WGDF

[Cerebrawl]

The best criminals are dead ones.

Fixed.

Do note that there's actual witnesses to Trayvon bashing George's head against the pavement, which is certainly attempted murder, and doesn't make him the victim in this situation.

 

[Something Amyss]

The point was that this was a mean spirited joke specifically for a group of people, at the expense of another, and one where the target wasn't exactly laughing cleverly at themselves.

I'm sorry, can you tell me which of these are also mean spirited?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10084-Erin-and-Hobbes-2
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10098-AJAB
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10123-The-Christmas-Marathon
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10313-The-Divide
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10363-The-Fans
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10611-The-Sacrificial-Lamb
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10634-The-Ones-Who-Knock

I'll end the list there simply because I don't want the space to be huge.

I mean, maybe you find all of these "mean," but otherwise, the tone seems to be consistent and they get less complaints. And what it looks like is that things that offend others are satire or jokes or funny but things that aren't are "mean spirited."

The point of such movements is pretty much that yes, crap like that has been aimed at minorities, and it's wrong.

Only in the sense that Fox News is fair and balanced. Which is to say, not at all. Neither in deed or really in word. The fact that these comics "attract" such insane histrionics is evidence of that.

 

[Dragonbums]

The best criminals are dead ones.

Fixed.

Do note that there's actual witnesses to Trayvon bashing George's head against the pavement, which is certainly attempted murder, and doesn't make him the victim in this situation.

Who were these witnesses? I certainly never heard of anybody else being at the scene except Trayvon (who is dead) and Zimmerman (who is not dead). He did sport punching scars but of course that would happen if your going after somebody in the middle of the night and their response to threats like that is fighting instead of fleeing.

 

[Cerebrawl]

Who were these witnesses? I certainly never heard of anybody else being at the scene except Trayvon (who is dead) and Zimmerman (who is not dead). He did sport punching scars but of course that would happen if your going after somebody in the middle of the night and their response to threats like that is fighting instead of fleeing.

[link]http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236[/link]

Spoiler: 'punching scars'

 

[madwarper]

Who were these witnesses? I certainly never heard of anybody else being at the scene except Trayvon (who is dead) and Zimmerman (who is not dead). He did sport punching scars but of course that would happen if your going after somebody in the middle of the night and their response to threats like that is fighting instead of fleeing.

So, did you simply bury your head in the sand during the trial?

Because, John Good, the *prosecution's witness* testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman throwing blows.

Transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/28/cnr.03.html
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsdLMBUvhAM

 

[Dragonbums]

Who were these witnesses? I certainly never heard of anybody else being at the scene except Trayvon (who is dead) and Zimmerman (who is not dead). He did sport punching scars but of course that would happen if your going after somebody in the middle of the night and their response to threats like that is fighting instead of fleeing.

So, did you simply bury your head in the sand during the trial?

Because, John Good, the *prosecution's witness* testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman throwing blows.

Transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/28/cnr.03.html
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsdLMBUvhAM

Except for the fact that it still doesn't say who started what. Half the time he said he couldn't even see anything. The only thing he identified was that Trayvon was on top. That's it. He didn't know who really cried for help. He just assumed. He didn't see the two interact before the fight. He didn't even know if Martin was being hit. Most of his testimony was speculation because he went inside immediately to dial the cops and was only witness to the fight. The only definite thing he had was 2 people fighting and one of them called for help. He also described the position as "ground pound" as a term for when one can punch downwards but the bottom person can fight back as well. So it's not like Zimmerman was entirely defenseless. He then heard a gunshot. It's obvious who fucking did that.

However that still absolves nothing.

If Zimmerman didn't think he was a big shot he would've stayed in his fucking car like any rational person would when reporting "shady" people in the middle of the night. Then again he was stalking the kid in his car to begin with.

Then he gets out of his car- which I'm fairly sure a street smart kid like Trayvon- would have noticed his vehicular stalking at this point and gave chase. Even though the operators told him not to do that. And even though he stopped- what do you think a kid would do when he was stalked by car in the middle of the night and then said person gets out of the car and starts giving chase whilst on the phone with an unknown? Once again it's fight or flight and Trayvon chose fight. Obviously he would have the advantage since Zimmerman didn't know his whereabouts. However if Trayvon had a weapon - don't you think he would of used it by now instead of throwing punches? Obviously Zimmerman instead of calling for help some more ( if it even was him) decided a gun with the intent to kill was the better option.
The witness who only even a tiny fraction of the fight clearly spent most of that interaction on the phone with the cops.

