|
George Zimmerman ; Combined Threads
|
|
Topic Started: Apr 11 2012, 01:36 PM (8,479 Views)
|
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:12 PM
Post #1381
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 09:47 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 08:32 AM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 07:22 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:54 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 05:48 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:43 PM
Screwdriver, BAG of jewelry....
What pieces of the GZ puzzle brought your mind to illegal guns?
Did you even READ the article? Martin says it wasn't his. Zimmerman says he didn't do it. You are being a total hypocrite. - Quote:
-
So what lead you to illegal guns?
deflect, deflect, deflect - Quote:
-
This would be akin to me saying "George Zimmerman bought illegal weapons." Which of course I never even came close to doing.
I told you what brought me to my thoughts. What brought illegal guns to your mind? Pretty simple question. I'm being honest. Strange that you won't say what made you even think it was possible. Looks like you just cooked it up....
You have not addressed your hypocrisy here. What brought illegal guns to my mind? I think Zimmerman is a crazy asshole who shot and killed an unarmed teen and has since went out and acquired more weapons. Thought it was possible maybe those weapons were illegal. Not exactly a huge jump in thinking. What doesn't seem like a huge leap to you, does to me. Why would a legal, concealed carry card holder want to have illegal guns? That makes zero logical sense.
|

|
| |
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:13 PM
Post #1382
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- sirbrianwilson
- Dec 4 2013, 09:48 PM
but GZ's innocent, right?
br Morally...maybe, maybe not.
Legally....yes, he was innocent.
|

|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:15 PM
Post #1383
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:01 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 03:49 PM
Dreach and Brian, What did you think about the reports about GZ helping a homeless person fight against the police, and tutoring poor black kids?
What does that have to do with anything? I haven't seen that report, but I also have never made the claim the GZ has never done anything good with his life. He also saved that family in a car crash shortly after the trial. That doesn't mean I'm going to excuse him for unnecessarily shooting a kid (my opinion only, not yours or the legal systems) or domestic violence. Those reports came out after NBC and others tried to smear GZ as a racist, white-hispanic.
I thought that was very important evidence, as we tried to access GZ's intent. How can you completely ignore it?
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:17 PM
Post #1384
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 04:15 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:01 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 03:49 PM
Dreach and Brian, What did you think about the reports about GZ helping a homeless person fight against the police, and tutoring poor black kids?
What does that have to do with anything? I haven't seen that report, but I also have never made the claim the GZ has never done anything good with his life. He also saved that family in a car crash shortly after the trial. That doesn't mean I'm going to excuse him for unnecessarily shooting a kid (my opinion only, not yours or the legal systems) or domestic violence.
Those reports came out after NBC and others tried to smear GZ as a racist, white- hispanic. I thought that was very important evidence, as we tried to access GZ's intent. How can you completely ignore it? ??? I'm not trying to rehash the trial here. I believe his actions directly led to the death of a kid. Tutoring boys doesn't change that all.
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:19 PM
Post #1385
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:12 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 09:47 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 08:32 AM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 07:22 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:54 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 05:48 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:43 PM
Screwdriver, BAG of jewelry....
What pieces of the GZ puzzle brought your mind to illegal guns?
Did you even READ the article? Martin says it wasn't his. Zimmerman says he didn't do it. You are being a total hypocrite. - Quote:
-
So what lead you to illegal guns?
deflect, deflect, deflect - Quote:
-
This would be akin to me saying "George Zimmerman bought illegal weapons." Which of course I never even came close to doing.
I told you what brought me to my thoughts. What brought illegal guns to your mind? Pretty simple question. I'm being honest. Strange that you won't say what made you even think it was possible. Looks like you just cooked it up....
You have not addressed your hypocrisy here. What brought illegal guns to my mind? I think Zimmerman is a crazy asshole who shot and killed an unarmed teen and has since went out and acquired more weapons. Thought it was possible maybe those weapons were illegal. Not exactly a huge jump in thinking.
What doesn't seem like a huge leap to you, does to me. Why would a legal, concealed carry card holder want to have illegal guns? That makes zero logical sense. Where have you been? This has already been totally addressed. Aaron and I hashed this out over 6 pages oor something. I'm not going to recap it for you. Go back and read.
At some point, are you going to explain why you jumped down my throat telling me not to convict GZ before all the evidence came out and yet you are completely willing to convict Martin without all the evidence?
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:21 PM
Post #1386
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:13 PM
- sirbrianwilson
- Dec 4 2013, 09:48 PM
but GZ's innocent, right?
br
Morally...maybe, maybe not. Legally....yes, he was innocent. Legally, when was Martin found guilty of something.
Legally, GZ was not innocent when he lied to a judge in court about his finances.
|
|
| |
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:39 PM
Post #1387
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:19 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:12 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 09:47 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 08:32 AM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 07:22 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:54 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 05:48 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:43 PM
Screwdriver, BAG of jewelry....
What pieces of the GZ puzzle brought your mind to illegal guns?
Did you even READ the article? Martin says it wasn't his. Zimmerman says he didn't do it. You are being a total hypocrite. - Quote:
-
So what lead you to illegal guns?
deflect, deflect, deflect - Quote:
-
This would be akin to me saying "George Zimmerman bought illegal weapons." Which of course I never even came close to doing.
I told you what brought me to my thoughts. What brought illegal guns to your mind? Pretty simple question. I'm being honest. Strange that you won't say what made you even think it was possible. Looks like you just cooked it up....
You have not addressed your hypocrisy here. What brought illegal guns to my mind? I think Zimmerman is a crazy asshole who shot and killed an unarmed teen and has since went out and acquired more weapons. Thought it was possible maybe those weapons were illegal. Not exactly a huge jump in thinking.
What doesn't seem like a huge leap to you, does to me. Why would a legal, concealed carry card holder want to have illegal guns? That makes zero logical sense.
Where have you been? This has already been totally addressed. Aaron and I hashed this out over 6 pages oor something. I'm not going to recap it for you. Go back and read. At some point, are you going to explain why you jumped down my throat telling me not to convict GZ before all the evidence came out and yet you are completely willing to convict Martin without all the evidence? I haven't "convicted" anyone of anything.
IT IS OF MY OPINION, with what we do know (tm's social media, bag of jewelry/screwdriver and his likely story), There is a very good chance that TM was a petty thief.
You are allowed to think GZ is an asshole criminal and I'm allowed to think TM was a pot-smoking thief who was a wanna-be thug.
I felt directly after the incident that there was more to the story, which turned out to be correct. I stated to you that I felt you were jumping to some pretty quick conclusions considering the complexity of the case and it's relation to Florida law. If pointing that out AND being LEGALLY correct about it makes me a hypocrite in your eyes, then so be it.
Your personal feelings about GZ and my personal feeling about TM really have little to do with it, IMO. My arguments in favor of GZ were from a total legal standpoint, I really couldn't care any less about him from a personal standpoint.
|

|
| |
|
IUCOLTFAN
|
Dec 5 2013, 04:40 PM
Post #1388
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #131
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:21 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:13 PM
- sirbrianwilson
- Dec 4 2013, 09:48 PM
but GZ's innocent, right?
br
Morally...maybe, maybe not. Legally....yes, he was innocent.
Legally, when was Martin found guilty of something. Legally, GZ was not innocent when he lied to a judge in court about his finances. I'm clearly referring to the death of TM.
|

|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
Post #1389
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:17 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 04:15 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:01 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 03:49 PM
Dreach and Brian, What did you think about the reports about GZ helping a homeless person fight against the police, and tutoring poor black kids?
What does that have to do with anything? I haven't seen that report, but I also have never made the claim the GZ has never done anything good with his life. He also saved that family in a car crash shortly after the trial. That doesn't mean I'm going to excuse him for unnecessarily shooting a kid (my opinion only, not yours or the legal systems) or domestic violence.
Those reports came out after NBC and others tried to smear GZ as a racist, white- hispanic. I thought that was very important evidence, as we tried to access GZ's intent. How can you completely ignore it?
??? I'm not trying to rehash the trial here. I believe his actions directly led to the death of a kid. Tutoring boys doesn't change that all. I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight?
Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight.
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 07:26 PM
Post #1390
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:17 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 04:15 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:01 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 03:49 PM
Dreach and Brian, What did you think about the reports about GZ helping a homeless person fight against the police, and tutoring poor black kids?
What does that have to do with anything? I haven't seen that report, but I also have never made the claim the GZ has never done anything good with his life. He also saved that family in a car crash shortly after the trial. That doesn't mean I'm going to excuse him for unnecessarily shooting a kid (my opinion only, not yours or the legal systems) or domestic violence.
Those reports came out after NBC and others tried to smear GZ as a racist, white- hispanic. I thought that was very important evidence, as we tried to access GZ's intent. How can you completely ignore it?
??? I'm not trying to rehash the trial here. I believe his actions directly led to the death of a kid. Tutoring boys doesn't change that all.
I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight? Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight. We've been over this 1000 times in this thread and I have absolutely not ignored the "mma style" witness or anything. I've never made any claim to who started the fight and if you actually read any of the thread you would know what I think already. The answers you seek lie within. Go find them. I have no desire to rehash the trial. I'm not trying to find GZ guilty in the legal system.
You say you want to look at the big picture and that GZ had a lot of positives going for him that I'm conveniently ignoring? What about the negatives you are ignoring? Arrested for for resisting arrest WITH VIOLENCE, claims of domestic violence and a restraining order granted against him. Those aren't exactly your common "do-gooder" problems.
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 07:29 PM
Post #1391
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:39 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 04:19 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 04:12 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 09:47 AM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 5 2013, 08:32 AM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 07:22 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:54 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 4 2013, 05:48 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Dec 4 2013, 05:43 PM
Screwdriver, BAG of jewelry....
What pieces of the GZ puzzle brought your mind to illegal guns?
Did you even READ the article? Martin says it wasn't his. Zimmerman says he didn't do it. You are being a total hypocrite. - Quote:
-
So what lead you to illegal guns?
deflect, deflect, deflect - Quote:
-
This would be akin to me saying "George Zimmerman bought illegal weapons." Which of course I never even came close to doing.
I told you what brought me to my thoughts. What brought illegal guns to your mind? Pretty simple question. I'm being honest. Strange that you won't say what made you even think it was possible. Looks like you just cooked it up....
You have not addressed your hypocrisy here. What brought illegal guns to my mind? I think Zimmerman is a crazy asshole who shot and killed an unarmed teen and has since went out and acquired more weapons. Thought it was possible maybe those weapons were illegal. Not exactly a huge jump in thinking.
What doesn't seem like a huge leap to you, does to me. Why would a legal, concealed carry card holder want to have illegal guns? That makes zero logical sense.
Where have you been? This has already been totally addressed. Aaron and I hashed this out over 6 pages oor something. I'm not going to recap it for you. Go back and read. At some point, are you going to explain why you jumped down my throat telling me not to convict GZ before all the evidence came out and yet you are completely willing to convict Martin without all the evidence?
I haven't "convicted" anyone of anything. IT IS OF MY OPINION, with what we do know (tm's social media, bag of jewelry/screwdriver and his likely story), There is a very good chance that TM was a petty thief. You are allowed to think GZ is an asshole criminal and I'm allowed to think TM was a pot-smoking thief who was a wanna-be thug. I felt directly after the incident that there was more to the story, which turned out to be correct. I stated to you that I felt you were jumping to some pretty quick conclusions considering the complexity of the case and it's relation to Florida law. If pointing that out AND being LEGALLY correct about it makes me a hypocrite in your eyes, then so be it. Your personal feelings about GZ and my personal feeling about TM really have little to do with it, IMO. My arguments in favor of GZ were from a total legal standpoint, I really couldn't care any less about him from a personal standpoint. So when I had an opinion on the Martin incident based on "what we do know" it wasn't valid, but when you have an opinion on the jewelry based on "what we do know" it's totally cool. Sounds pretty hypocritical.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Dec 5 2013, 07:57 PM
Post #1392
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 07:26 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight?
Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight.
We've been over this 1000 times in this thread and I have absolutely not ignored the "mma style" witness or anything. I've never made any claim to who started the fight and if you actually read any of the thread you would know what I think already. The answers you seek lie within. Go find them. I have no desire to rehash the trial. I'm not trying to find GZ guilty in the legal system. You say you want to look at the big picture and that GZ had a lot of positives going for him that I'm conveniently ignoring? What about the negatives you are ignoring? Arrested for for resisting arrest WITH VIOLENCE, claims of domestic violence and a restraining order granted against him. Those aren't exactly your common "do-gooder" problems. Ok, I just reread the entire thread in detail (not!) and recall that you don't think GZ should have feared for his health, and therefore had no right to shoot TM? Therefore, it doesn't matter who started the fight, and GZ is guilty of murder. I found the "MMA-style" pummeling account more compelling than you, and thought GZ was justified in defending himself with deadly force. Is that a fair summary?
