• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Nifonging of George Zimmerman

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By William A. Levinson
July 17, 2013



There is an aphorism to the effect that there is only a small difference between police and criminals, just as there is only a small difference between sheep dogs and wolves. It is that small difference, however, that distinguishes heroes from enemies of society. Sheep dogs and wolves are members of the same species, and both are physically and temperamentally capable of killing other animals. The key difference is, of course, that sheep dogs never harm the sheep they protect from the wolves. A police officer must, like the violent criminals he or she arrests, be similarly capable of handling a physical confrontation if he or she is to protect innocent people.

No civilized society can tolerate a sheep dog that turns on the sheep, or a police officer or prosecutor who uses his or her authority against innocent people for personal or political gain. This is why, for example, the U.S. Code includes a provision for "color of law" violations of civil rights. As stated excellently by the FBI:

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies -- authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.​

This is why proven rogue prosecutors like Mike Nifong (Duke Lacrosse), and alleged rogue prosecutors Scott Harshbarger (Amiraults), Janet Reno (Grant Snowden), and Florida State Attorney Angela Corey (George Zimmerman), are far more dangerous to society than all but the most vicious criminals.


Read more: Articles: The Nifonging of George Zimmerman

Perhaps we can also include Eric Holder in the trio, for he too is seeking to persecute Zimmerman for something already found to be proven false. Hmm..., isn't Holder also associated with Janet (burn 'em up) Reno.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I dont know what the Holder Reno relationship is.
But for sure, Holder is digging his own grave. Telling Americans to run and hide, retreat? Thats not what built America.
Retreat, Hell.
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
By William A. Levinson
July 17, 2013



There is an aphorism to the effect that there is only a small difference between police and criminals, just as there is only a small difference between sheep dogs and wolves. It is that small difference, however, that distinguishes heroes from enemies of society. Sheep dogs and wolves are members of the same species, and both are physically and temperamentally capable of killing other animals. The key difference is, of course, that sheep dogs never harm the sheep they protect from the wolves. A police officer must, like the violent criminals he or she arrests, be similarly capable of handling a physical confrontation if he or she is to protect innocent people.

No civilized society can tolerate a sheep dog that turns on the sheep, or a police officer or prosecutor who uses his or her authority against innocent people for personal or political gain. This is why, for example, the U.S. Code includes a provision for "color of law" violations of civil rights. As stated excellently by the FBI:

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies -- authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.​

This is why proven rogue prosecutors like Mike Nifong (Duke Lacrosse), and alleged rogue prosecutors Scott Harshbarger (Amiraults), Janet Reno (Grant Snowden), and Florida State Attorney Angela Corey (George Zimmerman), are far more dangerous to society than all but the most vicious criminals.


Read more: Articles: The Nifonging of George Zimmerman

Perhaps we can also include Eric Holder in the trio, for he too is seeking to persecute Zimmerman for something already found to be proven false. Hmm..., isn't Holder also associated with Janet (burn 'em up) Reno.



Nothing was 'proven false' at the Zimmerman trial.

The jury decided that there was not enough evidence to find Zimmerman guilty.




"An unjust law is no law at all." ~ St. Augustine.
 

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Nothing was 'proven false' at the Zimmerman trial.

The jury decided that there was not enough evidence to find Zimmerman guilty.


"An unjust law is no law at all." ~ St. Augustine.
It's called "Not Guilty", the prosecution was unable to prove their allegations. Therefore like the Duke trial a NOT Guilty decision was made. It's not just about the trial. It's the denial of evidence to the defense. That is a Major No-No in the court of law. For that Angela Corey like Nifong can go to jail. Yes, by denying the defense pertinent evidence in the case. That was unjust and against the law. As far as
the law of Self Defense that goes back to the first laws of man. If it is unjust too protect yourself, someone has been overly Socially Engineered. Only in some Progressive States has it become illegal to protect one's family or one's self in "Self Defense" when attacked. Hmm....


