You're a trolling shit head. Trayvon never had a criminal record.

What you read in a FoxNews.com article about Trayvon's school suspensions DO NOT count as a "mile-long [sic]wrap sheet".

Skipping class, having an EMPTY baggie on him, and carrying jewelry that wasn't reported stolen DO NOT make Trayvon a thug, criminal or a "bad person"

Trayvon was a person, flesh and blood. Just like you, you asshat.

Even if he engaged in criminal acts in the past, like George Zimmerman who assaulted a police officer..

Trayvon was minding his own business that night. Then was hunted down and murdered.

Step outside your little hateful, willfully ignorant bubble, @shang

>> ^shang:

He's a hero in my book, but many would call me a "redneck hick" so I really don't give 2 shits about retarded political correctness. I do believe in a right to protect your home and neighborhood. And I have pulled a gun and fired it on a trespasser before, my situation we had trouble with groups of guys "cruising" the roads late at night drunk, in a small town where usually only half a dozen cops on duty any particular shift, cops were called and told to call back if they were seen again.
This time they had stopped car got out and being loud, cursing, raising hell, my and neighbor called police and were waiting when my neighbor was threatened, I went inside got my gun, fired it once into air, they scattered except 1 ran at me and I shot him, course being scared in the moment I hit him in the thigh and he didn't die but him and his friends were locked up and the guy I shot wound up having to pay restitution to me and my neighbor the judge ruled which even surprised me.
anyhow that was nearly 18 years ago today and yes it was bunch of black thugs but hell trespassers get shot every few months in these areas and in plenty of rural areas.


I guess if you picked a car and decided it was going to be the guys "cruising", followed it, and provoked it by following you might have an analogy.

1) No trespassing if the guy is on the sidewalk and has reason to be in the neighborhood (which he did).

2) No proof of any wrongdoing besides Zimmerman's word, and Zimmerman's word is garbage. Not even one witness to the events...just parts and pieces through multiple people who "know" Zimmerman and are going to make assumptions based on him being neighborhood watch and the captain of it at that... an "authority" if you will. They'll argue Trayvon's past comes into question because he was supposedly caught with marijuana and probably "dealing" it. But of the two, Zimmerman has a police record which is used as an example of him "learning from his mistakes". And he and his wife got caught for perjury within the last month.

So....I'm not seeing someone who "did everything right and above board" here.

While in your circumstance you were on your own property and had saw your neighbor get threatened and had someone charge you. It's about as clear cut as it gets when it happens on your own property. Be a little different if you shot the guy near his house when he was on his way home after you followed him into a dark walkway when he ran from you.

If he's a hero, we're screwed.

The point is that under that insane stand your ground law, she should be set free. This law is not being applied equally.

She shot at children? George Zimmerman shot at and killed a minor.
>> ^bobknight33:

Maybe she is in jail for shooting at the children.
Where is Al Sharpton and the media?

History has proven that the law is NOT sacrosanct, especially with regards to certain groups. You talk about slavery; well for decades after slavery it was against the law to kill black men, yet they were murdered often, with the killers not serving a day. In Florida, it is this history that people remember when they think of Martin.

It's already Mad Max time with people like Zimmerman walking around, and those two characters in Tulsa that killed several random black men just because they were black. The question is, can the so called justice system in our country get things back to law and order.>> ^cosmovitelli:

>> ^longde:
I don't think he will walk due to that law unless you have a cowboy of a judge. It's simply the easy path to send the case to a jury. And Zimmy has told so many lies to the police and to the public, he will be he will look very bad in front of a jury.>> ^cosmovitelli:
He's going to walk. It's the law in Florida that if you're frightened you can kill someone. He only has to say he was, and they can't touch him for it.


Yeah but this is my point.. Even a jury trial can't just decide to punish someone, the judge has to rule that they have broken the law first. You might not like the guy in the dock and have numerous reasons for wanting to lock him up but THE LAW IS SACROSANCT. You have to demonstrate that he broke it. During slavery, it was in some places and at some times not against the law to kill a black person. Therefore, no matter how outraged the jury, they COULDN'T TOUCH HIM.
So this is the problem - if they go against the law to send him to jail they've destroyed the sanctity of the law that 300 years of liberal intellectuals have created and protected, sometimes with their lives.
If they let him go it's Mad Max time and there'll be a hundred more of these in the next few years.
This is what happens when men of low character get to write laws. It's happened many times before. And it's never led to anything that lasted long afterwards.
Here's hoping they can figure it out.

Number 1 with a bullet, sponsored by the NRA.
>> ^Yogi:

>> ^00Scud00:
They're just playing to their audience, which just happens to be full of racists. Also people who want the right to shoot anyone, anywhere, at any time and for any reason, no matter how flimsy.

"Fox News: Not racist, But #1 With Racists!"

>> ^00Scud00:

They're just playing to their audience, which just happens to be full of racists. Also people who want the right to shoot anyone, anywhere, at any time and for any reason, no matter how flimsy.


