If the intruder wasn't so belligerent, our boy wouldn't have to be as forceful in order to put him in his place.

There is no law, anywhere, that says if you think someone is stalking you that you can turn around and beat the crap out of them.

Also didn't you notice how you fabricated the whole story in your mind? Now Zimmerman was waving his gun around and thats why martin was running? Also now Zimmerman DETAINED him?

Where are you getting all these "FACTS" from? The Bill O'Reilly's of the liberal world probably.

I'm the most calm and rational person on here and just because I'm NOT taking sides you want to label me a racist sympathizer. Awesome

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

So i'm pretty sure you're a racist sympathizer. or just dumb.
If you instigate an attack, you can't claim self defense. Period.
If you were stalked and chased down and detained against your will by a belligerent man with a gun, who you knew hated you and was out to harm you...
You're telling me you'd simply punch him once then attempt to flee?
Zimmerman has the right to defend himself with lethal force?
But a skinny unarmed teenager using just his fists is wrong to fight for his life?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Your opinion is disgusting and indefensible. Full Stop.

In reply to this comment by Darkhand:
If Martin turned around and punched him and knocked him on his ass I think that would have been a justifiable amount of force. But continuing to beat on him as some people suggesting to "knock him out" you don't understand how the body works. You can't tell the difference between "Oh yeah I knocked him out" and "Awesome! Internal bleeding and his brain is swelling now I can get away".
Does everyone here really believe because Zimmerman was being over zealous they feel he deserves to get knocked down and have someone sit on top of him and continuously punch him in the head?

At Darkhand:

So i'm pretty sure you're a racist sympathizer. or just dumb.

If you instigate an attack, you can't claim self defense. Period.

If you were stalked and chased down and detained against your will by a belligerent man with a gun, who you knew hated you and was out to harm you...

You're telling me you'd simply punch him once then attempt to flee?

Zimmerman has the right to defend himself with lethal force?

But a skinny unarmed teenager using just his fists is wrong to fight for his life?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Your opinion is disgusting and indefensible. Full Stop.

So i'm pretty sure you're a racist sympathizer. or just dumb.

If you instigate an attack, you can't claim self defense. Period.

If you were stalked and chased down and detained against your will by a belligerent man with a gun, who you knew hated you and was out to harm you...

You're telling me you'd simply punch him once then attempt to flee?

Zimmerman has the right to defend himself with lethal force?

But a skinny unarmed teenager using just his fists is wrong to fight for his life?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Your opinion is disgusting and indefensible. Full Stop.



In reply to this comment by Darkhand:
If Martin turned around and punched him and knocked him on his ass I think that would have been a justifiable amount of force. But continuing to beat on him as some people suggesting to "knock him out" you don't understand how the body works. You can't tell the difference between "Oh yeah I knocked him out" and "Awesome! Internal bleeding and his brain is swelling now I can get away".

Does everyone here really believe because Zimmerman was being over zealous they feel he deserves to get knocked down and have someone sit on top of him and continuously punch him in the head?

He kept them guessing and laughing. They at no point knew that they were going to get moved or tossed out which kept them from being belligerent.>> ^calvados:

He did a pretty good job of sorting them out without actually getting insulting. Didn't give them anything to get mad at really. Well done.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

We're debating why we were attacked by a handful of radical folks
Pht - I can answer that in one word. Isreal. Next?
...whether or not our military engagement, specifically since WWII, has been productive in any measurable way...
Productive to who and in what way?
You see - to a leftist - your question is unanswerable. Like Ron Paul, leftists view any military intervention by the United States as unproductive. By their very natures it is literally impossible to supply a leftist with any response that they will find satisfactory. Leftists come from a particular philosophy and perspective that disallows the word 'productive' to be used in the same sentence as 'American military engagement'. Heck to this day there are leftists who even question whether the US should have gotten involved in WW1 or WW2 or not.
Other people with other perspectives are not quite so closed-minded about whether or not a military action was 'productive' or not because they allow other definitions of 'productive' to be satisfied. But to a Proglibdyte, ANY US military action is viewed as unproductive.

