I didn't conflate the 2 cases, but you are. I simply used the word "Trayvon'ed" and you ran with it like a liberal, telling me what I "really meant". But since you went down that road, your 2 hoodlums, like young gentle Trayvon, started something they could not finish, and ended up like Trayvon.
The posters you dismiss as "confused" simply don't feel sorry for the 2 criminals, as if they were trick or treaters who got lost. Breaking into an inhabited house is an aggressive and threatening act, but I suspect you know that. The old man should never have been forced into in that situation by these two. Good riddance to rubbish.
Yeah, fastasleep does that a lot. They aren’t here for reasoned discussion, just an argument. Doesn’t really matter what the topic is.
Using the term "Trayvon'd" is conflating the two. What could saying that these two got "Trayvon'd" possibly mean other than what happened to Martin happened to them?
In reality, they were in the opposite situation from Martin.
Martin had Zimmerman on the pavement and was actively bashing Zimmerman's head into the ground when he was shot in the head.
These two were both lying supine on the floor unarmed and severely wounded when Smith deliberately fired bullets into their heads.
The old man should never have been forced into in that situation by these two.
They forced him into shooting at least one of them.
No one forced him to fire lethal headshots into two people who were - by his own admission - badly wounded and completely subdued.
That's the difference here, and that's why it is completely incorrect to say they got "Trayvon'd."