Current Events > I liked Obama, but the Trayvon could have been my son thing was the cringiest

(+) Yeah! (+)

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So you're arguing that killing someone trying to kill you is wrong?

In neither situation was anyone that died trying to kill the person that killed them.

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun? Micheal Brown was trying to steal the cop's gun for shits and giggles? Alton Sterling was reaching for his gun - that he legally wasn't supposed to have because he's a felon - when dealing with the police because he thought it was Show and Tell day?

gtfoh
---

darkjedilink posted...

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun?

Pretty much yes
---

darkjedilink posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So you're arguing that killing someone trying to kill you is wrong?

In neither situation was anyone that died trying to kill the person that killed them.

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun? Micheal Brown was trying to steal the cop's gun for shits and giggles? Alton Sterling was reaching for his gun - that he legally wasn't supposed to have because he's a felon - when dealing with the police because he thought it was Show and Tell day?

gtfoh

You can't reason with todays liberals when it comes to minorities. Black people always right and pure good, cops and white people always wrong and evil.

ITT: People misquote and extrapolate
---

it's so weird to me that people on here don't consider obviously following someone around an act of aggression.

Like if you followed around a police officer all for a half hour I'm sure he'd detain you off that alone and everyone would be okay with it.
---

The cringiest moment of Obama's Presidency wasn't even said by him. It was Nancy Pelosi and her famous "We have to pass it to know what's in it" comment. Holy shit
---

gamepimp12 posted...

it's so weird to me that people on here don't consider obviously following someone around an act of aggression.

Aggressive actions are not necessarily physical provocation. Unless I actually touch you physically in a way you don't like, you have no right to physically assault me.

Why is that so hard for you to understand? Look at it this way - if you could just go around beating the shit out of people for "following" you, how many black people do you think would get assaulted by white people in New York, LA, or Chicago? "That black man was following me for a half a block! I thought he was going to jump me and steal my purse, so I kicked his ass!"

Would you be okay with that? Same deal as Trayvon.

Like if you followed around a police officer all for a half hour I'm sure he'd detain you off that alone and everyone would be okay with it.

Very few people would be okay with that. I'd actually love for that to happen to me, actually - I'd be getting me an easy payday from Baton Rouge.
---

darkjedilink posted...

gamepimp12 posted...

it's so weird to me that people on here don't consider obviously following someone around an act of aggression.

Aggressive actions are not necessarily physical provocation. Unless I actually touch you physically in a way you don't like, you have no right to physically assault me.

Why is that so hard for you to understand? Look at it this way - if you could just go around beating the shit out of people for "following" you, how many black people do you think would get assaulted by white people in New York, LA, or Chicago? "That black man was following me for a half a block! I thought he was going to jump me and steal my purse, so I kicked his ass!"

Would you be okay with that? Same deal as Trayvon.

Like if you followed around a police officer all for a half hour I'm sure he'd detain you off that alone and everyone would be okay with it.

Very few people would be okay with that. I'd actually love for that to happen to me, actually - I'd be getting me an easy payday from Baton Rouge.

I never really discussed legality in the first half of the post, just that someone responding aggressively to obviously be followed, especially for unknown reasons is a somewhat expected reaction.


And I'm pretty sure following a police officer around would be enough suspicion for at least detainment, I mean they detain you for just running from them.
---

gamepimp12 posted...

I never really discussed legality in the first half of the post, just that someone responding aggressively to obviously be followed, especially for unknown reasons is a somewhat expected reaction.

There's a difference between "responding aggressively" to "losing the guy following you, going home, then deciding to hunt that person down and beat the shit out of them."

And I'm pretty sure following a police officer around would be enough suspicion for at least detainment, I mean they detain you for just running from them.

And, again, that'd be an unlawful arrest, and you'd be able to get a nice payday from the city in that case.
---

ImPickleRick posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So you're arguing that killing someone trying to kill you is wrong?

In neither situation was anyone that died trying to kill the person that killed them.

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun? Micheal Brown was trying to steal the cop's gun for shits and giggles? Alton Sterling was reaching for his gun - that he legally wasn't supposed to have because he's a felon - when dealing with the police because he thought it was Show and Tell day?

gtfoh

You can't reason with todays liberals when it comes to minorities. Black people always right and pure good, cops and white people always wrong and evil.

Stupidest part is that Zimmerman was not even a cop.

A lot of Trayvon supporters don't even know that because they have literally never looked at the case
---

That_Happened posted...

Trayvon was slamming zimmerman's head on the ground. And as for Mike Brown, he started fist fighting with a police officer.

And neither deserved to die.

darkjedilink posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So you're arguing that killing someone trying to kill you is wrong?

In neither situation was anyone that died trying to kill the person that killed them.