Bollocks. I'm a socialist and I firmly believe that not only was America right to get involved in WW2, it was right to get involved in Libya recently.

Typical "rightist" attitude. You can't see any nuance or context. The left opposed Americas intervention in Vietnam, in Iraq and guess what? They turned out to be fucking right. Hell, I don't even remember that much left wing opposition to gulf war 1, other than the likes of Bill Hicks pointing out the ridiculous position you were in was largely of your own making.

As for "American exceptionalism", the USA had some grand ideals, and should be commended for that. But the reason it occupies the place it does in the world today is down to geology (it was rich in natural resources) and geography (America has never had a strong belligerent neighbour). So really, more down to good luck than good management.

I didn't think so, I thought it just looked like you were talking. I think I'll keep my day-job and not become the official sift photographer then >> ^dag:

Wow, in that second one - I look like a belligerent drunk. Drunk sure, but belligerent? That's not how I remember it.
>> ^oritteropo:
I was far too slow! My two blurry photos are here, and I'm afraid they add little:
http://s1100.photobucket.com/albums/g409/oritteropo/melbournesiftup201
1/

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Wow, in that second one - I look like a belligerent drunk. Drunk sure, but belligerent? That's not how I remember it.
>> ^oritteropo:

I was far too slow! My two blurry photos are here, and I'm afraid they add little:
http://s1100.photobucket.com/albums/g409/oritteropo/melbournesiftup201
1/

@Fletch

It often refers to someone who is belligerent, unreasonable, rudely intrusive or aggressive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitch/insult

I consider myself a reasonable person. I've never slapped anyone I've disagreed with.

@blankfist

Research that purporting that teaching is a difficult job based on 6 criteria. I suggest the whole document but here's the jest of it.
______________________________________________
---------->Societal Attitude:
The participants in this study believed that the attitude of society toward the teaching profession was unfair and detrimental to their overall functioning. They did not believe that they were valued, despite their advanced levels of education. In a recent nationwide survey of over 11,000 teachers and teacher candidates, Henke, Chen, Geis, and Knepper (2000) found that only 14.6% of the teachers surveyed were satisfied with the esteem in which society held the teaching profession.

--->Denise, a high school English teacher addressed the issue of respect:

"There is a lack of respect for teachers. It's not just the money, but also the attitude I get from administrators and politicians that teachers are trying to get away with something. We have taken these cushy jobs where all we have to do is stand up in front of a bunch of kids and BS for a few hours, and only work ten months of the year, at that teachers have it easy! Every time we ask for something (like, in my county, that the county pay our contribution to the state retirement system, for example), they make us out to look like whiners - give 'em an inch; they'll take a mile. The truth is, though, that teachers care so deeply and work SO much beyond our "contract hours." I can't tell you how many come in for weeks during the summer, as I do, and take on clubs after school (for which we are not compensated), and work during vacations. This lack of respect for teachers gets me down."
______________________________________________
---------->Financial Issues:
On top of the perception that they are not being valued by society, teachers are notoriously underpaid in our country. Four years after their graduation, Henke et al. (2000) surveyed a large sample of college graduates between 1992-1993. They found that the teachers were tied with clerical staff and service workers for the lowest salaries. A recent report from the American Federation of Teachers (AFT, 2000) found the following to be the case for the 2000-2001 school year:

For new teachers, the $28,986 average beginning salary lagged far behind starting salary offers in other fields for new college graduates. For example, accounting graduates were offered an average $37,143; sales/marketing, $40,033; math/statistics, $49,548; computer science, $49,749; and engineering, $50,033.
The $43,250 average teacher salary fell short of average wages of other white-collar occupations, the report found. For example, mid-level accountants earned an average $52,664, computer system analysts, $71,155; engineers, $74,920; and attorneys, $82,712.
The majority of the participants in this study related that they were simply not paid enough to live comfortably. They drove old cars and lived in inexpensive apartments. Others struggled to save enough money to buy a home.