 

[Dragonbums]

Who were these witnesses? I certainly never heard of anybody else being at the scene except Trayvon (who is dead) and Zimmerman (who is not dead). He did sport punching scars but of course that would happen if your going after somebody in the middle of the night and their response to threats like that is fighting instead of fleeing.

[link]http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236[/link]

Spoiler: 'punching scars'

You want to see my answer look at the last person I responded to. I don't have time to talk to users who would rather insult through picking up word choice instead of a legitimate response. Condescending or not. Then again it's not the first time you belittle those who argue with you.

 

[Cerebrawl]

You want to see my answer look at the last person I responded to. I don't have time to talk to users who would rather insult through picking up word choice instead of a legitimate response. Condescending or not. Then again it's not the first time you belittle those who argue with you.

Slander alert, slander alert.

I pointed out that your claim was false, by providing solid evidence to the contrary. The claim being that all he got was some punching scars. Oh and that there wasn't any witness.

His nose was in a pretty rough state too, and there's photographic evidence of that as well.

But yeah I have noticed that your mind is made up and no amount of evidence you didn't know about is going to change that.

And we do have witnesses who have testified it was George Zimmerman who cried for help, and also to call the police.

 

[Dragonbums]

Slander alert, slander alert.

I guess you forgot the last time you discussed with me and called me an apologist and all that jazz in the last Anita Sarkeesian thread I think even another user called you out on it.

I pointed out that your claim was false, by providing solid evidence to the contrary. The claim being that all he got was some punching scars.

To which I responded to another user about.

His nose was in a pretty rough state too, and there's photographic evidence of that as well.

I was talking about what the witness stated in the in his testimony provided in the link, and since I already said he has fighting wounds beforehand you would know that I'm already aware of the fact that he did get beaten up.

But yeah I have noticed that your mind is made up and no amount of evidence you didn't know about is going to change that.

And you still believe that in this case Trayvon was a "criminal" even though Zimmerman was the catalyst to the events that happened anyway.

I still think that Zimmerman should of gotten some sort of charge in the first place. Instead he was absolved of everything.

And we do have witnesses who have testified it was George Zimmerman who cried for help, and also to call the police.

Then can you provide me with another link then? Because the one I was linked to by another user he stated that he made the assumption that Zimmerman made the cry for help because he was on the bottom. That wasn't a definite answer. That was a speculation at best.

 

[madwarper]

[snips]

Except, whoever started the fight is completely irrelevant.

At the time John Good witnessed the struggle, Martin was on top of Zimmerman "reigning down blows".
Even IF Zimmerman was the initial aggressor, as you seem to speculate but have ZERO proof of, Martin's response in force was in no way proportional. This is evidenced by the fact that (aside from the gunshot) the only injuries to Martin were scrapped knuckles, while Zimmerman was beaten and bloody. Also, there is the powder-burn on the hoodie and stippling on the body clearly shows that at the time of the shooting, Martin was leaning over Zimmerman.

All the physical evidence supports Zimmerman's account. Remember, physical evidence. Want a link? It was all in the trial. So, instead of asking for evidence, perhaps you should start providing some. You know, instead of pulling more speculation from your hindquarters.

 

[Cerebrawl]

And you still believe that in this case Trayvon was a "criminal" even though Zimmerman was the catalyst to the events that happened anyway.

Zimmerman was doing his duty as a neighbourhood watchman. Perhaps overzealously, but he was doing exactly what neighbourhood watchmen are supposed to do. And he was the coordinatinator, a position that he'd been nominated for by other members of the neighbourhood watch, and which was overseen and coordinated with(thus his title) the local police department.

As for criminal, yes. Though up until that incident, small time(recreational drug use). But his beating of Zimmerman certainly constitutes attempted murder, or at best aggravated assault. He was shot during the commision of a crime.

And the only wounds he had on his body aside from the gunshot wound were on his fists, which certainly corroborates Zimmerman's story, with you know, real physical evidence. Zimmerman was beat up, Martin had bruised knuckles, but no other brawling wounds.

I still think that Zimmerman should of gotten some sort of charge in the first place. Instead he was absolved of everything.

See above.