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun? Micheal Brown was trying to steal the cop's gun for shits and giggles? Alton Sterling was reaching for his gun - that he legally wasn't supposed to have because he's a felon - when dealing with the police because he thought it was Show and Tell day?

gtfoh

The first one's called fighting. Not attempted murder. Brown never reached for the cop's gun and was too far away for that to matter when he died (unless he's Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic). Sterling wasn't reaching for his gun.

So wrong on all accounts.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

And neither deserved to die.

If you don't want to risk dying, don't repeatedly slam someone's head against the ground and make them fear for their lives. That seems like a simple rule to me. Whether or not Trayvon "deserved" to die is irrelevant--his actions caused someone to fight back and kill him.
---

I never understood why conservatives are so fixated on that comment from Obama. It really wasn't that deep or hard to get but they seem to make a huge mountain out of a molehill

Knowledge_King posted...

That_Happened posted...

Trayvon was slamming zimmerman's head on the ground. And as for Mike Brown, he started fist fighting with a police officer.

And neither deserved to die.

darkjedilink posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So you're arguing that killing someone trying to kill you is wrong?

In neither situation was anyone that died trying to kill the person that killed them.

So Trayvon Martin was just banging Zimmerman's head into the ground for fun? Micheal Brown was trying to steal the cop's gun for shits and giggles? Alton Sterling was reaching for his gun - that he legally wasn't supposed to have because he's a felon - when dealing with the police because he thought it was Show and Tell day?

gtfoh

The first one's called fighting. Not attempted murder. Brown never reached for the cop's gun and was too far away for that to matter when he died (unless he's Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic). Sterling wasn't reaching for his gun.

So wrong on all accounts.

Forensic science proves all of this wrong.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Stupidest part is that Zimmerman was not even a cop.

BLM hinges on the texas sharpshooter fallacy.
---

CruelBuffalo posted...

I never understood why conservatives are so fixated on that comment from Obama. It really wasn't that deep or hard to get but they seem to make a huge mountain out of a molehill

They'll never be able to explain it without sounding racist as shit.
---

That_Happened posted...

If you don't want to risk dying, don't repeatedly slam someone's head against the ground and make them fear for their lives. That seems like a simple rule to me. Whether or not Trayvon "deserved" to die is irrelevant--his actions caused someone to fight back and kill him.

This is usually against the law btw. It's called escalation of force. If someone is beating you up with fists, you cannot shoot them. That's why him getting off is so controversial. Also the fact that he flat out murdered someone and didn't even get arrested that day and was walking free.

Shooting someone who is beating you up is always against the law.

darkjedilink posted...

Forensic science proves all of this wrong.

Except it proved nothing wrong and you made that up.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

This is usually against the law btw. It's called escalation of force.

I may be wrong here, but I thought escalation of force generally applied to police and the military: people trained to deal with these matters. I don't know too many civilians who get hit with this charge--but again, I may be wrong.
---

What was wrong with the comment though?

I don't remember anybody answering that.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

That_Happened posted...

If you don't want to risk dying, don't repeatedly slam someone's head against the ground and make them fear for their lives. That seems like a simple rule to me. Whether or not Trayvon "deserved" to die is irrelevant--his actions caused someone to fight back and kill him.

This is usually against the law btw. It's called escalation of force. If someone is beating you up with fists, you cannot shoot them. That's why him getting off is so controversial. Also the fact that he flat out murdered someone and didn't even get arrested that day and was walking free.

Shooting someone who is beating you up is always against the law.

darkjedilink posted...

Forensic science proves all of this wrong.

Except it proved nothing wrong and you made that up.

If you have a reasonable fear that your attacker will kill you, then you most certainly have the right to kill that person.

Like, your ignorance of the law is astoundingly horrendous. Have you not even seen a single episode of Law and Order?
---

I've not spent a lot of time looking into the Sterling case, so I won't make baseless assumptions one way or the other. A novel concept on the internet...

The other two cases brought up, Martin and Brown...

Yeah, if someone half my age is beating my head into the pavement, or frankly just physically assaulting me with their fists, I am NOT going to win that fight with my awesome martial arts skills. If I think I can safely pull a weapon and kill them, I will, because I don't know what in the world they are doing or what their intent is, so I'm not really left with much choice. I don't *want* to kill anyone, but if I have every reason to believe someone intends to beat me to death, I will stop them any way that I can.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Like, your ignorance of the law is astoundingly horrendous. Have you not even seen a single episode of Law and Order?

I'm assuming you're joking with that line. Because that's a pretty decent attempt at humor tbh.

That_Happened posted...

I may be wrong here, but I thought escalation of force generally applied to police and the military: people trained to deal with these matters. I don't know too many civilians who get hit with this charge--but again, I may be wrong.

I've seen it happen and been cited. Like if someone hits you, lawfully you can hit them back. You cannot punch them 1000 times and still be on the right side of the law however. Same with someone punching you and you stabbing or shooting them.
---

The Top Crusader posted...

