What's weird is that killing a teenager you chased who was armed with skittles and Arizona iced tea makes you a hero to these nut wads.
Clearly he needed to be carrying a gun, someone attacked him for merely looking at them. In the end we got half a good result, if Martin had ratcheted up his assault to where he killed Zimmerman we'd have a fully good result. One ******* dead one ******* in prison for life and none of us would have ever heard of the story. Win/Win/Win.
What's weird is your simpleton view of what actually happened that day. I don't think anyone really likes Zimmerman. He's an f'n douchebag that was within his legal right to shoot someone that was attacking him.
There really should be a way to prevent him from profiting from this. Whether you think this was a justified shooting or a heinous act, a man was killed that night with that gun. It shouldn't be a selling point.
That's not nearly as disgusting as Trayvon's parents making literally millions as a result of their kid attacking someone and ending up shot. There's no reason to prevent him from selling his gun for whatever someone is willing to pay for it. In this case, he didn't do anything wrong.
Now that I think about it, Trayvon's death was probably the best thing that ever happened for his parents. All it took was terrible parenting and a masterful job promoting the death of their kid as something other than it was and they are set for life.
Fair enough, but what I said is true. Sometimes the truth is terrible. They can have another kid, and fail to raise it to where it doesn't go out attacking people for looking at them, but they can't create another money making scam like that. If they weren't out trying to maximize profit on the situation then I would think the pain of losing their kid outweighed the profit in their eyes, but that's not the case.
I love how this thread brings out the same old assumptions about things not in evidence and declarations based on imaginations.
Agreed, but some people can't help themselves, they want to paint Martin as a victim despite no evidence to support that narrative.
In your mind that's what happened. Nobody but George really knows for sure. I think it's equally likely that George approached with his gun already drawn which makes sense given the evidence of where the holster was located and the idea that he couldn't have actually reached it with Trayvon on top of him etc. Trayvon fought for his life, and when he was killed, George covered his ass. I don't know that's what happened either. But it is backed up by the evidence just like there is evidence to back up the story that GZ was assaulted by Martin. The bottom line is that it's all guessing at this point, and for anyone on either side to act like they know definitively what happened is stepping way outside their knowledge.
I agree. And given the uncertainty over what happened, its especially heartless to criticize the parents who lost a son for no good reason.
According to all evidence, that's what happened. I know you consider your dreamed up fantasy equal to that of the preponderance of evidence.....but that's not my problem. If George Zimmerman attacked Martin like in your fantasy, wouldn't there have been wounds on him from that? The kid didn't have a scratch on him other than the gunshot wounds. Zimmerman had wounds from an attack. Anyway, you keep rolling with your baseless dreamed up scenarios, I'll stick to the facts.
FranchiseBlade made up his mind the second he read the very first article (very biased) on this story. He's a very immature thinker who is not open to changing his initial first impression, especially when it fits the narrative he wants to be true.
I'm going by evidence. The evidence is that Martin was on the phone at the time of the attack. That's not something people going to assault someone do. The evidence is the location of Zimmerman's supposedly holstered gun made it impossible for him to have grabbed it and shot Martin the way he claims. It isn't that GZ attacked Martin, it's that he approached him with his gun already drawn. Martin then reacted and beat Zimmerman, before GZ was able to aim the gun and shoot Martin. There is evidence to support that (phone records, location GZ's supposedly holstered gun, etc.) I'm not saying that is what happened. There is evidence that supports that Martin attacked GZ as well. I think with all the evidence anyone who is claiming to know what happened is just pretending, or making assumptions that absolutely not proven to be true. I don't know, and I believe it is foolish for any of us on this board to pretend that we do know. We don't.
