Man saves family from overturned SUV

[Katherine Robinson]

It is heart warming knowing that people like this walk the streets and help those in need.

http://m.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/07/george-zimmerman-rescuing-people-car-accidents-now/67452/

[ChumpDumper]

This was after he saved that neighborhood from an unarmed black kid.

[Chief Brody]

This was after he saved that neighborhood from an unarmed black kid.
Yes, he's back on the street and helping out the Community, while Trayvon's still pushing daisies. Ready to get over it, yet?

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, he's back on the street and helping out the Community, while Trayvon's still pushing daisies. Ready to get over it, yet?Are you ready to stop celebrating a kid's death?

[Frank Dux]

I'm impressed that he managed to get through it all without shooting anybody.

Who says people can't change?

[CubanSucks]

:lmao I didn't know cd had a bleeding heart for a thug who attacks people just because...THEY WERE FOLLOWING ME!!! :cry :cry

[ChumpDumper]

lol thug

Trayvon could have argued self defense too under Florida law. All he had to do was shoot and kill Zimmerman.

[Chief Brody]

Are you ready to stop celebrating a kid's death?
That's dumb.

You celebrate the fact that this year-long melodrama is mercifully over. You celebrate the fact that the American justice system prevailed despite the media's verdict a year prior. It's unfortunate that a kid died, but he's plant food now and has been for a year. The prosecution presented its case and the defense presented theirs. Not guilty. Move on.

[ChumpDumper]

That's dumb.

You celebrate the fact that this year-long melodrama is mercifully over. You celebrate the fact that the American justice system prevailed despite the media's verdict a year prior. It's unfortunate that a kid died, but he's plant food now and has been for a year. The prosecution presented its case and the defense presented theirs. Not guilty. Move on.lol unfortunate

You're a peach.

[Chief Brody]

lol unfortunate

You're a peach.
Want me to carry that cross for awhile? You look like you could use a rest.

[Rogue]

a man's past records shouldn't negate what he's done good and right imho. its like when you buys a hamburger and a female seller hands you one, you don't care if the woman had just inserted a tampon into her vagina with her fingers, or if the hamburger was just made by the same fingers.

[CubanSucks]

lol thug

Trayvon could have argued self defense too under Florida law. All he had to do was shoot and kill Zimmerman.

Self defense from what, being followed?

[The Reckoning]

why do people who arent from florida give a fuck about florida laws?

[SupremeGuy]

Zimmerman is the hero Florida deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So, we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A Dark Knight.

[Capt Bringdown]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eOAvXuXtPow

[ChumpDumper]

Self defense from what, being followed?Yep.

[SA210]

Are you ready to stop celebrating a kid's death?


:lmao The illegal drone child murder supporter cummdumpster, that selfishly and spinelessly ridiculed dead babies by drones in the politics forum suddenly cares about dead kids when its fits his agenda.

:lol sheeple in deed. (here comes the spin/lies lol)

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao The illegal drone child murder supporter cummdumpster, that selfishly and spinelessly ridiculed dead babies by drones in the politics forum suddenly cares about dead kids when its fits his agenda.

:lol sheeple in deed. (here comes the spin/lies lol)I ridicule you for being such an idiot.

My stance on the drone program is quite clear. You were obviously too salty to read it.

[Thread]

lol thug

Trayvon could have argued self defense too under Florida law. All he had to do was shoot and kill Zimmerman.

That's how you ended up turvy the Heat topsy.

tee, hee.

[Thread]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eOAvXuXtPow

Brasky after 6?

[ChumpDumper]

That's how you ended up turvy the Heat topsy.

tee, hee.Huh?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

lol thug

Trayvon could have argued self defense too under Florida law. All he had to do was shoot and kill Zimmerman.

Please explain how shooting someone who was following you would be legal.

[ChumpDumper]

Please explain how shooting someone who was following you would be legal.All the shooter has to do is convince a jury he felt threatened.

That's Florida law.

Since George Costanza was carrying a gun, it would have been pretty easy to convince a Florida jury.

Maybe not since Trayvon was black. After all, wounding a wall in self-defense will get a black person 20 years in Florida.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

All the shooter has to do is convince a jury he felt threatened.

That's Florida law.

Since George Costanza was carrying a gun, it would have been pretty easy to convince a Florida jury.

Maybe not since Trayvon was black. After all, wounding a wall in self-defense will get a black person 20 years in Florida.

This is under the assumption that Zimmerman had unholstered his gun upon approaching Martin, which he didn't.

How would Martin justify shooting someone who was following him not knowing this person had a concealed gun? Shoot him and hope he has a gun? What then if they person he shot that was following him didn't have a gun?

[ChumpDumper]

This is under the assumption that Zimmerman had unholstered his gun upon approaching Martin, which he didn't.Nope. Not necessary.


How would Martin justify shooting someone who was following him not knowing this person had a concealed gun? Shoot him and hope he has a gun? What then if they person he shot that was following him didn't have a gun?I didn't write the law. The gun isn't even necessary for a person to feel threatened.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

How would someone following another be considered life threatening?

[ChumpDumper]

How would someone following another be considered life threatening?Doesn't have to be life threatening.

Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.

[Jeff Van Gundy]

Doesn't have to be life threatening.

Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.

:lol

[Capt Bringdown]

Brasky after 6?

LOL, "Stay down, buddy."