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 5 2013, 08:34 PM
Post #1393
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 07:57 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 07:26 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight?
Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight.
We've been over this 1000 times in this thread and I have absolutely not ignored the "mma style" witness or anything. I've never made any claim to who started the fight and if you actually read any of the thread you would know what I think already. The answers you seek lie within. Go find them. I have no desire to rehash the trial. I'm not trying to find GZ guilty in the legal system. You say you want to look at the big picture and that GZ had a lot of positives going for him that I'm conveniently ignoring? What about the negatives you are ignoring? Arrested for for resisting arrest WITH VIOLENCE, claims of domestic violence and a restraining order granted against him. Those aren't exactly your common "do-gooder" problems.
Ok, I just reread the entire thread in detail (not!) and recall that you don't think GZ should have feared for his health, and therefore had no right to shoot TM? Therefore, it doesn't matter who started the fight, and GZ is guilty of murder. I found the "MMA-style" pummeling account more compelling than you, and thought GZ was justified in defending himself with deadly force. Is that a fair summary? Fail.
It's true that I don't think GZ's life was in imminent danger though.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Dec 5 2013, 09:15 PM
Post #1394
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 08:34 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 07:57 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 07:26 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight?
Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight.
We've been over this 1000 times in this thread and I have absolutely not ignored the "mma style" witness or anything. I've never made any claim to who started the fight and if you actually read any of the thread you would know what I think already. The answers you seek lie within. Go find them. I have no desire to rehash the trial. I'm not trying to find GZ guilty in the legal system. You say you want to look at the big picture and that GZ had a lot of positives going for him that I'm conveniently ignoring? What about the negatives you are ignoring? Arrested for for resisting arrest WITH VIOLENCE, claims of domestic violence and a restraining order granted against him. Those aren't exactly your common "do-gooder" problems.
Ok, I just reread the entire thread in detail (not!) and recall that you don't think GZ should have feared for his health, and therefore had no right to shoot TM? Therefore, it doesn't matter who started the fight, and GZ is guilty of murder. I found the "MMA-style" pummeling account more compelling than you, and thought GZ was justified in defending himself with deadly force. Is that a fair summary?
Fail. It's true that I don't think GZ's life was in imminent danger though. HaHa, No, YOU fail! :-)
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Dec 6 2013, 02:17 PM
Post #1395
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 09:15 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 08:34 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 07:57 PM
- dreachon
- Dec 5 2013, 07:26 PM
- HoosierLars
- Dec 5 2013, 05:16 PM
I don't like the idea of applying the "criminal" label to GZ or TM. Before doing that, I would like to look at the big picture. GZ had a lot of positives going for him. I can understand why you and others want to dismiss those, because they make it more difficult to say he's a crazy asshole who hunted TM down that fateful night. Much of the case came down to intent due to lack of direct evidence. However, the one eyewitness said TM was pummelling GZ "MMA-style", and you like to also ignore that point, and for some reason infer that GZ instigated the fight. What evidence do you have that GZ instigated the fight?
Also, you have ignored the point that TM's girlfriend said she and TM feared GZ was a gay-rapist, and that is also another reason TM may have started the fight.
We've been over this 1000 times in this thread and I have absolutely not ignored the "mma style" witness or anything. I've never made any claim to who started the fight and if you actually read any of the thread you would know what I think already. The answers you seek lie within. Go find them. I have no desire to rehash the trial. I'm not trying to find GZ guilty in the legal system. You say you want to look at the big picture and that GZ had a lot of positives going for him that I'm conveniently ignoring? What about the negatives you are ignoring? Arrested for for resisting arrest WITH VIOLENCE, claims of domestic violence and a restraining order granted against him. Those aren't exactly your common "do-gooder" problems.
Ok, I just reread the entire thread in detail (not!) and recall that you don't think GZ should have feared for his health, and therefore had no right to shoot TM? Therefore, it doesn't matter who started the fight, and GZ is guilty of murder. I found the "MMA-style" pummeling account more compelling than you, and thought GZ was justified in defending himself with deadly force. Is that a fair summary?
Fail. It's true that I don't think GZ's life was in imminent danger though.
HaHa, No, YOU fail! :-) I have no comeback for that :(
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|