Replies

Zimmerman had a right to watch his neighborhood unmolested by a neighborhood thug.

When you reinterpret what actually is by what you think it ought to be, you're heading for a world of hurt. Most people have learned that lesson by the time they got out of the terrible twos.

Zimmerman had a right to watch his neighborhood. Period. He deliberately went beyond the bounds, violated the guidelines of Neighborhood Watch, disobeyed the instructions of the 911 personnel, precipitated a violent encounter with someone (not a thug as you say to try to legitimize your faulty characterization of the facts) who had every reason to fear for his life from a stranger aggressively following him at night, and every right to elude the pursuing stranger and, when accosted by him, to defend himself. But you seem to be intent on defending the indefensible, so it's not surprising you "don't give a sh*t" what anyone says. Something to think about though is that Zimmerman was unconcerned about being recorded by 911 saying things like the a-holes are always getting away with it and referring to "them" as "f-cking coons." This points directly to his state of mind and it wasn't a good one.

Furthermore, when misery pimps try to highjack this incident for their own political ends, the correct response is to draw attention to their opportunism, not to make the completely illogical conclusion that the facts of the case must be 180 degrees different than what they are complaining about because you don't like their misuse of the situation.

Furthermore, when misery pimps try to highjack this incident for their own political ends, the correct response is to draw attention to their opportunism, not to make the completely illogical conclusion that the facts of the case must be 180 degrees different than what they are complaining about because you don't like their misuse of the situation.

Unless, of course, the facts ARE 180 degrees different than what they are complaining about. Which appears to be the case.