I don't *want* to kill anyone, but if I have every reason to believe someone intends to beat me to death, I will stop them any way that I can.

And in every state of the Union, you have that right. Most states require you at least make some attempt to flee if possible, but the legal standard is that, if someone is assaulting you in a manner to where the average person would reasonably fear for their life, you can legally kill them in self-defense.

Florida has a "stand your ground" law, which basically states that you don't need to attempt to flee to use lethal force in self-defense. Ergo, as long as the average person would reasonably fear for their life, fire away.

Very few people would legitimately argue that being attacked from behind, knocked to the ground, and repeatedly having your head slammed into the pavement wouldn't give the average person a reasonable fear of death. Ergo, pretty everyone claiming it wasn't self-defense in the Martin case is either trolling or racist.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

I've seen it happen and been cited. Like if someone hits you, lawfully you can hit them back. You cannot punch them 1000 times and still be on the right side of the law however. Same with someone punching you and you stabbing or shooting them.

You're full of shit, and you know it. The legal standard is if an average person would reasonably fear for their life, you can use lethal force in self-defense.

Tell me how an average person wouldn't reasonably fear death when someone jumps them from behind, slams them to the ground, climbs on top of them, and slams their head repeatedly into the pavement.
---

Him joining the media wagon saying that Trump would definitely not be president was very cringe worthy. He just should've stayed above the fray there.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Tell me how an average person wouldn't reasonably fear death when someone jumps them from behind, slams them to the ground, climbs on top of them, and slams their head repeatedly into the pavement.

Because that happens in the majority of fights? Like no one shoots someone doing that besides in this case.

And no, you can't just kill if you 'fear for your life.' I've seen it happen on first 48. No one cares what kinda danger you think you're in.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Tell me how an average person wouldn't reasonably fear death when someone jumps them from behind, slams them to the ground, climbs on top of them, and slams their head repeatedly into the pavement.

Because that happens in the majority of fights? Like no one shoots someone doing that besides in this case.

And no, you can't just kill if you 'fear for your life.' I've seen it happen on first 48. No one cares what kinda danger you think you're in.

If it's totally not legal, how did Zimmerman get acquitted?

You claim it's not legal to kill someone in self-defense. If that's true, he couldn't claim that as a defense in court.
---

Kineth posted...

CruelBuffalo posted...

I never understood why conservatives are so fixated on that comment from Obama. It really wasn't that deep or hard to get but they seem to make a huge mountain out of a molehill

They'll never be able to explain it without sounding racist as shit.

---

it was the most racist shit a president has ever said
---

Explain yourself.
---

Kineth one of those people you know don't have SHIT else going on but CE, he'll quote himself just to bump a topic to argue with more people.

Your opinion is valued very much here at CE Kineth. Are you hoping they'll send you a free gamefaqs shirt one day if you virtue signal enough on CE? You show 'em, all these 15 year olds and 30-something year old virgins obsessed with body pillows and fapping to 2d girls.
---

Has anyone explained what exactly was wrong with the comment yet?
---

without losing 3 to 10 karma or getting a suspension, no, you need to learn to post within the parameters because the moment you start talking reality it "upsets" people so you are marked for trolling or offensive
---

Ilove4chan posted...

Nice, a "snowflake" insult LMAO.

2016 is over cuck, get a new word.

You know, I don't usually defend Admiral since it seems he digs a lot of holes, but an abortion jab is far more pathetic than calling someone a snowflake. Is he really affecting your personal life that much to wish he never existed? Or that someone would kill him?
---

yemmy posted...

Kineth one of those people you know don't have SHIT else going on but CE, he'll quote himself just to bump a topic to argue with more people.

Your opinion is valued very much here at CE Kineth. Are you hoping they'll send you a free gamefaqs shirt one day if you virtue signal enough on CE? You show 'em, all these 15 year olds and 30-something year old virgins obsessed with body pillows and fapping to 2d girls.

Well, you tried.
---

Banjo2553 posted...

You know, I don't usually defend Admiral since it seems he digs a lot of holes, but an abortion jab is far more pathetic than calling someone a snowflake. Is he really affecting your personal life that much to wish he never existed? Or that someone would kill him?

most of the most bitter users, like the ones that love to argue, likely have something else going on in their life outside of CE that is pissing them off. Or they have absolutely nothing going on, so they take this shit hella seriously.

I mean I don't know why people think this place matters at all, like what makes anyone on here worth arguing with for 1 post, much less hours of going back and forth. Just a place to waste time really, like who cares about rep and respect on CE? .
---

darkjedilink posted...

If it's totally not legal, how did Zimmerman get acquitted?

Because racism? That's part of the whole issue with the case. Him not getting arrested initially or being convicted for blatantly killing anyone. If this was OK and normal, there'd be no controversy.
---