--->Calvin, a high school science teacher, talked about his pay:

"I love teaching, but I don't know if I love it enough to deprive my family and myself of necessities. I have a baby and another on the way. I can't see how I can ever save enough to make a down payment on a house, even with a second job in the summer."
______________________________________________
---------->Time Scarcity:
Many new teachers were physically and emotionally fatigued to the point of exhaustion. They reported that they worked long days at school, and then took home lesson plans to create, papers to grade, and parents to call. They also worked nights and weekends on school-related work.

--->Jessica, a high school math teacher:

"I work 70 hours a week, and after 3 years it's not getting any better. When Friday night rolls around, all I want to do is fall asleep at 8 p.m.! Obviously that doesn't lead to a very exciting social life, or much of a "life" at all, if I can hardly stay awake long enough to go out to dinner with my friends and family. Even at holidays there are always papers to grade."

--->Fred, a high school English teacher also had difficulty with the amount of time required to do his job, pointing to the effect the time constraints had on family relationships:

The time commitment is the worst. During my first two years of teaching I worked 70-80 hour weeks, including time worked during the school day, in the evenings and over the weekend. Time commitment varies with the subject taught and with experience, but this aspect of the job nearly ran me out of teaching on several occasions and I witnessed one great new teacher leave teaching for this very reason. "It's my job or my marriage," she explained. "I never see my husband, and we're living under the same roof."

______________________________________________
---------->Workload:
The data reveal that it is nearly impossible for a conscientious teacher to complete all that is expected of them in one school day. At the high school level, teachers were teaching five or more classes in a traditional school, and three in a block schedule school. For each class this meant that the teacher's task was to design a complete lesson lasting at least one hour. This lesson had to follow the state curriculum, be engaging and interesting to students, and include various components as required by the school district, such as a warm-up, class activities, and homework. The teachers wanted to use outside resources such as the Internet to connect the material to real world applications. Additionally, they reported that there were often several special needs students in the class, and each of them needed some special accommodation. They found that planning was not a trivial task; it took several hours to design one effective instructional plan.

According to the teachers in this study, class sizes were another difficult feature of the teacher's day. In public high schools, most class sizes ranged from 25 to 35 students for a total of 125-175 students in a traditional school, and 75-105 in a four period block school. Henke et al. (2000) reported that the average number of students taught by secondary teachers each day is 115.8.

--->Abby, a high school history teacher explained the effect of large class sizes:

"Imagine any other professional trying to deal with the needs of this many "customers" at one time. If a physician were seeing patients, and grouped this many together, it is readily apparent how ridiculous it would be to expect her or him to address the needs of each person. The same is true for teachers.
Each student is an individual, with needs and issues that must be addressed. In a class period, the teachers expressed frustration because they could not address the needs of 25 or more students. "

--->Gina, a former high school science teacher described the variety in her workload as well as in her students' abilities:

"What I least expected was the amount of paperwork I had to do. Grading papers, progress reports, parent conferences, English-as-a-Second Language, exceptional students, ADD paperwork, and even work for absent students seem to take more time than "teaching."

To compound the issue, teachers also related many learning issues, where students had questions or misunderstandings that could easily have been cleared up with a few minutes of one-on-one time. They also reported discipline issues that got more serious when they were not addressed. Some students were bored. Some lacked basic skills and could not perform without help. In general, the teachers expressed being frustrated because they are educated professionals who could address these issues, if there were time to get to everyone. There was simply not enough time to address the variety of issues that simultaneously too place. Farkas et al. (2000) reported that 86% of new teachers report that the change most likely to improve teaching is reducing class size.

--->Eva, a high school English teacher summed up her frustration with large class sizes.

"This was not a matter of poor time management; it was a matter of too many students with too many needs and one harried teacher trying to be superhuman. There were times that I had a great lesson plan, only to have it totally derailed because of one or two students who needed individual attention and could not get it."

The total number of students that this professional was expected to evaluate, plan, and care for each day was as many as 150.
______________________________________________
---------->Working Conditions:
School administrators varied in their support of young teachers, and many teachers reported that this support was inadequate. The new teachers felt that they were evaluated and judged, but they would have preferred real feedback and suggestions for improvement of their teaching. They felt that they were often not supported in discipline issues or in conflicts with parents.