And we do have witnesses who have testified it was George Zimmerman who cried for help, and also to call the police.

Then can you provide me with another link then? Because the one I was linked to by another user he stated that he made the assumption that Zimmerman made the cry for help because he was on the bottom. That wasn't a definite answer. That was a speculation at best.

It's actually on recording, from witnesses calling the police, and was identified by a large number of witnesses at the trial as being Zimmerman.

 

[Dragonbums]

Zimmerman was doing his duty as a neighbourhood watchman. Perhaps overzealously, but he was doing exactly what neighbourhood watchmen are supposed to do. And he was the coordinatinator, a position that he'd been nominated for by other members of the neighbourhood watch, and which was overseen and coordinated with(thus his title) the local police department.

It doesn't matter what promotions or what have you he has. At the end of the day you are still playing vigilante. You are not a cop. You are not an enforcer of the law. You see something, you report it. You don't stalk the person how many fucking blocks, then get out of your car and give chase after the person in question has already run off and you can't see them.

But his beating of Zimmerman certainly constitutes attempted murder, or at best aggravated assault. He was shot during the commision of a crime.

How is beating up someone who is stalking you in the middle of the night and gave chase a crime? I'm fairly certain if the kid wasn't dead he could of just as easily stated self defense himself. I don't care if Zimmerman is a watchman, or a vigilante, or an acquaintance of the police. As far as Trayvon was concerned some creep fuck in a car stalked him for a couple of blocks, stopped, and gave chase to him. On top of that he was on the phone with somebody. If I was in such a situation that is just as much as a valid response than just running the entire fucking time.

And the only wounds he had on his body aside from the gunshot wound were on his fists, which certainly corroborates Zimmerman's story, with you know, real physical evidence. Zimmerman was beat up, Martin had bruised knuckles, but no other brawling wounds.

I didn't deny he got beat up. Once again I was simply talking about what the witness said in case to the ensuing fight between the two before the gunshot.

It's actually on recording, from witnesses calling the police, and was identified by a large number of witnesses at the trial as being Zimmerman.

Alright then.

 

[Therumancer]

Of course this is something I'm bringing up in response to a very rare situation on The Escapist. As a general rule there aren't many cases where you see a feature contributor basically baiting people, followed by bans when people take the bait. Strictly speaking the insulting tone in the WGDF jokes in "Critical Miss" could even be interpreted as an outright group attack.

It's constructive criticism, not an attack. The point in framing it as an attack is so that there can be a morally justified defense, kind of like how Rush Limbaugh views every criticism of white people as an attack and by God, thanks to him there is finally a defense of white wealthy people. The point is to maximize argumentation as a political weapon - for Rush Limbaugh to justify whatever he does from the standpoint of being permanently besieged. "White people are under threat", which means anything goes so that privilege is maintained.

If we begin with the understanding that none of us are perfect and therefore there's always room for constructive criticism we won't view every criticism with hostility.

I disagree that this was in any way constructive, especially given the issue that was being addressed, and the mention of Zimmerman. What's more Rush Limbaugh frequently goes too far, and is made to apologize for it. He's also been under fire from numerous sponsors and patrons, and has been bounced around, put in late night TV slots (not even sure if he has a show) and other things due to his particular style. Granted Rush doesn't go much further than a lot of liberals do, and is treated differently because of the side he represents, which is kind of the point he's making when he talks about whites and conservatives being under siege.

One important thing to consider though is that I am *NOT* saying that Critical Miss should not have done this. There is however a discussion forum attached to this feature specifically to invite discussion. When someone uses that forum to respond in kind, they have been getting moderated. That's not right. My point is that if your going to have a forum for something like this, let it go both ways and be equally intense. If you don't want that kind of warfare on your site, then don't let the feature contributors fire off these kinds of shots. What your seeing Critical Miss doing is attacking, having a forum to encourage discussion and rebuttal, and hiding behind mods who attack anyone who throws
the same thing right back at them. As I've said, they have the right to say what they want, but on a site like this
they should also have to reap what they sow, forums attached to features that want to make socio-political commentary should be free fire zones within that subject, and if the feature is an attack piece, it should expect a counter attack.


