Zimmerman again?

[Jay]

was gonna reference harrison's inevitable derping in my original response.

decided to give him the benefit of the doubt.

he derped it up anyway.

the end.

Cool story sis! Ending was a bit predictable. 8/10. No choice but to see again while I post on nt.

[Gypsiyee]

How many run ins with the law has this nigga had ?

Legitimately one.

this is false. he was ordered to go to anger management classes a few years ago. he has gotten in trouble for attacking a police officer. then he killed a kid. he has been called on for domestic disturbances with his now ex-wife. now he's got a domestic disturbance for his current girlfriend.

that is not legitimately one.

[Gypsiyee]

was gonna reference harrison's inevitable derping in my original response.

decided to give him the benefit of the doubt.

he derped it up anyway.

the end.

Cool story sis! Ending was a bit predictable. 8/10. No choice but to see again while I post on nt.

it's one of those stories you will see until you have memorized it. that's what makes the predictable ending acceptable.

[Harrison]

Yeah, you should have included your worthless opinion in your post so I could have laughed at that along with your woefully sad confirmation bias' destruction in public, too.

[Gypsiyee]

Yeah, you should have included your worthless opinion in your post so I could have laughed at that along with your woefully sad confirmation bias' destruction in public, too.

Did you know that sometimes in your endless quest to come off as a pretentious self-righteous douchebag, you randomly string a series of words together that actually create a completely nonsensical statement?

Also, it is not simply opinion if you substantiate its factual accuracy moments later.

In conclusion, derp.

[Harrison]

You should probably just stick to the kitchen. You can't handle having your opinions shot down with logic.

Any information that goes against your impenetrable forcefield of bias regarding this subject just turns you into a crosseyed droolcup.

I'm not even defending Zimmerman. I'm just telling you that if names weren't used you wouldn't even bat an eyelash at the situation.

In conclusion, coming to a forum with 10 active posters where 7 of them agree with your opinion doesn't make it right.

[Zanchief]

Harrison, the reason this story is relevant is because it involves Zimmerman. Obviously we wouldn't care about it if it wasn't him. No one is disputing that. It does paint a pattern though, one that some of us predicted, and others denied.

[brinstar]

You should probably just stick to the kitchen. You can't handle having your opinions shot down with logic.

Any information that goes against your impenetrable forcefield of bias regarding this subject just turns you into a crosseyed droolcup.

I'm not even defending Zimmerman. I'm just telling you that if names weren't used you wouldn't even bat an eyelash at the situation.

In conclusion, coming to a forum with 10 active posters where 7 of them agree with your opinion doesn't make it right.

1. a "back to the kitchen" slam? bad form, dude

2. yes, let's toss about accusations of impenetrable forcefields of bias, shall we? brilliant ploy

3. true, if we didn't already know this guy was a killer and a douchebag it wouldn't matter nearly as much. but don't act like you're not defending him because lol

4. okay but that doesn't make it wrong either

[Menelvir]

I understand why there are traffic laws. And I at least partly understand the reasoning behind speed limits.

I also understand that enforcement of speed limits through the issuance of citations is a nice form of ancillary cash flow for municipal police departments.

But I really wish a separate road infrastructure could be built just for me, and none of the other mouth-breathing, cell-phone-using, burrito-eating motherfuckers that regularly get behind the wheel of a vehicle could use it.

Really, I'd seriously consider sacrificing a testicle if this could somehow be realized.

I won't lie and relate that I don't like to go fast, but also I consider myself a very attentive driver -- when I'm behind the wheel, driving occupies as close to 100% of my attention as possible (cell phone off, etc.). Which isn't to say I can't be distracted by a random thought, but I actively try to be as observant, as predictive, as aware of my surroundings as possible. And I consciously practice this. In all honesty, driving for any significant length of time (at least where there is significant accompanying traffic) is actually fatiguing to me -- it's mentally draining.

No, I'm probably not the best driver that's ever lived... but I do believe I'm above average. In 29-ish years of driving, I've never had an accident in which I or my actions were the cause of the accident (I have been hit by others... rear collision, both times).

What's that? Oh, this was a George Zimmerman is a scumbag thread... Shit, sorry about that, I just wanted to have a mini-rant.*

Now back to your regularly scheduled 'try this stupid fuck in the court of public opinion' piece.




*yes, I recently got a speeding ticket -- ~$200 for 14 mph over the limit (64 in a 50) -- yes, obviously I was endangering the lives of the drivers around me (even though there weren't any), I'm a horrible person, and I should have my license revoked.

[Harrison]

Harrison, the reason this story is relevant is because it involves Zimmerman. Obviously we wouldn't care about it if it wasn't him. No one is disputing that. It does paint a pattern though, one that some of us predicted, and others denied.

If you were read this story by anyone without the use of names, you'd say, "That doesn't add up and sounds like a psycho bitch making shit up."

It's not that you wouldn't care because it's not him. It's that you wouldn't believe it right off without looking at the facts. Once his name was used you stopped looking at it objectively, and just went with your confirmation bias, ignoring all reason.

Surely no woman would ever sink so low when they get dumped as to make a false claim to police knowing they would be required to look into it, right?


I mean his ex-wife is completely trustworthy. I'm sure when she said he threatened her with a gun during a "domestic dispute" she was telling the truth this time.

[Zanchief]

I guess they're all lying then, Harrison.

[Harrison]

It's a very good possibility given the facts presented so far.

We'll see with this newest one, though. Maybe this time she isn't just a crazy cunt using his name against him, maybe not.

I don't care either way. He could go to jail for it this time and I wouldn't give a shit. It doesn't detract from you ignoring the facts presented so far due to his name being in the article. I'm just not that blind to reason.

[Zanchief]

Why do you assume the first woman lied about the domestic abuse? You do know that her lying in court is just as much about Zimmerman as it is about her. You think she perjured herself in order to protect both of them all on her own? No way. That was worked between them.

If you want to ignore every woman who's claimed he's a violent douche, and the indisputable time he killed a person because of an escalating argument he initiated, then that's your problem. That's hardly objective though.

You seem to view this as a case of media hysteria, and you’re the sole voice of reason. As facts continue to add up that you were wrong all along, you’re going to have a harder and harder time defending your opinion. If you were truly objective you would be able to re-examine things and change your opinion based on the new evidence. I, honestly, don’t think you’re physically capable of admitting your wrong though (I’ve never seen it and you’ve walked face first into plenty of shitstorms).

[Gypsiyee]

back to the kitchen? really? that's hilarious you're hilarious.

the reason the name matters is because he has a history of violence and anger management issues including domestic violence, murder, and attacking a cop, so of course the "bias" leans toward his history. are you daft, man? take out the name and add anyone else with the same history and any logical person would draw the same conclusion. the problem is that you're not logical. you made no logical argument. instead, you assumed the female (who we have *no* known history of, contrary to her boyfriend who has a well documented tainted past) was crazy and then in the same post that you wanted to talk about your LOGICAL argument, TOLD ME TO GET BACK TO THE KITCHEN. Who's biased?

[Kaemon]

She recanted,

[brinstar]

kinda. she wants the no-contact provision dropped so they can be together and said officials "misinterpreted" her when she said "you're pointing that gun in my face" (actual quote). charges have not been dropped yet. doesn't matter, he'll be in trouble again within a few months anyway

he needs shanked and she needs therapy

but above all, as always: