Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Lol! You must not be from the "mean streets." Beating a "cracka" down and doing drugs aren't even on the list to qualify as a "thug." That's baby stuff!03Lightningrocks wrote:Funny thing is, amyone who claims to be from the "mean streets" would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trayvon was a thug and had every intention of , at the least, beating this cracka down. And possibly stealing his wallet to finance his drug habit. Fact!!!!
Perhaps you are biased look at 1a of the law he posted. A jury could conclude that following TM was causing distress in TM. Following TM served no useful purpose. Another jury could find different. My initial point was to the effect that a jury could drive a truck through these statutes depending on how the events are presented in court.AndyC wrote:Show where the law that Rotten Apple posted indicates that, as he stated, the "act of following someone (w/o additional elements) is a crime."
I think that he's proving his point - you, not so much, I'm afraid.
Okay. I'll depart this thread now. Y'all can have a pile-on with the next person that has a disagreement with y'all's viewpoints.Keith B wrote:OK, this thread is about to be locked. Stop the personal attacks. Any more and there could be potential bans of individuals as well. Stop now.
You don't get to ignore the last portion of the statue. The wording saidBullitt wrote:Actually if your reading & comprehension skills were strong you would comprehend better what I wrote and what this statute states, "opening your....well....flexing your fingers..." apparently has backfired on you.RottenApple wrote: Actually, no it wouldn't. If your google-fu were strong, you'd have searched before opening your....well....flexing your fingers. Under Florida law, neither harassment or stalking fits. And if you check the laws in the other 49 states, you won't find a single one that calls following a person harassment or stalking. At least not without additional actions to go with it.
Florida Penal Code 784.048
784.048 Stalking; definitions; penalties.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
Like I said, a jury could call it either way. 1a is sufficient to prove the point and we don't even need to read the rest of the statute. The dispatcher has nothing to do with it, who by the way also told Z he didn't need to be following TM. Following TM could be said to have caused emotional distress, and following certainly served no legitimate purpose. There is no evidence to suggest that TM was in the neighborhood to commit a crime.
But nice try!
(he even highlighted it for you).which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
If you had normal business needs in River Oaks this weekend, would you cancel them?howdy wrote:I learned and always taught that the sure sign of a great Pilot is someone who uses his superior brain to avoid situations where you might have to use your superior skill.
As a CHL Instructor, I have been using the Zimmerman case as a "teaching moment" to show where you can be doing everything legally and still find yourself in a very difficult position. I was taught in my initial CHL class and again during CHL Instructor school that we should avoid as much as possible situations where the use of my handgun might be required. I won't go to River Oaks this week-end even though it would be perfectly legal.
As a CHL holder, I hold myself to a higher standard when it comes to obeying the law. The State of Florida's entire case was Z's " following, getting out of his car, confronting and killing TM. We know that it was all legal, but Z almost went to jail for the rest of his useful life and he will never walk the streets like you and me. Argue these points all you want. The proof is in the pudding. What Z did was not very bright and I for one will not imitate it.
Well, I probably agree to some degree. However, I suspect some parents are now telling some children that "beating a cracka down" might get them killed.Bullitt wrote: Lol! You must not be from the "mean streets." Beating a "cracka" down and doing drugs aren't even on the list to qualify as a "thug." That's baby stuff!
VoiceofReason wrote:“The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.” The Orlando Sentinel quoting Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law “who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman”.
Unbelievable.Our government is completely out of control.
That and maybe staying on the phone with the 911 operator too long. 911/Non-emergency operators are not your friends. Make your call, give them pertinent info and hang up. Call back later if needed.03Lightningrocks wrote:Oh... the only real mistake GZ made was allowing that thug murderer to get close enough to hit him.
Don't lock it yet, I bet we can hit 200 pagesKeith B wrote:OK, this thread is about to be locked. Stop the personal attacks. Any more and there could be potential bans of individuals as well. Stop now.
ScooterSissy wrote:If you had normal business needs in River Oaks this weekend, would you cancel them?howdy wrote:I learned and always taught that the sure sign of a great Pilot is someone who uses his superior brain to avoid situations where you might have to use your superior skill.
As a CHL Instructor, I have been using the Zimmerman case as a "teaching moment" to show where you can be doing everything legally and still find yourself in a very difficult position. I was taught in my initial CHL class and again during CHL Instructor school that we should avoid as much as possible situations where the use of my handgun might be required. I won't go to River Oaks this week-end even though it would be perfectly legal.
As a CHL holder, I hold myself to a higher standard when it comes to obeying the law. The State of Florida's entire case was Z's " following, getting out of his car, confronting and killing TM. We know that it was all legal, but Z almost went to jail for the rest of his useful life and he will never walk the streets like you and me. Argue these points all you want. The proof is in the pudding. What Z did was not very bright and I for one will not imitate it.
More to the point, if you had normal business needs (and we'll count "volunteer work" as business needs) in River Oaks going forward, would you quit whatever activity it was permanently, so as to never have to be in that dangerous area again?
That is what the Zimmerman critics are stating - that because he had a CHL, he should have given up being a neighborhood watch member.
That was the legitimate purpose had had for following Martin. That alone puts one in an elevated position of danger because face it, thugs don't like to be followed and/or identified.
Putting himself in that particular elevated position of danger was not illegal, it wasn't wrong, and it wasn't stupid.
I don't blame anyone for choosing not to do so, but nor should Zimmerman be "blamed" for doing it!
well after seeing riots in la after rodney king i can honestly say that if was approached by large group of people blocking me in, i would be in fear of my life and would consider that a threat -- after all blocking someone from leaving is considered holding me against my will, kidnapping sort ofVoiceofReason wrote:KHOU
http://www.khou.com/news/local/Proteste ... 02081.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
About 150 protesters unhappy with the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial marched Tuesday in downtown Houston.
After leaving the federal courthouse they moved on to Houston City Hall. At some intersections the protestors stopped traffic as officers looked on. Drivers were patient with the demonstrators. “We know how to stop traffic. We did it last night. Y’all help us,” one man said, referring to Monday night when hundreds of protestors took to the streets of Third Ward and blocked traffic on Highway 288.
Quanell X said the group will march on River Oaks Sunday because he calls it the Sanford, Florida of Houston.
Meanwhile, the Rev. Al Sharpton announced Tuesday that he will lead a national “Justice for Trayvon” day in 100 cities this weekend to press for federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman.
When are people going to stand up and say enough? Is there anyone left that has the courage?
Maybe we all misunderstood. LITTLE TRAYTRAY was on his way to church. He was looking for someone to take with him. He was going to use his burglary tools to save some poor starving orphans who had been locked out of the small place they all slept every night. I bet TRAYTRAY was actually taking those drugs off the street, he was pictured with on FB, so other teens couldn't be harmed by them. The gold grille he wore in the picture was his retainer so that when he attended seminary school next year his teeth would all be straight. He was probably on his way to return the stolen jewelry his school found in his back pack.Bullitt wrote:You ridiculously found the law for me and even posted it!RottenApple wrote:So why don't you actually find a law, in any state, where the mere act of following someone (w/o additional elements) is a crime. You made the assertion. Prove it.