--->Carol, a former high school math teacher:

"I was very frustrated with the lack of support from my principal/administration in that after three observations I never got any feedback either in written or verbal form. I never really knew how I was doing. I felt I was doing a good job, but did not think the administration cared one way or the other."

--->Fran, a high school mathematics teacher expressed a need for more funds:

"Teachers should be given all the supplies that they need - $25 is not enough! At all other jobs that I have worked at, whatever you need to do your job is provided."
______________________________________________
---------->Relationships with Students and Parents:
A common problem reported by beginning teachers was student apathy. Many of the novice teachers reported that students had no interest in learning. In addition to attendance problems, a number of students often came to class without pencil, paper, and textbook. It was difficult to force or entice them to participate in classwork, and virtually impossible to get them to do homework.

--->Owen, a former high school mathematics teacher, was frustrated by his students' apathy:

"The vast majority of my students had no interest in learning math and I quickly tired of trying to force them (or entice them). They refused to bring paper or pencil to class, refused to do homework or classwork, and frequently came to class late or not at all. Most of them, to my great surprise, were not at all belligerent or confrontational about their refusal to do anything in class; they just had no intention of working at anything."

--->Mattie, a former high school history teacher, could not deal with the frustration:

"I just became very frustrated teaching to a class of 20 students and about 5 were interested or at least concerned with their grades. I decided not to return, because I was so exhausted and depressed at the end of the year. I just couldn't see "wasting" my time in a classroom where the kids don't care about themselves or what you're trying to accomplish."

--->Eugene, a former high school math teacher, also reported problems with apathy:

"I was frustrated with the apathy of the students. Many days I felt as though I was standing up there talking to myself. It was the longest year of my life. I was an emotional wreck because I felt as if the kids/parents didn't care enough to try or participate."

So, if blind adherence to religious dogma absolves your personal bigotry, then logically, there is nothing wrong with the KKK, The Westburo Baptist Church or Al Queda - they are merely doing God's work. Kudos to the gutsy student for standing up to this belligerent bigot.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Amusing, but when the video ends, you still have a herd of homeless overunning a public park. There's a time and place, peeps, and there are plenty of places willing to feed the homeless. The real trolls are the feeders, trying to make a "statement" about how the city treats its homeless, but when it's people who refuse to help themselves, no city or charity can 'save' them.^{[citation needed]}
Do liberals know who the homeless are, besides useful tools for 'activism'? Forget Hollywood bullsh1t, these are not the down-on-luck, hat-in-hand, willing-to-work hopefuls of yesteryear. Discounting the mentally ill, many are belligerent bums who demand handouts (wonder where they got their sense of entitlement)?^{[citation needed]}
In one of the downtown cities here, these lovable tramps sleep on the steps of city hall and have taken to pissing anywhere they feel like. The stench is so bad, city trucks drive around each morning spraying the streets and alleys with restroom cherry or lemon deodorant.^{[citation needed]}
Maybe Clever Goofus should go to each small business in the area and explain why bums who drive away potential shoppers are good for the local economy as well as tax base.^{[citation needed]}


http://xkcd.com/285/
FTFY;

Amusing, but when the video ends, you still have a herd of homeless overunning a public park. There's a time and place, peeps, and there are plenty of places willing to feed the homeless. The real trolls are the feeders, trying to make a "statement" about how the city treats its homeless, but when it's people who refuse to help themselves, no city or charity can 'save' them.

Do liberals know who the homeless are, besides useful tools for 'activism'? Forget Hollywood bullsh1t, these are not the down-on-luck, hat-in-hand, willing-to-work hopefuls of yesteryear. Discounting the mentally ill, many are belligerent bums who demand handouts (wonder where they got their sense of entitlement)?

In one of the downtown cities here, these lovable tramps sleep on the steps of city hall and have taken to pissing anywhere they feel like. The stench is so bad, city trucks drive around each morning spraying the streets and alleys with restroom cherry or lemon deodorant.

Maybe Clever Goofus should go to each small business in the area and explain why bums who drive away potential shoppers are good for the local economy as well as tax base.

