londonfog
Well-Known Member
I know you thinking about what you would love to do with a prick , but I think you meant such.
Why do Canadians have a maple leaf on their flag?
It shows them what to use for toilet paper.
trayvan martin
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
Why do Canadians have a maple leaf on their flag?
It shows them what to use for toilet paper.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Great. I just wasted my time arguing with a 12 year old.
Whatever , you can always come on across the line and prove that , shouldn't be much of a problem since I'm such a " little fella" and you're such a Big Studly Canucker.
We can arrange it if you wish. If you don't wish then quit trying to swing your dick ,I mean I know it's hard to get enough of it to hold onto with that thumb and forefinger.
SIDESTEP. In other words you've nary a clue about what you just claimed to be " more expert" in than I am. I mean since according to you I "know nothing" then it oughta be eeeeaaaasssssyyyyyyy for ya to PROVE it.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
*you're
as in, it sound like you are eager to suck on an arrogant prick, but i bet you would settle for sucking on a humble prick.
one can wipe their ass with a maple leaf, but a star is much too large and hot to be effective for wiping one's ass.
thanks for sticking up for zimmerman! is he a saint yet?
cliffey501
Active Member
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[SUP][17][/SUP]
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
I dont know how to highlight but focus on this part
A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
I dont know how to highlight but focus on this part
A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
did they release the photos of zimmerman's "broken nose" and "smashed skull" yet?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who...Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself
seems to be that if zimmerman had stood his ground instead of provoking the whole incident, all we'd have to worry about would be trayvon possible choking on a skittle.
cliffey501
Active Member
Now we are turning into grammar nazi's? I did not know you could wipe your ass with a maple leaf.Was this an american discovery?In canada we use TP.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
since when is it a wise idea to call someone an idiot while failing to use grammar you should have learned in grade three?
must be that superior canadian education.
i've been informed that canadians don't wipe at all because they are unaware that their shit stinks.
EXACTLY . And since Zimmerman was utilising ***UNLAWFUL FORCE***..............well do you care to shoot the other foot too?
cliffey501
Active Member
If trayvon swings first zimmerman is innocent.You cant prove he didnt several witnesses gave testimony to the police that backs up zimmermans claims of self defense.Along with document police testimony of injuries to zimmermans nose and head.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
An Englishman, a Canadian and an American were captured by terrorists.
The terrorist leader said, "Before we shoot you, you will be allowed last words. Please let me know what you wish to talk about."
The Englishman replied, "I wish to speak of loyalty and service to the crown."
The Canadian replied, "Since you are involved in a question of national purpose, national identity, and secession, I wish to talk about the history of constitutional process in Canada, special status, distinct society and uniqueness within diversity."
The American replied, "Just shoot me before the Canadian starts talking."
cliffey501
Active Member
Actually it smells like maple syrup.
You dont corner someone, you give them an out. anyone can tell you that. Security was part of my retail job as well and unless you want someone flailing or lunging at you, you dont corner them.
You see someone suspicious you ask if they need help and then you observe. You leave an out for the person to change their mind and walk away. Why? Because you are the one in control. Zimmerman gave up control by stalking him and cornering him.
You see someone suspicious you ask if they need help and then you observe. You leave an out for the person to change their mind and walk away. Why? Because you are the one in control. Zimmerman gave up control by stalking him and cornering him.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it doesn't say "initially provoked the use of justifiable force", it says "initially provoked the use of force", right or wrong.
zimmerman was the initial provoker. if he stands his ground, trayvon eats skittles. but instead, he aggressed him for hundreds of yards, making him the aggressor.
and again, there is zero physical evidence of any assault whatsoever. you have no evidence, just one notoriously unreliable eyewitness account that does not even know what happened right before the gunshot was fired and a police report in which they were "correcting" people's statements.
zimmerman was the aggressor and did not exhaust all escape options.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
cliffey501
Active Member
Your wrong.Following someone for 13 minutes doesn't justify trayvon swinging on him(if thats what happened).And according to the evidence that we know about it appears he did.He would be found innocent with or without the stand your ground law.