Gravitymaster

The question isn't whether you want it to pass. The question is will it pass?

O.K. now that I know he's a Democrat, I've changed my support. Throw this racist Mofo in jail. It's obvious to me now he is a racist. probably supports Affirmative Action. Fry him. Turn him over to the Black Panthers!!

Not only that, Zimmerman is a Democrat!! http://freebeacon.com/registered-dem-killed-trayvon/ (I know, I know, I just wanted to throw that in to muck up this thread even more than it already is)

Yes, you are. So how do you know they're whimsical? You must be going for some kind of contradiction record. But seriously, can you think of no way that an unarmed man can threaten another unarmed man? Just a yes or a no. You can do it. How many invitations do you need... OK. Agrown man has just been following a teenager at night for no reason, grabs him by the arm and wont let go, while aggressively asking who the fuck he is and what the fuck he's doing, and threatening to kick his ass if he's a) a punk and b) if he tries to leave. That is but one of the things that would make me feel quite threatened if I was in the teenager's position. Were you able to think of that? No? Then... No, we were dealing in real-world scenarios, not ones where an out of shape adult on foot runs down a 17 year old football star some 2.5 minutes after the kid started running. Shhhhh...he's enjoying his fantasies.

That also prevents other people from making money of her dead child. But you wouldn't look at it from that side, would you.... Which they are already doing. This allows her to sue them.

Damn kids were told not to jump on the bed.

Depends on how much money she has to hire a lawyer. I would suggest OJ Simpson's lawyers.

Too bad Al's wife didn't have a gun. She might be alive if she did.

Might as well make a few bucks off your dead child. Perhaps this will help with the greiving process. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/trayvon-martin-trademarks-769123

Yes, you are. So how do you know they're whimsical? You must be going for some kind of contradiction record. But seriously, can you think of no way that an unarmed man can threaten another unarmed man? Just a yes or a no. You can do it. How many invitations do you need to share your fantasies with us? Let's get your fantasy in writing so we can examine how close you were once the truth all comes out.

Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Not at all. If you think my reasons suffice then they must be based in reality. But seriously - to demonstrate how ridiculous your attempted point was, can you honestly think of no way in which an unarmed person can be threatened by another person who does not have a gun? Seriously, think about it. It should take you about 5 seconds, even at your speed. (And if you can't think of any, please let us know, so I can point and laugh.) Your whimsical fantasies are entertaining enough. Before you get too invested in this, you do realise that I didn't actually state any of the many reasons, right? So, all these whimsical theories are entirely of your own imagining. You do get that, right? And if you are in fact stating that you cannot think of any way in which an unarmed (or thought to be) man can threaten another unarmed man... Still waiting on your "plausable reasons".

Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Not at all. If you think my reasons suffice then they must be based in reality. But seriously - to demonstrate how ridiculous your attempted point was, can you honestly think of no way in which an unarmed person can be threatened by another person who does not have a gun? Seriously, think about it. It should take you about 5 seconds, even at your speed. (And if you can't think of any, please let us know, so I can point and laugh.) Your whimsical fantasies are entertaining enough. Have you though of writing a book? We could call it "Jakee's Bedtime Stories and Other Whimsical Fairy Tales".

Was she eating skittles?

Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough.

I'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice.

That's not even close to what I said. Are you really incapable of distinguishing the differences? Which is why i said 'I suspect" in regards to why this story went viral Answered. The only question is if you have the capacity to understand.

Up thread you are berating people for jumping to conclusions without knowing facts. Here you start a sentence with "I suspect" Hypocrite much? My comments were about why this incident went viral. Surely you are capable of seeing the difference between that and comments specific to the incident. You sure do keep stepping in it lately.

At least they are doing one. This whole thing started because they didn't do too much of one the first time around. I suspect there's a lot more going on than you are aware of. As an example, why did it take several weeks before this story went viral and started recieving national attention?

If the child was walking lawfully home and he noticed he was being followed, and then confronted by an armed stranger, perhaps he was in fear of his life and attempted to defend himself. If that's what happened, then this would explain why Jorges wansn't arrested. You cannot assault someone whom you think is following you. Try reading the whole thing, I know you're capable. So either he knew Jorges was armed or he didn't. If he didn't know he was armed, then why would he feel threatened? If he knew he was armed, why would he attack him. Come on, think. I know it hurts, but you can do it.

Your response is exactly why the Police are reluctant to release details of crimes. Once you release a few details, people assume this is everything they have and start accusing them of being dumb and incompetent. Same as with a skydiving incident people take partial details and start jumping to unfounded conclusions. I really hope the Police don't release any more details until the entire investigation has been completed.

If the child was walking lawfully home and he noticed he was being followed, and then confronted by an armed stranger, perhaps he was in fear of his life and attempted to defend himself. If that's what happened, then this would explain why Jorges wasn't arrested. You cannot assault someone whom you think is following you.

Only problem with your story is if it happened that way, the Police would have arrested Jorges. So obviously there's pieces missing. Either that or Jorges is a very good liar.

That's the 3rd time that's been posted. We got it already.

Depends on your definition of accosted.

Who's Jorges? That's what I thought. Now let's let the investigation continue. Hopefully those who have already convicted and sentenced Jorges will go hjome and let the Judicial System take it's course.