>> ^swedishfriend:
statistics, physical reality: no matter how many times I flip a coin and get heads up the next toss is still an equal chance to come up heads or tails. No matter how many stops a police officer makes, the results are 4 times more likely to end up in a dead civilian than in a dead cop at any one stop. in other words if stops result in 10 cops killed in a year the same number of stops resulted in 40 civilians killed. On a stop by stop basis the risk is 4 times greater for the civilian. If a cop makes 100 stops in a year he may be more likely to end up dead in that year than a person who gets stopped once during that year but that doesn't change the odds at any one stop. At any one traffic stop the risk is four times greater that the civilian will end up dead. Most stops end well but I don't find it reasonable for the person who is definitely armed and dangerous to always assume that the other person is the dangerous one by default. Especially since statistics show that cops are more likely to commit crimes than the general population and that each interaction with a police officer is more likely to end up badly for the civilian than for the cop. It also seems to me that starting any interaction off with an attack and / or assumptions about the other person not based on any evidence will definitely make the situation more dangerous for all participants.

You have a very strange sense of logic. Let's look at the facts:

1) The man immediately got out of his car, confronted the cop and then put his hand into his pocket.
2) The man was wearing a baggy sweatshirt and baggy pants, both of which could easily conceal a weapon.
3) The man completely ignored the cop's orders.
4) While ignoring said orders, the man actually approached the cop.

Given these facts, it's very clear that the man was neither calm nor rational. Do you really believe that the cop should have ignored these facts and thought "Well, statistics show that there's only a 20% chance that this guy is going to attack me so I guess I should holster my weapon and relax"? And even if the cop did indeed do that, how do you think the man would have responded to being told that he was pulled over for a crooked license plate? Given his already belligerent behavior, do you think he would have just said "Oh, okay" and suddenly become compliant? I doubt that very much. In all likelihood, he would have only become more hostile and the situation would have been escalated.

Cops can never assume that a suspect is harmless, especially when that suspect is acting aggressive and confrontational. You can cite all the statistics you want but common sense will always prevail. Like it or not, the police hold a position of authority over you. They have the right to shoot or taser you should you present yourself as a threat. As such, you need to think logically. Don't want to get tasered or arrested? Don't present yourself as a threat. It's that simple. Almost every one of these videos is the same. Someone acts confrontational, ignores police orders and/or resists arrest, then they suffer the consequences. If you believe you have the right to ignore the police and do whatever you want, by all means, go ahead. Just don't be surprised when you get tasered or shot. It's like acting outraged after walking onto the freeway and getting run over. Common sense, please.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

yes, it's very important to be respectful at the mausoleums of our dead leaders. Rules must be adhered to. You can't dance in front of Dear Leader's shrine in N.K. either. Those guys were really on to something.

>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^blankfist:
Was dancing turning into a big issue at the Memorial prior to this law? No. Then why? Because some legislator somewhere wanted to show the world the size of his cock. I say civil disobedience is the correct response to pathetically worthless laws that make victims out of the innocent people committing these victimless "crimes".

Maybe someone that was there thought they were being disrespectful by dancing in a memorial on Memorial Day weekend and complained to the police? I'm fairly positive not everyone there that day was down to get jiggy with it. Why dance at this memorial? Why not dance at the library? There are thousands of other buildings they could have chosen. Why the Jefferson Memorial?
And I really don't see how they are "innocent people", the cop very plainly said "Don't dance here." What did they do? They became belligerent, petulant little weasels, "You can't tell me not to dance here!" stomp, stomp, stomp. So the cop arrested them. How does that make the cop the bad guy? Sure, it's a stupid law but, it's still a law. Sure, it was a peaceful demonstration, until they decided to goad the cops by doing exactly what he told them not to do.
Lastly, my apologies to you and @GenjiKilpatrick (and anyone else) if my comments instigated this rage-fest. I just do not understand your point of view. I have total and utter lack of understanding of anyone that thinks this incident is a step (small or otherwise) forward for democracy or humankind. I leave you in peace.