6 votes

I Fully Support George Zimmerman

If you don't want to get shot, don't mess with people with guns.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What does this have to do with the Daily Paul?

I mean who cares what the story is... was there anything that the media was pushing to take away our civil liberties, I mean obviously both sides of the story made mistakes, but why not move beyond this and not make it an issue and focus on the real issues out there. Like the snowden case or kokesh, I mean there are more important things that affect each and everyone of us that could be talked about so we can learn from one another, I mean everything that surrounds the zimmerman case in my opinion doesn't have any "new information" that I can use to promote liberty. And that's what we are talking about here. Let's lay this to rest and move on with what's important.

I support Zimmerman as well.

Unfortunately he is going to get killed and this event will dominate the news spectrum for about 5-7 days until it is forgotten.

I'm sorry but I can see into the future and this is what will happen unless someone stops it. I hate being able to see the future.

Chris Indeedski!

Daily Paul cured my abibliophobia.

I agree. It just comes down

I agree. It just comes down to, if you know you look suspicious and are out at night in a hoodie, not to mention are black (not racist, just a fact you are going to appear more questionable), and some dude is following you, just go inside. I know ideally you should have a right to be wherever you want without being harrassed, but you know you are going to be anyway, so just leave. At the end of the day would you rather have your liberty to travel from point A or point B, or be alive?

And I hate to say it, but might makes right. If someone legally has more fire power than you do, then get home and take cover, you don't need to be outside. If you are, fine. Its a free country, but just accept personal responsibility when you mess with someone with a gun. Maybe you should think about trying to legally obtain one yourself too (well being 17, he couldn't do that, but you get my point).

That's why I like Ron Paul so much really, cause he recognizes that if our government has more firepower (like drones) than we do, and can just kill whoever it wants when they mess with them, that it is game over, we should just sit back and not try to speak against it or defend ourselves.

This is NOT a race issue, its a respect your elders issue. If an older man is following you in a vehicle (especially a larger one, specifically a utility van) he is by default an authority figure. And you should do what he says, even if he doesn't identify himself, or actually say anything.

BOTTOM LINE THOUGH, our personal right to protection is guarded by the 2nd amendment and legal government approved firearms, not our hands. If someone has a legally purchased firearm, I will always defend them over someone who was empty-handed, because it just means they were more prepared for self defense. Chances are, if you don't have a gun, and are good at fighting without one, you were probably looking for a fight anyway. What are we, kung fu chinamen? We should have the right to be as out of shape as we want, but with the ability to take down anyone at the push of a button. Damn Michelle Obama trying to make us eat better so were physically fit and dont need guns to physically defend ourselves. We want our guns and high cholesterol butter you bitch! Trying to mandate new public school lunches. These communist Obamas always with their mandates! We like our current un-mandated lunch menus!!! ...

Now if George Zimmerman were a real cop and Trayvon Martin was some dude's dog, I would have a different opinion :)

absolutely 100% not guilty

I agree 100%. If a cop shot Trayvon Martin, then, yes, the cop should be sent to prison for manslaughter or second degree murder. A cop could have used a taser or called for backup before he discharged his weapon. But Zimmerman did not have such luxuries at his disposal. Where where the police to protect him? Where were the police to protect Trayvon? Police don't protect and serve anybody but themselves. If any harm should come to Zimmerman from this time forward, then it is proof positive that the police, military, and Homeland Security cannot keep Americans safe. Safety comes from self-protection and our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, even machine guns and tanks, if that is what is necessary for self-protection in this degenerating remnant of democracy that is America.

But what if Trayvon Martin

But what if Trayvon Martin was defending himself with his hands? Maybe he thought he was in danger also, and he had to use what resources he could. Especially because the law says hes too young to own a weapon, so he couldn't have one, and Zimmerman did have one, which is obviously a dangerous disadvantage for Martin. Keep in mind, Zimmerman did not identify himself as a safe person. Which I'm not saying is illegal, but suggesting is irresponsible.

Zimmerman did in fact have those luxuries at his disposal. The only reason he was yelling help was because he thought the 'backup' he had called was right around the corner and would hear him. Well, if he thought they were right around the corner, why did he go in alone in the first place? How is that any different?

treyvon doubled backed to

treyvon doubled backed to attack zimmerman. If treyvon had not atttacked zimmerman. Treyvon would of kept walking and not doublebacked and he would be alive today. I think you missed the evidence that clearly showed zimmerman was not an aggressor. location of crime showed zimmerman had stopped following him(which is not a crime) even if zimmerman continued to follow him which did not happen. Treyvon was the aggressor and had to come back to attack zimmerman.

eyewitness and angle of bullet show treyvon was on top of zimmerman. even eyewitness testified to hearing zimmerman screaming for help. the same help heard in the 911 call which by eyewitness proves it was not treyvon screaming for help but zimmerman.

Ron Paul 2016

Murder was the case that they gave me

Cain killed Abel without a gun. Why did Big Brother deny Trayvon the right to keep and bear arms for his self-protection? Where was Big Brother when Trayvon needed him? Big Brother is responsible for Trayvon's death.

Nothing to do with a black person in a hoodie,

elders, or anything else. How about this: don't needlessly initiate violence against another human being if you don't want to be shot.

I AM is all that is. Everything else is malleable.

Don't needlessly follow

Don't needlessly follow someone you suspect of being dangerous if you don't want to be in danger.

He has a reasonable doubt for innocence, so I'm fine with the not guilty verdict. Just saying his guilt is reasonably viable as well, so why passionately defend him, and hold him up as some great example?

I did not

defend anyone, passionately or otherwise, so I have no idea where you are coming from. Refute what I actually stated, and I will kindly respond.

I AM is all that is. Everything else is malleable.

also, its absolutely not a

also, its absolutely not a fact that trayvon martin initiated violence against someone. it may be true at one point he was carrying out violence against someone, but obviously so was george zimmerman.

As far as what you said- I

As far as what you said- I think the not guilty verdict is because he had a reasonable doubt, which is fine. But if Trayvon Martin had killed Zimmerman, I think he would be in more trouble, and it would have been assumed it was not self-defense right away, and him being able to defend himself simply with his own testimony would be way more difficult, and it would be a double standard based on the weapon used (gun vs. hands) and more indirectly on age and race. So, I think you said in short, don't put yourself in danger. I believe that's what Zimmerman did by following Martin, and so he's partially to blame that the incident took place in the first place. Maybe not legally murder two guilty, but still morally not completely blameless.

The passionately defend thing wasn't about your post, just the original poster, and commenting on people who on one side use this case as a great example of defending yourself with a weapon, when there's technically no proof that it was like 100% clean cut unprovoked self defense. And there's no proof Martin wasn't defending himself, but just without a weapon since legally he couldn't own one (like you fight with your hands and you're a thug, you fight with a gun and you're a great american following the constitution, its stupid).

And on the flip side, there is no proof Zimmerman was racist and had any horribly bad intentions so holding up Trayvon Martin passionately as some example of pure innocence I think is also a mistake. I just think biases on any side should come second after the facts, not mixed in with them to form an opinion on this case.

While I am glad that he was acquitted

he's going to be stalked by racists until they kill him, and nobody will do anything about it. The media will smugly report on it for about a day or two.

I hope I am wrong.