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Doesn't have to be life threatening.

Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.

Where in here would shooting for being followed be justifiable?

Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

[ChumpDumper]

lol wrong section

Close though.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Mind posting it? These aren't the friendliest phone compatible sites I'm looking at.

[ChumpDumper]

You were one off.

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.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html

[Thread]

Where in here would shooting for being followed be justifiable?

It's not, King. Dumper is never wrong. Ever.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

You were one off.

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.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html

You recommended he shoot him. He would need to reasonably believe he was preventing imminent death or great bodily harm. I fail to see how an unarmed (Trayvon doesn't know Zimmerman is armed since it is concealed) man following him causes this threat.

[CubanSucks]

:lol Cumdumper stretching HARD. So someone following you makes you feel there's imminent bodily harm or death? A little different than actually being engaged in a face pummeling. Here's an idea for TrayTray that would've been asked, "considering you had plenty of time before the second confrontation, why didn't you call the police if you felt threatened?

[AchillesHeel]

:lol Cumdumper stretching HARD. So someone following you makes you feel there's imminent bodily harm or death? A little different than actually being engaged in a face pummeling. Here's an idea for TrayTray that would've been asked, "considering you had plenty of time before the second confrontation, why didn't you call the police if you felt threatened?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQKOBiHyNU

[DisAsTerBot]

:lol Cumdumper stretching HARD. So someone following you makes you feel there's imminent bodily harm or death? A little different than actually being engaged in a face pummeling. Here's an idea for TrayTray that would've been asked, "considering you had plenty of time before the second confrontation, why didn't you call the police if you felt threatened?

because everyone is racist!!!! duh

[Creepn]

Zimmerman needs to turn off his police scanner and sit his fat ass down somewhere.

[ChumpDumper]

You recommended he shoot him. He would need to reasonably believe he was preventing imminent death or great bodily harm. I fail to see how an unarmed (Trayvon doesn't know Zimmerman is armed since it is concealed) man following him causes this threat.I don't recommend anyone shoot anyone but it certainly could be argued in court. All one needs is a good lawyer.

It's not a strech. It's Florida.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Trayvon could have argued self defense too under Florida law. All he had to do was shoot and kill Zimmerman.

So then what did you mean by this?

[ChumpDumper]

What part did you not understand?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Are you making the argument that he could have shot him, argued self defense, and got off or are you arguing he could have shot him, argued self defense and gone to jail? Be clear.

[Trill Clinton]

Zimmerman needs to turn off his police scanner and sit his fat ass down somewhere.

yo, i almost spit out my water laughing at this. if i was in an accident and that pedo came to assist, i'd turn him away and just wait for the professionals. fuck outta here, doggie. make yaself useful and go get someone else to unbuckle me. i don't want that cum colored, pasty, portly, pedo, pervert, prick anywhere near me.

[ChumpDumper]

The former, though it would have been easier had he been a white woman.

[Thread]

Zimmerman needs to turn off his police scanner and sit his fat ass down somewhere.

& be eternally grateful he can still accomplish your dictate, Creep.

[Katherine Robinson]

yo, i almost spit out my water laughing at this. if i was in an accident and that pedo came to assist, i'd turn him away and just wait for the professionals. fuck outta here, doggie. make yaself useful and go get someone else to unbuckle me. i don't want that cum colored, pasty, portly, pedo, pervert, prick anywhere near me.

I implore you to remain on a keyboard and not interfere with the work of heroic citizens such as Zimmerman. It is better to contain prejudice and racial profiling (exhibited by you) to the Internet.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

The former, though it would have been easier had he been a white woman.


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.




Where in this law would it be permissable to shoot and kill someone strictly for following you? The law would tell Trayvon to retreat.

[Trill Clinton]

I implore you to remain on a keyboard and not interfere with the work of heroic citizens such as Zimmerman. It is better to contain prejudice and racial profiling (exhibited by you) to the Internet.

okay and i implore you to chill on this alias account. i sincerely hope mrsmaalox, judyntx, cuckingfunt,etc. is the person behind the katherine robinson alias. you're either a fatherless male or under the age of 12. no way does a grown man raised with a father create and dedicate 400+ posts under a female account unless he got a lil sugar in his tank. you're at 404 posts right now, doggie. don't make it to 405, just let a woman take over the account or dead it altogether. just giving you some trill advice.

[SupremeGuy]

lol @ chumpdumper

You're getting your shit pushed in man, just stop. :lol You're trying your hardest to make a point that just doesn't work, let it go...

[ohmwrecker]

I've never seen a bunch of white men so pleased to see a child murdered and no one held responsible. It's amazing.

[Katherine Robinson]

okay and i implore you to chill on this alias account. i sincerely hope mrsmaalox, judyntx, cuckingfunt,etc. is the person behind the katherine robinson alias. you're either a fatherless male or under the age of 12. no way does a grown man raised with a father create and dedicate 400+ posts under a female account unless he got a lil sugar in his tank. you're at 404 posts right now, doggie. don't make it to 405, just let a woman take over the account or dead it altogether. just giving you some trill advice.

Now, now, I am simply relaying advice to you which will benefit humankind and racial equality. To keep racial profiling on the Internet is a good measure to aid socioeconomic discrepancy. I gladly embrace any personal attacks under the guise of "real talk" you might sling towards me as they do not hit harder than my Husband's left hand.