I find the whole situation kind of cowardly honestly, I drop my fair share of bombs (but do it in a fairly polite fashion) but don't get upset when people "dare" to speak back to me, or go crying to the mods or expecting some kind of administrative force field. As I've said if they had done this kind of thing, the way they did it, without being a feature contributor they would have been suspended at the very least, and to me it's just plain wrong to see a bunch of people moderated in their defense under those kinds of circumstances, and then see them do the entire thing again and get tons of "OMG, here it comes again" responses because of the mess they created before.

I'll also be blunt in saying again that Rush has been made to apologize in the past for stunts (which I'm not suggesting here), but at the same time Rush to my knowledge has never portrayed his opponents as engaging in casual murder either. I used to listen to him to an extent (my opinions are mixed) and I've heard him call people morons, corrupt, implied treason, and talked about extreme media bias, but he's never even really joked about how democrats
and liberals are going to go walking about and blow the heads off people for disagreeing with him.

To put it in another perspective, if someone here did a joke that had "blacks are brainless monkey people who rape white women" as the punchline, what kind of outcry and action do you think that would warrant? This is the same thing. Would the mods be defending that?

Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing against extreme jokes, ideally, as I've said, I'd prefer free speech on both sides when something like this gets started, rather than moderation or censorship in either direction. If Critical Miss wants to try and start something, more power to them, but they shouldn't be protected from the response. The Escapist doesn't have to do that though, and whether I like it or not, can already practice censorship. As an alternative if they want to be reasonable about it and not host a bunch of socio-political free-fire zones, I've also suggested they might simply exercise editorial control and not host content that is making a socio-political statement, or piggybacking one onto something else. Of course I'd prefer the mods to simply be kept out of features that make social and political statements. In reality I however expect nothing to happen, and things to continue on as they have been, which is of course the right of The Escapist. I'm just sounding off (so to speak).

 

[Dragonbums]

Even IF Zimmerman was the initial aggressor, as you seem to speculate but have ZERO proof of,

Of course nobody has proof of it because the only person to prove that is dead and nobody cared to look out the window of the incident until the fight actually started.

Martin's response in force was in no way proportional.

Neither is a gunshot to the face. Then again, anything can happen at night, and if I'm more of a person to fight than flight that certainly would be a rational response to some mystery man stalking me in a car (with unknown amounts of people) in the middle of the night for a couple of blocks, and then getting out of the car talking to somebody on the phone and for the briefest moments gave chase.

This is evidenced by the fact that (aside from the gunshot) the only injuries to Martin were scrapped knuckles, while Zimmerman was beaten and bloody. Also, there is the powder-burn on the hoodie and stippling on the body clearly shows that at the time of the shooting, Martin was leaning over Zimmerman.

Well yeah, the witness said SOMEBODY was on top.

All the physical evidence supports Zimmerman's account. Remember, physical evidence. Want a link? It was all in the trial. So, instead of asking for evidence, perhaps you should start providing some. You know, instead of pulling more speculation from your hindquarters.

I'm pulling speculation because the only account we have is Zimmerman's account. At the end of the day we still have one side of the story that is- and forever will be- unknown because the person in question is dead. Right now all we are talking about is Zimmerman getting beat up. I'm talking about the fact that Zimmerman shouldn't of acted like he's some fucking hotshot and stalk somebody in the middle of the night in a car then have the audacity to get out of the car and chase after him under some disillusion that nothing would possibly happen to him. Any other person who pulled some shit like this would be called a fucking idiot. You aren't the law. Your a civilian vigilante. If you see some shady ass shit just call the fucking cops from your car give them the general location and leave.

 

[Dragonbums]

and you're taking the route of making martin a huge victim in all this and making it black and white.

Perhaps I am making this black and white. However for my family and relatives these kinds of things hit really close to home because (obviously) I have male relatives this can happen to at any given moment should they decided to wear a hoodie and walk in the middle of the night.


I'm mainly upset over the fact that he was absolved of all charges. Especially when the entire situation could of been avoided had he of just called the cops over suspicious activity and not stalk the man for an indeterminate amount of time and then get out of the car and chase him. It is beyond fucking stupid.

Maybe Trayvon should not of beaten the guy up that hard. But again, we will have no explanation for why he went that far because again- he's dead. So we are still heavily reliant on only one side of the case, and a couple of witnesses that were only there to see the fight. And none of the stuff beforehand.

 

[Therumancer]

The point was that this was a mean spirited joke specifically for a group of people, at the expense of another, and one where the target wasn't exactly laughing cleverly at themselves.