"Fox News: Not racist, But #1 With Racists!"

>> ^longde:

I don't think he will walk due to that law unless you have a cowboy of a judge. It's simply the easy path to send the case to a jury. And Zimmy has told so many lies to the police and to the public, he will be he will look very bad in front of a jury.>> ^cosmovitelli:
He's going to walk. It's the law in Florida that if you're frightened you can kill someone. He only has to say he was, and they can't touch him for it.



Yeah but this is my point.. Even a jury trial can't just decide to punish someone, the judge has to rule that they have broken the law first. You might not like the guy in the dock and have numerous reasons for wanting to lock him up but THE LAW IS SACROSANCT. You have to demonstrate that he broke it. During slavery, it was in some places and at some times not against the law to kill a black person. Therefore, no matter how outraged the jury, they COULDN'T TOUCH HIM.

So this is the problem - if they go against the law to send him to jail they've destroyed the sanctity of the law that 300 years of liberal intellectuals have created and protected, sometimes with their lives.
If they let him go it's Mad Max time and there'll be a hundred more of these in the next few years.
This is what happens when men of low character get to write laws. It's happened many times before. And it's never led to anything that lasted long afterwards.

Here's hoping they can figure it out.

I don't think he will walk due to that law unless you have a cowboy of a judge. It's simply the easy path to send the case to a jury. And Zimmy has told so many lies to the police and to the public, he will be he will look very bad in front of a jury.>> ^cosmovitelli:

He's going to walk. It's the law in Florida that if you're frightened you can kill someone. He only has to say he was, and they can't touch him for it.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:


If Trayvon had been the one holding the gun when police arrived..
Best believe he'd have been sitting in cell facing 1st degree murder charges on February 27th or 28th.


He'd probably have about 40 bullet holes in him.
>> ^Yogi:


Although they're pretty stupid, I don't think they're that stupid. They didn't write the law in such a way, and there's other things to consider. He's not going to just walk, it's going to be an interesting trial and it may mean the death of this stupid bill.


Well that's the point of laws. Solid rules you follow no matter what so everyone knows the deal. Unfortunately I dont speak legalese. But a sound law is intelligible to the common man and widely understood. The 'public' version of this law is 'if you are scared for your life you can pull a concealed weapon and murder the other guy first'.
So it seems like either civil society or the common understanding of law is history down there. Be interesting to see which.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

It still baffles me as to why Fox are so vigorously taking the "Zimmerman's the victim and Trayvon's the aggressor" side. I just don't see what they get out of this, it makes them look even stupider and more racist than usual


It's because they're stupid and racist.

@legacy0100

It's less about "being white" and more about white privilege.

George Zimmerman is a "white sounding" name. Plus his father is a former judge. Two things which definitely worked to his favor if he in fact invoked them when police arrived.

If Trayvon had been the one holding the gun when police arrived..

Best believe he'd have been sitting in cell facing 1st degree murder charges on February 27th or 28th.

>> ^cosmovitelli:

He's going to walk. It's the law in Florida that if you're frightened you can kill someone. He only has to say he was, and they can't touch him for it.


Although they're pretty stupid, I don't think they're that stupid. They didn't write the law in such a way, and there's other things to consider. He's not going to just walk, it's going to be an interesting trial and it may mean the death of this stupid bill.

>> ^speechless:

If there's one positive to come out of this, it's the emergency medical treatment he received after his life threatening ordeal. Look at his nose. His face. It's almost hard to believe that only a few weeks ago this man had a 17 year old child beat him within an inch of his life. So badly in fact, that his only recourse, his only way to survive, was to shoot him dead. What a wonderful world we live in. Modern medicine is truly amazing.


and I thought you were speechless.

>> ^messenger:

I am referring to the story behind it since there aren't any proper news videos about the arrest Sifted yet, and I'm too lazy to try and find one. But whatever. I have a feeling that videos don't live or die based on channel assignments, so whatev.>> ^BoneRemake:
equality ? seems like a stretch.
This video does not depict equality at all. Its story/story leading up to it may be but this video is just trial proceedings on camera.
nochannel
News
Law
If you think otherwise I'll be out back with a broken bottle. Come'round for a drink.



I am under the guise that a channel assignment for a posted video is not in relation to what the posters intentions of a post is. Assignments and tags depict what the video reflects, not the history of the ongoing case and its mass' of videos. I admire your "whatevs" demeanor through the ordeal, whatevs indeed.

I am referring to the story behind it since there aren't any proper news videos about the arrest Sifted yet, and I'm too lazy to try and find one. But whatever. I have a feeling that videos don't live or die based on channel assignments, so whatev.>> ^BoneRemake:

equality ? seems like a stretch.
This video does not depict equality at all. Its story/story leading up to it may be but this video is just trial proceedings on camera.
nochannel
News
Law
If you think otherwise I'll be out back with a broken bottle. Come'round for a drink.