To be a problem while highlighting the same problem is hypocracy in its most disgusting manifistation, I would pray for you to simply be "trolling" portraying such a chaotic persona. As for myself, I will continue to take value in what I see and administer a grain of salt when seeing outright social bigotry - much like what you are a practitioner of.

[Trill Clinton]

lol @ chumpdumper

You're getting your shit pushed in man, just stop. :lol You're trying your hardest to make a point that just doesn't work, let it go...


clambake pushed your shit in in the nfl forum when you kept asking the same dumb ass question over and over lol. have a seat, fam.

[Trill Clinton]

Now, now, I am simply relaying advice to you which will benefit humankind and racial equality. To keep racial profiling on the Internet is a good measure to aid socioeconomic discrepancy. I gladly embrace any personal attacks under the guise of "real talk" you might sling towards me as they do not hit harder than my Husband's left hand.

To be a problem while highlighting the same problem is hypocracy in its most disgusting manifistation, I would pray for you to simply be "trolling" portraying such a chaotic persona. As for myself, I will continue to take value in what I see and administer a grain of salt when seeing outright social bigotry - much like what you are a practitioner of.

i usually don't respond more than once to wack posters, but i am really trying to help you out, doggie. you gave me some advice and i'm reciprocating it back to you. there are several ways to troll online but a male posing as a female is about as low as it gets.

[Katherine Robinson]

i usually don't respond more than once to wack posters, but i am really trying to help you out, doggie. you gave me some advice and i'm reciprocating it back to you. there are several ways to troll online but a male posing as a female is about as low as it gets.

What I tell is advice in which will help your local community and make a small chip at the wall of bigotry constructed by those of every color. I do not believe you would take it to vice, rather opting to sympathize with a "victimized" group instead if carrying the burden of an evolved society - but one does not win the lottery by not playing.

You may continue with your attempt on derailing a valid point with slander, but it will only be taking a page from the book colorful individuals such as Al Sharpton had written. As history has proven with individuals such as Tawana Brawley, it is fruitless.

[SupremeGuy]

clambake pushed your shit in in the nfl forum when you kept asking the same dumb ass question over and over lol. have a seat, fam.lol @ aaron hernandez taking a shit all over the black community and none of the fake thugs doing shit about it

[ChumpDumper]

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.




Where in this law would it be permissable to shoot and kill someone strictly for following you? The law would tell Trayvon to retreat.
Nope. It's pretty much up to a jury to decide.

[ChumpDumper]

lol @ chumpdumper

You're getting your shit pushed in man, just stop. :lol You're trying your hardest to make a point that just doesn't work, let it go...

It's Florida law. I agree it's a pretty stupid law and I am glad you also feel that it is absurd.

[Clipper Nation]

I've never seen a bunch of white men so pleased to see a child murdered and no one held responsible. It's amazing.

It's to be expected.... white team and red team won, black team and blue team lost, hence the celebrating, tbh..... pretty sad that all anyone seems to care about in this case is racial and political bullshit....

[CubanSucks]

okay and i implore you to chill on this alias account. i sincerely hope mrsmaalox, judyntx, cuckingfunt,etc. is the person behind the katherine robinson alias. you're either a fatherless male or under the age of 12. no way does a grown man raised with a father create and dedicate 400+ posts under a female account unless he got a lil sugar in his tank. you're at 404 posts right now, doggie. don't make it to 405, just let a woman take over the account or dead it altogether. just giving you some trill advice.

You seem a little preoccupied with fathers parenting status. Are you just so stoked that as a black person you had the luxury of growing up with a dad?


i usually don't respond more than once to wack posters, but i am really trying to help you out, doggie. you gave me some advice and i'm reciprocating it back to you. there are several ways to troll online but a male posing as a female is about as low as it gets.

:lol doggie doggie doggie

keep going with that, top notch insult imho

[Trill Clinton]

You seem a little preoccupied with fathers parenting status. Are you just so stoked that as a black person you had the luxury of growing up with a dad?



:lol doggie doggie doggie

keep going with that, top notch insult imho

http://i39.tinypic.com/bgs2kz.pngdoggie isn't an insult, fam. look, i'm only replying to you just to give you a heads up, i'm ignoring all lame and wack posters. if you're going to insult me, you gotta come harder than that, no homo. i've heard the no daddy joke plenty of times here and its unfunny every time.

do me a favor and never quote me again. unless you want my attention i suggest you take heed to my warning or i'm going to add you to the list of the other lames i put on ignore. don't quote me unless i quote you first. the choice is yours.

[Thread]

I've never seen a bunch of white men so pleased to see a child murdered and no one held responsible. It's amazing.

Sometimes you eat the bear: Zimmerman sending that child to live with Jesus full-time. And sometimes? That bear, it just gets up all over you: Tray letting his mouth overload his ass.

[CubanSucks]

http://i39.tinypic.com/bgs2kz.pngdoggie isn't an insult, fam. look, i'm only replying to you just to give you a heads up, i'm ignoring all lame and wack posters. if you're going to insult me, you gotta come harder than that, no homo. i've heard the no daddy joke plenty of times here and its unfunny every time.

do me a favor and never quote me again. unless you want my attention i suggest you take heed to my warning or i'm going to add you to the list of the other lames i put on ignore. don't quote me unless i quote you first. the choice is yours.