Whether it's called Stand Your Ground Law, or Self Defense Law it's all the same.
 

KevinKohler

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
21,923
Reaction score
9,969
Location
CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There's self defense, and then there's the claim of self defense after instigating a situation that requires said defense in the first place.


Stand your ground or not...someone following me, first slowly in a vehicle, then on foot...is gonna have a confrontation. Period. If Martin should have ran away frightened, as seems to be the contention, then Zimmerman should have sat his ass in his car and waited on the police.
 

KevinKohler

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
21,923
Reaction score
9,969
Location
CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
For the record, I agree with the verdict. Z didn't break FL law. Doesn't mean he didn't do anything fundamentally wrong.
 

Wehrwolfen

Banned
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There's self defense, and then there's the claim of self defense after instigating a situation that requires said defense in the first place.


Stand your ground or not...someone following me, first slowly in a vehicle, then on foot...is gonna have a confrontation. Period. If Martin should have ran away frightened, as seems to be the contention, then Zimmerman should have sat his ass in his car and waited on the police.
Kevin, I suggest you read the Federal definition of Self Defense and the Florida Statute defining Stand Your Ground. The fact that GZ did not remain in his SUV after TM circled it has no weight in the case. The fact that TM sucker punched GZ and smashed his head against the concrete walk several times is the reason why he was acquitted and found NOT GUILTY. Anything else other than the ethics and criminal charges against Angela Corey is Bull Crap.
 

Black Dog

King Of The Dog Pound
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
36,230
Reaction score
8,358
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There's self defense, and then there's the claim of self defense after instigating a situation that requires said defense in the first place.


Stand your ground or not...someone following me, first slowly in a vehicle, then on foot...is gonna have a confrontation. Period. If Martin should have ran away frightened, as seems to be the contention, then Zimmerman should have sat his ass in his car and waited on the police.
No one is saying Martin could not confront Zimmerman. In fact if he had done it without the assaulting and battery, I would have backed him 100%. Unfortunately he took the law into his own hands, not Zimmerman, who did nothing illegal.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,508
Reaction score
50,072
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No one is saying Martin could not confront Zimmerman. In fact if he had done it without the assaulting and battery, I would have backed him 100%. Unfortunately he took the law into his own hands, not Zimmerman, who did nothing illegal.

Exactly.


It really IS unfortunate and tragic in that this didn't have to happen. If someone follows me, there might be a confrontation... but I'm not going to assault them until and unless they demonstrate they are a threat.

Now, I'm going to admit something... when I was 17, I might have jumped some guy for following me. It's stupid, but then so are 17yo's.

Some of us are lucky enough to survive our youthful stupidity phase, and some are not.

But Z apparently had a legitimate reason and an understandable suspicion as his cause for following Martin... obviously it wasn't for criminal reasons or he wouldn't have been on the phone with the police dispatcher.

Once TM made the decision, (at least as far as we can tell from available evidence) to assault Z in a manner that caused him to fear grave bodily harm.... Z had to do SOMETHING.

I suppose he could have just laid there while Martin walloped him and bounced his head off the pavement and hoped TM stopped before he was dead, crippled, disfigured or otherwise messed up for life.


Most of us with some IRL experience don't exactly consider that an optimal solution, obviously.


The thing is at that point Z apparently felt his best chance to survive this assault was to pull his gun and use it.

Since a jury has concluded that he was legally in the right to do so, I'm going to decline to second-guess this course of action too much.


I know I often come across as hard-hearted about this stuff, but in truth I do think it is tragic that this wasn't avoided... and I've said so several times including early on. Both men made some questionable choices that night, and either could have changed this outcome if they'd acted a bit more prudently.


But when the rubber meets the road, if you think someone is going to beat your head in on the pavement, you do what you feel you have to do. A jury decided this was a reasonable course of action... and that really OUGHT to be the end of it.


But obviously it isn't....
 
Top Bottom