I'm sorry, can you tell me which of these are also mean spirited?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10084-Erin-and-Hobbes-2
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10098-AJAB
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10123-The-Christmas-Marathon
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10313-The-Divide
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10363-The-Fans
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10611-The-Sacrificial-Lamb
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/10634-The-Ones-Who-Knock

I'll end the list there simply because I don't want the space to be huge.

I mean, maybe you find all of these "mean," but otherwise, the tone seems to be consistent and they get less complaints. And what it looks like is that things that offend others are satire or jokes or funny but things that aren't are "mean spirited."

The point of such movements is pretty much that yes, crap like that has been aimed at minorities, and it's wrong.

Only in the sense that Fox News is fair and balanced. Which is to say, not at all. Neither in deed or really in word. The fact that these comics "attract" such insane histrionics is evidence of that.

... and again, how many of those got this kind of reaction? Not many. This is not to say there were not comments, but there wasn't a legendary bloodbath that had a sequel going "OMG, the bans here are going to be crazy again". What's more they aren't showing casual murder, or banking on an "assumed" view of a controversial case (Zimmerman).

What's more you yourself are kind of making the point about dual standards when you start talking about "Insane Histrionics" which is simply you agreeing with the strip and disagreeing with the other side. After all if this was some kind of racist statement or whatever... say a strip presenting blacks as out of control rape monkeys or something... you'd consider the vehement response "social justice" and the intense responses a positive thing. What's more your also trying to invoke a blanket attack on Fox News as some kind of "truth" that makes a point, when really that's just something you... and admittedly a sizable number of people... think. In reality though Fox is still a major news
network and it's legions of viewers (millions of people) disagree with you. This gets down to the entire point about someone dropping a bomb from one political position, and then hiding behind a bunch of mods to avoid the fallout, and then deliberately provoking the same kind of reaction again.

See, it's one thing to poke fun at say "Breaking Bad" fans and spoilers or whatever, it's another to attack a major group and portray them as casual murderers. In this case it's less a Democrat Vs. Republican thing here, rather than a rather insulting attack on the growing number of people who have largely been opposing the ridiculous extent PC leanings have gotten to in fandom of late. The basic "joke" was that someone who doesn't think the relatively few black protaganists in video games is obvious racism when people will accept an anthromorph, is equivalent to a casual race murderer... with Zimmerman, which is a controversial case, being presented as an example of that. By extension it's
also saying that people who think Zimmerman was right and acted in self defense, are racists.

They by all means have the right to express that opinion, but I do not think moderating the forum put in place for comments and criticisms when it sees counter attacks is reasonable. I do not expect The Escapist to change anything, but I believe they should either declare the forums attached to features like this a free fire zone, allowing things to go both ways, and meaning that Critical Miss will reap what it sows (positive or negative), or that if The Escapist does not want to host such battles then by all means they should prevent feature contributors from starting them. But again, I don't think it's likely anything will change. Critical Miss isn't going to apologize, or reign things in, and I just can't see The Escapist as a whole implementing policy changes based on my opinions of all people. As I've said, I'm just sounding off.

... and yes, before you mention that minorities and such HAVE been the victims of this kind of attack & protection before, I will point out that it wasn't right then, and it isn't right now. Claims of "social justice" in seeing things reversed are pretty much bunk, that's just doing the wrong thing in another direction. Attacking white guys, or in this case socio-political opponents on specific issues (more than it really being racial) and then not allowing response in an attached forum is just as wrong as if someone was doing racist garbage about black people and not allowing a response. As a believe in free speech, I believe you have the right to say whatever you want (not that The Escapist has to allow free speech, being a private institution), but people also have the right to respond to you. This is why I do not think editing "Critical Miss" or refusing to run strips is a great idea, and would simply prefer the forums to be declared mod-free territory.

Now, if you've followed my posts you'll notice I've said some very non-PC things, and am not exactly an all around social liberal. But you'll also notice I'm fairly polite even when saying things that are negative, and I have never disagreed with anyone's right to respond to me. Heck, I haven't even reported people for flaming me, because hey, they have that right, just like I have the right not to take they have to say seriously because of it. The point is I put my money where my mouth is in making this statement. To be honest part of what bugs me is that it seems our friends at Critical Miss are great at dishing it out, but can't take it.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

and you're taking the route of making martin a huge victim in all this and making it black and white.