Yes sir. Whatever it takes for you not to ignore me

[ohmwrecker]

Sometimes you eat the bear: Zimmerman sending that child to live with Jesus full-time. And sometimes? That bear, it just gets up all over you: Tray letting his mouth overload his ass.

Pipe down, Pappy.

[ChumpDumper]

White people are funny.

[jag]

:lol Cumdumper stretching HARD. So someone following you makes you feel there's imminent bodily harm or death? A little different than actually being engaged in a face pummeling. Here's an idea for TrayTray that would've been asked, "considering you had plenty of time before the second confrontation, why didn't you call the police if you felt threatened?

http://afrsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/kg-2000-dunk-contest-reaction_o_GIFSoup.com_.gif

[jag]

CD trying too hard here. Throwing common sense to the wind so he can be a contrarian.

[ChumpDumper]

You don't have to call the police if you feel threatened in Florida.

Just shoot to kill.

The law says it's OK.

[ChumpDumper]

CD trying too hard here. Throwing common sense to the wind so he can be a contrarian.Common sense has nothing to do with Florida law.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

You don't have to call the police if you feel threatened in Florida.

Just shoot to kill.

The law says it's OK.

Not under the scenario you've presented.

You still have a duty to retreat, unless faced with serious bodily harm or fear for life.

Zimmerman following Trayvon does not satifsy either.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Doesn't have to be life threatening.

Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.
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.



Even if Martin considered Zimmerman a threat, under the law he could not meet him with lethal force. You are wrong, someone following you does not cause imminent death or great bodily harm.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Now if you wanted to argue Martin could meet Zimmerman with force, I'd agree with you. But you have been arguing deadly force.

[ChumpDumper]

Not under the scenario you've presented.

You still have a duty to retreat, unless faced with serious bodily harm or fear for life.

Zimmerman following Trayvon does not satifsy either.That's for a jury to decide. The followed declares he felt so threatened and the jury either agrees that the feeling was reasonable or it doesn't.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

That's for a jury to decide. The followed declares he felt so threatened and the jury either agrees that the feeling was reasonable or it doesn't.

The jury decides Trayvon heads straight to prison for life.

[ChumpDumper]

The jury decides Trayvon heads straight to prison for life.I said his chances would be better were he a white woman.

[ohmwrecker]

The jury decides Trayvon heads straight to prison for life.

In Florida? You are probably right.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

I said his chances would be better were he a white woman.

You've been arguing the law would allow him to shoot and kill Zimmerman because he felt threatened.

[ChumpDumper]

You've been arguing the law would allow him to shoot and kill Zimmerman because he felt threatened.I said he could argue that in court, not that acquittal would be a lock.

It's a stupid law.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

I said he could argue that in court, not that acquittal would be a lock.

It's a stupid law.

It's only a stupid law when you try and stretch it to fit your scenario.

[ChumpDumper]

It's only a stupid law when you try and stretch it to fit your scenario.That it can be applied so easily makes it stupid.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Except that how you want to apply it sends Trayvon to prison for life.

[ChumpDumper]

Except that how you want to apply it sends Trayvon to prison for life.Up to a jury.

As I said, his odds would be better were he a white woman.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Up to a jury.

As I said, his odds would be better were he a white woman.

Well no shit it would be up to a jury, but under your scenario and according to the law he's going to prison as a person following you would not be enough of a threat to use deadly force. You posted the law yourself, I figured you'd understand it.

[ChumpDumper]

Well no shit it would be up to a jury, but under your scenario and according to the law he's going to prison as a person following you would not be enough of a threat to use deadly force. You posted the law yourself, I figured you'd understand it.All his lawyer has to do is successfully argue he felt threatened per the terms of the law.

[CubanSucks]

Holy shit, this argument just went in a circle like 3 times. CD falling back on the Furious Styles race card approach.

It isn't a bad law if the jury has common sense. Being followed and even losing the follower at one point isn't imminent bodily harm or death. Having your head attacked by someone sitting on you is. So forget the law and forget this hypothetical retarded jury you keep using, do YOU see the difference in that?

[ChumpDumper]

Holy shit, this argument just went in a circle like 3 times. CD falling back on the Furious Styles race card approach.

It isn't a bad law if the jury has common sense. Being followed and even losing the follower at one point isn't imminent bodily harm or death. Having your head attacked by someone sitting on you is. So forget the law and forget this hypothetical retarded jury you keep using, do YOU see the difference in that?A dude with a gun following another alone at night?

A jury could easily find someone who shot such a man would have a reasonable fear.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

A dude with a gun following another alone at night?

A jury could easily find someone who shot such a man would have a reasonable fear.
Except for the fact that the gun is concealed which means Trayvon doesn't know he's armed, unless you're changing your story around again to now have George following Trayvon around brandishing his pistol.

[ChumpDumper]

Except for the fact that the gun is concealed which means Trayvon doesn't know he's armed, unless you're changing your story around again to now have George following Trayvon around brandishing his pistol.A lawyer could just say he thought George had a gun. It turned out he did, so that actually helps his case.

[jag]

Common sense has nothing to do with Florida law.

Keep pretending this discussion is about Florida Law, and not your characterizing Trayvon as a defenseless "unarmed black kid."

[ChumpDumper]

Keep pretending this discussion is about Florida Law, and not your characterizing Trayvon as a defenseless "unarmed black kid."We're talking very much about Florida law.

Trayvon's biggest problem was he wasn't armed. More guns would have solved everything.

[jag]

We're talking very much about Florida law.

Trayvon's biggest problem was he wasn't armed. More guns would have solved everything.

Acting like a civilized human being and not attacking Zimmerman would have solved everything. You're trying too hard.

[AntiChrist]

Acting like a civilized human being and not attacking Zimmerman would have solved everything. You're trying too hard.

When you are asked annoying questions by a short, white-hispanic dude, you really have no choice but to go MMA on a mofo.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

We're talking very much about Florida law.

Trayvon's biggest problem was he wasn't armed. More guns would have solved everything.

And what would a 17 year old be armed with legally?

[jag]

When you are asked annoying questions by a short, white-hispanic dude, you really have no choice but to go MMA on a mofo.

And then a jury decided the short, white-hispanic dude had no choice but to shoot the not-so-short, black dude who was unable to react without violence.

[DisAsTerBot]

those pesky self defense laws!

[CubanSucks]

A dude with a gun following another alone at night?

A jury could easily find someone who shot such a man would have a reasonable fear.

Assume Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had the gun


We're talking very much about Florida law.

Trayvon's biggest problem was he wasn't armed. More guns would have solved everything.

YOU'RE talking Florida law, we're talking common sense.

With that second line I feel a little insecure cause I'm starting to feel like you're trolling the shit out of us

[Creepn]

Common sense would be not to follow people in a dark pathway.

[Katherine Robinson]

God bless the generosity of the true American

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/pro-gun-group-raising-money-to-buy-george

[jag]

God bless the generosity of the true American

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/pro-gun-group-raising-money-to-buy-george

http://www.akphotograph.com/Alaska%20Blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/wpid1725-FlyBall-9074-Edit.jpg

[Jacob1983]

That's a bad ass looking eagle in that pic.

[ChumpDumper]

Acting like a civilized human being and not attacking Zimmerman would have solved everything. You're trying too hard.Zimmerman's not stalking the dude with a gun would also have worked. Now you're thinking.


And what would a 17 year old be armed with legally?He can pay that fine.


Assume Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had the gunSince he did have a gun, that would help any argument he thought he was in danger.


YOU'RE talking Florida law, we're talking common sense.Then you aren't talking jury trials.


With that second line I feel a little insecure cause I'm starting to feel like you're trolling the shit out of usWhat an odd thing to feel insecure about.

[CubanSucks]

Anyone who continues this argument is an absolute sucker tbh. CD refuses to drop the Florida law strawman that he's using to cover the fact that Trayvon acted like a thuggish retard

[jag]

Zimmerman's not stalking the dude with a gun would also have worked. Now you're thinking.


I wasn't aware he was found to be "stalking" anyone. Since you're so interested in Florida law, can you please tell me what Zimmerman did that night that was determined to be illegal?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

He can pay that fine.



Much more than a fine again as he'd be serving prison time. His parents would most likely be charged with a felony in Florida as well for their son illegally possessing a firearm and causing bodily harm. Awesome scenario you've dreamed up, everyone's a winner!

[ChumpDumper]

Much more than a fine again as he'd be serving prison time.Not for possession of a firearm. first offense means community service and some driver's license issues. You should really read up on this stuff before you post.
His parents would most likely be charged with a felony in Florida as well for their son illegally possessing a firearm and causing bodily harm.Only if they knew he walked around with a loaded gun. How will you prove that?
Awesome scenario you've dreamed up, everyone's a winner!As he would be alive, Trayvon would probably prefer that scenario. Shoot to kill first and take your chances in court. That's Florida law, and your chances in court are better there than most states.

Just make sure you kill a person and don't wound a wall. That's serious.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Not for possession of a firearm. first offense means community service and some driver's license issues. You should really read up on this stuff before you post.

Only if they knew he walked around with a loaded gun. How will you prove that?As he would be alive, Trayvon would probably prefer that scenario. Shoot to kill first and take your chances in court. That's Florida law, and your chances in court are better there than most states.

Just make sure you kill a person and don't wound a wall. That's serious.

All of your counter arguments are moot as an unjustifiable killing would have been committed by Trayvon.

[ChumpDumper]

All of your counter arguments are moot as an unjustifiable killing would have been committed by Trayvon.Again, that's for the Florida jury to decide.

It's their law, not yours.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

And how do you think the jury would rule, based on the scenario you've created?

Don't forget, you've set up the scenario as an illegally armed 17 year old shooting and killing someone who was following him.

[ChumpDumper]

And how do you think the jury would rule, based on the scenario you've created?

Don't forget, you've set up the scenario as an illegally armed 17 year old shooting and killing someone who was following him.An armed person following him alone at night.

Why would someone do that?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

That is not an answer.

[ChumpDumper]

That is not an answer.Just including factors you want to ignore.

Depends on the jury and the lawyers making the case. They would certainly bring up what you ignore.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

I haven't ignored anything and have taken it all into account. Your scenario is not well thought out if you think Trayvon would walk.

Illegally armed 17 year shoots and kills a man who was legally following him. Dead man happened to have a concealed weapon. Bye bye Trayvon.

[ChumpDumper]

I haven't ignored anything and have taken it all into account. Your scenario is not well thought out if you think Trayvon would walk.I'd say he'd have a chance which would be better were he not a black male.


Illegally armed 17 year shoots and kills a man who was legally following him. Dead man happened to have a concealed weapon. Bye bye Trayvon.Not necessarily. It's all opinion and not up to us. Florida law makes that argument possible and nothing you post will change that.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

I'd say he'd have a chance which would be better were he not a black male.We aren't discussing a woman. Stick to your scenario.


Not necessarily. It's all opinion and not up to us. Florida law makes that argument possible and nothing you post will change that.Illegally armed is not an opinion, that would be a fact. And Florida law makes this a no brainer murder conviction. Agree to disagree I guess.

[ChumpDumper]

We aren't discussing a woman. Stick to your scenario.I am. There's a chance of acquittal.


Illegally armed is not an opinion, that would be a fact. And Florida law makes this a no brainer murder conviction. Agree to disagree I guess.No, Florida law explicitly provides a defense for the shooter. That's the whole point.

[CubanSucks]

Anyone who continues this argument is an absolute sucker tbh. CD refuses to drop the Florida law strawman that he's using to cover the fact that Trayvon acted like a thuggish retard

give it up, kingsfan. He'll keep bringing it back to "Well, if Trayvon had a gun he could've shot Zimmerman..and..and.. he COULD get acquitted if the jury was made up of complete morons!

[ChumpDumper]

give it up, kingsfan. He'll keep bringing it back to "Well, if Trayvon had a gun he could've shot Zimmerman..and..and.. he COULD get acquitted if the jury was made up of complete morons!Yep. No real counter to that. It is what it is.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

No, Florida law explicitly provides a defense for the shooter. That's the whole point.Not for being followed.

[ChumpDumper]

Not for being followed.You posted the law. Not my problem if you can't understand what it means.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

It's clear here who doesn't understand the law.

[ChumpDumper]

It's clear here who doesn't understand the law.Yes, you don't understand that law allows for the type of defense described above.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Yes, you don't understand that law allows for the type of defense described above.

Please explain how being followed would justify killing someone, under this law.

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.

[ChumpDumper]

Please explain how being followed would justify killing someone, under this law.

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.The jury just has to conclude the shooters belief is reasonable. If they conclude the shooter had a reasonable belief that some serious shit was going to go down because he was being followed alone at night by a guy with a gun, that's it.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat it to you. You don't agree. Fine.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

The shooter would have to lie to make them believe it was reasonable as he never knew the person following him had a gun.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

Common sense would be not to follow people in a dark pathway.

agreed, always try to avoid coontact

[ChumpDumper]

The shooter would have to lie to make them believe it was reasonable as he never knew the person following him had a gun.False assumption. It's not impossible to tell a person is carrying.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

False assumption. It's not impossible to tell a person is carrying.

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Are you saying it's impossible?

Yes or no.

And besides, dude ended up having a gun. Suspicion confirmed.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Are you saying it's impossible?

Yes or no.

And besides, dude ended up having a gun. Suspicion confirmed.yes I am saying its impossible as it was dark out and Zimmerman had an inside the waistband concealed holster that happens to conceal the fucking gun! What's next from you, he was carrying his gun on his hip Wild West style? Martin had X-ray vision?

[ChumpDumper]

yes I am saying its impossible as it was dark out and Zimmerman had an inside the waistband concealed holster that happens to conceal the fucking gun! What's next from you, he was carrying his gun on his hip Wild West style? Martin had X-ray vision?Completely dark?

How did anyone find his way around?

Does the holster reduce the mass of a gun?

You'd be free to demonstrate your theory at trial. That's what trials are for.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Completely dark?

How did anyone find his way around?

Does the holster reduce the mass of a gun?

You'd be free to demonstrate your theory at trial. That's what trials are for.

You keep digging yourself deeper and deeper.

It could have been broad daylight and Trayvon would not have been able to see the gun. Zimmerman had a jacket on and the gun was holstered inside his waistband behind his right hip. Again, impossible to see, especially if being followed.

[ChumpDumper]

You keep digging yourself deeper and deeper.

It could have been broad daylight and Trayvon would not have been able to see the gun. Zimmerman had a jacket on and the gun was holstered inside his waistband behind his right hip. Again, impossible to see, especially if being followed.And yet, he did have a gun. suspicion confirmed.

Thanks for dismissing your own darkness argument all by yourself.

Hell, George Costanza could have had his hand on the gun for all anyone knows -- and he can't testify in this case.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

And yet, he did have a gun. suspicion confirmed.

Thanks for dismissing your own darkness argument all by yourself.

Hell, George Costanza could have had his hand on the gun for all anyone knows -- and he can't testify in this case.

The hypothetical holes continues to deepen. This is entertaining.

Since you seem to love hypotheticals so much let's put you in one.


Chumpdumper is walking home by himself carrying concealed (:lol)
Chumpdumper notices someone following him.
Chumpdumper thinks this person might be a threat.
Chumpdumper thinks he knows the Florida law well.
Does Chumpdumper pull his gun and shoot, believing he is legally justified in killing the person who followed him? Or does Chumpdumper retreat from his follower?

[ChumpDumper]

The hypothetical holes continues to deepen. This is entertaining.

Since you seem to love hypotheticals so much let's put you in one.


Chumpdumper is walking home by himself carrying concealed (:lol)
Chumpdumper notices someone following him.
Chumpdumper thinks this person might be a threat.
Chumpdumper thinks he knows the Florida law well.
Does Chumpdumper pull his gun and shoot, believing he is legally justified in killing the person who followed him? Or does Chumpdumper retreat from his follower?In Florida I have the right to do either. I'd have to prove I felt reasonably threatened according to the law should I decide to shoot -- or rather a prosecutor would have to prove I didn't feel reasonably threatened according to the law. If the guy had a gun like Costanza did, it would be more difficult for a prosecutor to prove the feeling was not reasonable.

Really, what part of this do you not understand after several days? It's entertaining that you read the same thing several times but fail completely to understand.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

In Florida I have the right to do either. I'd have to prove I felt reasonably threatened according to the law should I decide to shoot -- or rather a prosecutor would have to prove I didn't feel reasonably threatened according to the law. If the guy had a gun like Costanza did, it would be more difficult for a prosecutor to prove the feeling was not reasonable.

Really, what part of this do you not understand after several days? It's entertaining that you read the same thing several times but fail completely to understand.

Do you pull your gun and shoot or not? Are you confident that someone following you would be considered enough of a threat by the jury to acquit?

[CubanSucks]

CD with the trainwreck goods. This is fucking embarrassing.

[ChumpDumper]

Do you pull your gun and shoot or not?Dunno. You did a shitty job of describing the scene.
Are you confident that someone following you would be considered enough of a threat by the jury to acquit?More confident than if I were black.

It's up to the jury if I do shoot. Again, I didn't write the law. It's a pretty stupid law.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

CD with the trainwreck goods. This is fucking embarrassing.

Agreed.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Dunno. You did a shitty job of describing the scene.More confident than if I were black.

It's up to the jury if I do shoot. Again, I didn't write the law. It's a pretty stupid law.

You won't even answer your own hypothetical situation because you'd contradict everything you've spewed in this thread. I'll answer for you.

Chumpdumper would not shoot. Chumpdumper would not risk life in prison for shooting a guy that was following him. Chumpdumper is smart and retreats to his house and calls the police to tell them about the man who was following him. The police ask what the man was doing, Chumpdumper repeats that the man was following him. The police laugh and hang up. Chumpdumper returns to his computer.

[ChumpDumper]

You guys have a viewpoint of this law based mainly on your perception of the Trayvon Martin as a person. It just made you close your mind to anything that doesn't include that characterization.

[ChumpDumper]

You won't even answer your own hypothetical situation because you'd contradict everything you've spewed in this thread. I'll answer for you.

Chumpdumper would not shoot. Chumpdumper would not risk life in prison for shooting a guy that was following him. Chumpdumper is smart and retreats to his house and calls the police to tell them about the man who was following him. The police ask what the man was doing, Chumpdumper repeats that the man was following him. The police laugh and hang up. Chumpdumper returns to his computer.Who knows, if I felt threatened enough I'd shoot. Depends on what all is going on.

Florida law says I am under no obligation to flee, even if I can.

You posted it.

After that the question of whether the feeling of being threatened was reasonable becomes a legal matter. That's all I have been saying.

It's a pretty dumb law for just that reason.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

You guys have a viewpoint of this law based mainly on your perception of the Trayvon Martin as a person. It just made you close your mind to anything that doesn't include that characterization.

I haven't characterized Trayvon as a person other than pointing out his stupidity in confronting Zimmerman and assaulting him instead of going home.

[ChumpDumper]

I haven't characterized Trayvon as a person other than pointing out his stupidity in confronting Zimmerman and assaulting him instead of going home.There you go.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Who knows, if I felt threatened enough I'd shoot. Depends on what all is going on.

Florida law says I am under no obligation to flee, even if I can.

You posted it.

After that the question of whether the feeling of being threatened was reasonable becomes a legal matter. That's all I have been saying.

It's a pretty dumb law for just that reason.

You've got four minutes to decide on confronting or fleeing, what do you choose?

[ChumpDumper]

You've got four minutes to decide on confronting or fleeing, what do you choose?Four minutes until what?

[Trill Clinton]

is there evidence that the coward's gun was holstered?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Four minutes until what?

Until you must confront or continue home. You don't have to wait that long either. You can just go home.

[Blake]

You've got four minutes to decide on confronting or fleeing, what do you choose?

'sup TSA

[ChumpDumper]

Until you must confront or continue home. You don't have to wait that long either. You can just go home.Why must I confront?

Why is there a time limit on that?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

'sup TSA

'sup Cuck

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Why must I confront?

Why is there a time limit on that?you don't have to confront, you can just continue home. Seems like the smart thing to do doesn't it.

[ChumpDumper]

you don't have to confront, you can just continue home. Seems like the smart thing to do doesn't it.That's not what you said.
You've got four minutes to decide on confronting or fleeing, what do you choose?


Four minutes until what?


Until you must confront or continue home. You don't have to wait that long either. You can just go home.

Why must I confront after four minutes pass and I decide not to continue home at that time?

[Blake]

'sup Cuck

lol new sock puppet, same old results

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Why must I confront after four minutes pass and I decide not to continue home at that time?If you are threatened by the man following you why would you stay unless you are looking for a confrontation?

[ChumpDumper]

If you are threatened by the man following you why would you stay unless you are looking for a confrontation?You didn't answer the question.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

lol new sock puppet, same old results

Original account.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

To answer your question, you don't need to leave and you can stay, which brings us back to this.....

If you are threatened by the man following you why would you stay unless you are looking for a confrontation?

[ChumpDumper]

To answer your question, you don't need to leave and you can stay, which brings us back to this.....So the four minute scenario was just bullshit?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

You didn't answer the question.

[ChumpDumper]

You didn't answer the question.I just want to get this straight before we continue. The four minute thing is completely off the table because you realize it was a dead end for you.

Right?

[KingsFanWithoutName]

The four minutes doesn't really matter to me. If we need to take it off the table to get an answer from you so be it. This is your hypothetical after all.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

And once again.....


If you are threatened by the man following you why would you stay unless you are looking for a confrontation?

[ChumpDumper]

The four minutes doesn't really matter to me. If we need to take it off the table to get an answer from you so be it. This is your hypothetical after all.No it's yours. You are the one trying to set all the conditions. Some just don't work out for you.

The four minutes really meant something to you, otherwise you would not have brought it up.

Now that you have walked back from the four minute scenario, we can continue.

Under Florida law, I am under no obligation to flee before using force. You seem to have a real problem with the law. I don't blame you.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

No it's yours. You are the one trying to set all the conditions. Some just don't work out for you.

The four minutes really meant something to you, otherwise you would not have brought it up.

Now that you have walked back from the four minute scenario, we can continue.

Under Florida law, I am under no obligation to flee before using force. You seem to have a real problem with the law. I don't blame you.

The four minutes doesn't mean shit to me, but as we were comparing your situation to Trayvon's I thought it would be appropriate.

You still refuse to answer the question. You are correct, you do not have to flee. By choosing not to flee you are deciding on a confrontation no?

[ChumpDumper]

The four minutes doesn't mean shit to me, but as we were comparing your situation to Trayvon's I thought it would be appropriate.Of course it meant something to you.


You still refuse to answer the question. You are correct, you do not have to flee. By choosing not to flee you are deciding on a confrontation no?Not necessarily. I could just sit down and see what happens for example.

And I don't know why you are trying to pin me down into hypothetically shooting anyone. I explained the law to you three times after you posted it and failed to understand it. The shooter makes the choice if he feels threatened, the court decides if it is reasonable.

Period.

I couldn't tell you what I personally would do; your scenario is really badly executed -- I did tell you what the options are under Florida law if one feels threatened. That's it.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Of course it meant something to you.

Not necessarily. I could just sit down and see what happens for example.

And I don't know why you are trying to pin me down into hypothetically shooting anyone. I explained the law to you three times after you posted it and failed to understand it. The shooter makes the choice if he feels threatened, the court decides if it is reasonable.

Period.

I couldn't tell you what I personally would do -- I did tell you what the options are under Florida law if one feels threatened. That's it.

Riiiiiiight. You couldn't tell me what you'd do.......what a fucking cop out. You know you'd retreat, you just won't admit it because it flies in the face of your suggesting Trayvon should have shot and killed Zimmerman for following him.

It's hard for you to admit that Trayvon should have been smarter and just continued home.

[ChumpDumper]

Riiiiiiight. You couldn't tell me what you'd do.......what a fucking cop out. You know you'd retreat, you just won't admit it because it flies in the face of your suggesting Trayvon should have shot and killed Zimmerman for following him.What I would do isn't at issue. What I could do is and the part you just can't get.


It's hard for you to admit that Trayvon should have been smarter and just continued home.He should have been carrying and shot Costanza. He'd be alive today.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

What I would do isn't at issue. What I could do is and the part you just can't get.

He should have been carrying and shot Costanza. He'd be alive today.
And we've come full circle again.


Illegally possessing a firearm and shooting someone for following you lands you in prison, but hey, at least you are alive.

[ChumpDumper]

And we've come full circle again.


Illegally possessing a firearm and shooting someone for following you lands you in prison, but hey, at least you are alive.The possession would not -- again, you are arguing from ignorance. And, once again, the decision on the shooting would rest with a jury.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

The possession would not -- again, you are arguing from ignorance. And, once again, the decision on the shooting would rest with a jury.

Illegal firearm possession by a minor that causes death is most definitely a crime. You can call it a stupid law all you want but you know Trayvon would be serving prison time if he would have shot and killed him. The law was not on his side in that scenario.

[ChumpDumper]

Illegal firearm possession by a minor that causes death is most definitely a crime. You can call it a stupid law all you want but you know Trayvon would be serving prison time if he would have shot and killed him. The law was not on his side in that scenario.Up to a jury.

[KingsFanWithoutName]

Up to a jury.

Well no shit.

17 year old illegally carrying a firearm shoots and kills neighborhood watch guy who was following him.

Good luck with that one.

[ohmwrecker]

Ouch.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/family-zimmerman-saved-wont-appear-with-him-in-public-dont-want-to-be-associated-with-george/

[Blake]

Original account.

how fascinating.

[mouse]

You didn't answer the question.

Translation : I'm not satisfied with the first reply you gave me so I will just try to somehow make you look like some sort of misinformed tin foil hat wearing douche bag posters and paint you as bad guy so the burden of proof is you.......Am I close esse?

[mouse]

If someone can screen capture this topic in a PDF or JPEG file I call pay you minimum 10-25 cash if it's legit, but I do want original unedited screen caps.