue.

Red Herring: Motive to lie.

The red herring can either be applied negatively or positively to try and make your point. You chose a negative when you said "less motive", which is counter intuitive according to every deductive principle in existence. Motive is identified based on gain. Not loss.

In which case, SoM identified a motive for her to lie based on her friend-status with Martin. You responded by trying to use Zimmerman's own circumstances as a negating factor--even though the two aren't even remotely comparable--and then dressed it up as a deductive observation by phrasing it affirmatively.



The recording was no less or more cleaned up then before. He decided to change his tune when he realized it would help his dead son's case.

The mother only decided to speak when the father flip-flopped. So trying to use the phrase, "all along" to help along your claim only demonstrates all the more how deceptive you are.



That's the beautiful thing about a generalization. I don't have to cite anything. And it's especially frustrating for you because you can't deny it: this case does not have enough evidence to support a murder charge. It doesn't take a lawyer to see that.

Martin's friend can testify that he was afraid and trying to evade Zimmerman. Martin's last words she heard sounded like he was being attacked. That's evidence that I think a jury is going to be interested in and compare to what Zimmerman alleges.

Looks like a witness that said it was Zimmerman that was calling for help has retracted his statement.

globalgrind.com

He actually couldn't tell because it was to dark to actually see who was doing the yelling for help.

I'm sure she can say a lot of things.



I guess Zimmerman's injuries didn't give this author a clue. Seriously, that's fucking stupid.

Then again, it was you who linked to it.

Usually, when someone attacks you--and you're carrying a gun--that's grounds for shooting that person. There's no rule that your attacker has to have a bludgeon or a firearm to have cause to shoot. That kinda defeats the purpose of using a gun in the first place.


Do you honestly--HONESTLY believe that Martin was yelling for help all the while he's concentrated on putting the beat down on Zimmerman? What's more, do you really think that would change anything now that it's been confirmed that Martin was beating his head into the ground? It doesn't take a genius to realize that Martin went after him because he felt threatened, but that wouldn't negate the fact that he started the fight and that Zimmerman reacted to it.

How do you know Martin started it? All we know is Martin stopped running and confronted Zimmerman, then there was a tussle. Just because Zimmerman has injuries doesn't mean he was a helpless white guy getting beat up by a black thug. You're making shit up.

Because an "afraid" guy, instead of running away in fear, confronts a guy who had only been observing Martin from a distance, punches Zimmerman in the face, breaks his nose (documented), gives him two black eyes (documented), beats Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk and covers Zimmerman's head with bloody lacerations (documented, photographed), causes Zimmerman to scream 20 times at the top of his lungs for help (documented in 911 calls, and by at least 2 witnesses, and Zimmerman's own account), and jumps on Zimmerman for several minutes (those pesky 911 calls and witnesses again), before Zimmerman, finally pulls out a gun and shoots Martin, at an approximated distance of between 1 and 18 inches (documented, by forensic evaluation of the powder burns on Martin's clothes).

Yeah. Because an "afraid" guy always confronts the guy he's afraid of and beats him within an inch of his life, before he unexpectedly gets blown away when the guy he's beating on turns out to be armed.

If Martin was "afraid" he'd have run away. Instead he confronted Zimmerman. And didn't just confront him, but beat on Zimmerman relentlessly until Zimmerman was forced to shoot Martin in self-defense.
Pending further evidence, there is no justifiable case for prosecuting Zimmerman for homicide. The lady D.A. arrested Zimmerman in a pointless show-arrest, even though she already had the evidence weeks before it was released a few days ago. She knew well in advance there was no evidence to justify the 2nd arrest of Zimmerman. And she herself may face legal action for this deliberate suppression of the available facts in order to make a 2nd arrest, that was no more than theatre for the race-baiting masses.

The Rightwingers are to find a way to help their murdering white brother out of this. Poor hatemongers.

Zimmerman isn't white.