Perhaps I am making this black and white. However for my family and relatives these kinds of things hit really close to home because (obviously) I have male relatives this can happen to at any given moment should they decided to wear a hoodie and walk in the middle of the night.

The guy didn't have a gun on him at the time, but I've had this happen to me and a couple friends before, spent the night at someones house and were roaming around during the night just having fun, and this neighbor took the initiative to chase us down in his car because we were boys with "suspicious hoodies on" *were sporting our high schools hoodies* so believe me, this hits right at home.

I'm mainly upset over the fact that he was absolved of all charges. Especially when the entire situation could of been avoided had he of just called the cops over suspicious activity and not stalk the man for an indeterminate amount of time and then get out of the car and chase him. It is beyond fucking stupid.

Maybe Trayvon should not of beaten the guy up that hard. But again, we will have no explanation for why he went that far because again- he's dead. So we are still heavily reliant on only one side of the case, and a couple of witnesses that were only there to see the fight. And none of the stuff beforehand.

based off of how horribly wrong the media was on this (seriously, the media blew this case up, in all the wrong ways) I was originally incredibly sympathetic to trayvon's side, since it was taken out of context and he was made to look like some defenseless angel of a child when that couldn't be any more wrong. I don't have the direct link anymore since that was ages ago in internet time, but his texts/conversations (essentially his life story leading up to that point)were released and proved he was quite a scumbag and was heading down a very dark and steep slope up to this point, so after seeing all the official points made in court and reading all that context I couldn't sympathize with him "going to far", he thrived on getting into unnecessary fights and was quite the little pompous jerk (not saying he deserved to be killed, not in the slightest) but him jumping on someone and beating him within an inch of his life was probably his intent, and something he didn't mind doing at the time. also, those pictures were quite old the media was using, he was a pretty big fuckin teenager at this point, hell bigger than most adults.

*slight rant over* all that aside, I don't think zimmerman should have gotten off the way he did, but from what I had read in the original case, the plaintiff did not play it smart and went for home runs when they could've for sure gotten him jail time on smaller charges, especially considering they had the burden of proof and had to find a way to not make the "stand your ground" defense okay in this instance.

 

[madwarper]

Of course nobody has proof of it because the only person to prove that is dead and nobody cared to look out the window of the incident until the fight actually started.

Again. IRRELEVANT.

Neither is a gunshot to the face.

No one was shot in the face. Stop making shit up.

Martin was slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk. That's lethal force. Zimmerman's shooting of Martin IN THE CHEST is directly proportional.

Then again, anything can happen at night, and if I'm more of a person to fight than flight that certainly would be a rational response to some mystery man stalking me in a car (with unknown amounts of people) in the middle of the night for a couple of blocks, and then getting out of the car talking to somebody on the phone and for the briefest moments gave chase.

Then, by all means. Randomly attack all the people you want. See what that gets you.

Well yeah, the witness said SOMEBODY was on top.

That's not just the witness, it's also the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Read the autopsy report. Stop being willfully ignorant.

I'm pulling speculation because the only account we have is Zimmerman's account.

Which is supported by all the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Get that through your skull. We have EVIDENCE. You have NOTHING.

 

[Dragonbums]

Again. IRRELEVANT.

Why?

No one was shot in the face. Stop making shit up.

To make stuff up would be to imply that I knew the truth in the first place. As such, most people just said he got shot. Nobody went into the details of where. Not that it mattered because it was fatal anyway.

Then, by all means. Randomly attack all the people you want. See what that gets you.

And by all means randomly stalk people in the middle of the night then give chase when they run off and you can't see them and see what happens.

That's not just the witness, it's also the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Read the autopsy report. Stop being willfully ignorant.

And as I've already stated that's physical evidence of the fight. A fight that would not of happened had Zimmerman not of gotten out of his car and chased the man when he couldn't even see him.

Which is supported by all the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Get that through your skull. We have EVIDENCE. You have NOTHING.

Evidence of the fight. Which is not what I'm really talking about.
I'm talking about Zimmerman being absolved of all charges for an incident that could of been avoided if Zimmerman wasn't a hotshot dumbass vigilante who stalked someone in the middle of the night and when shit hit the fan hard shot him in the face.


Honestly the both of you are quite unpleasant to talk to, and I'm going to end it with Gmaverick because honestly he/she at least knows where I'm coming from with this.