and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

1.You don't know if martin posed a threat
2.As a neighborhood watch it was his duty to investigate these things,he was the watch for years and recieved no complaints only positive feedback from whites and blacks
3.the police were not ordering him not to investigate,they were suggesting he not
4.Zimmerman is the one with all blunt force trauma recieved from melee hits,not trayvon who only recieved bullet wounds,this implies that trayvon was the one attacking not zimmerman
5.my gun argument can still be easily used for trayvon,if he had a gun he may still be alive.

How about neither of them have a gun, then both could be alive.
A neighborhood watchmens duty is to investigate, but not to follow and shoot a teenager, after buying skittles.
If I saw a stranger following me with a gun, I would hit him to, I'm sure anybody would.
For me this case points out racism and the abuse of gun laws in america, it's not really a valid case for good use of guns, as chances are without the gun he wouldn't have felt equipped enough to go and confront the teen, and just stayed indoors and nobody would have got hurt.

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

The trouble is there aren't,and if you check the facts of the case you will notice the marks on zimmermans head from when trayvon bashed it against the sidewalk,it only takes one hit for you to be killed when having your head getting banged on the sidewalk,if zimmerman didn't have a gun he'd likely be dead.

Have you not heard the 911 call footage? He is perfectly safe and Martin possessed no threat at all.

1.You don't know if martin posed a threat
2.As a neighborhood watch it was his duty to investigate these things,he was the watch for years and recieved no complaints only positive feedback from whites and blacks
3.the police were not ordering him not to investigate,they were suggesting he not
4.Zimmerman is the one with all blunt force trauma recieved from melee hits,not trayvon who only recieved bullet wounds,this implies that trayvon was the one attacking not zimmerman
5.my gun argument can still be easily used for trayvon,if he had a gun he may still be alive.

How about neither of them have a gun, then both could be alive.
A neighborhood watchmens duty is to investigate, but not to follow and shoot a teenager, after buying skittles.
If I saw a stranger following me with a gun, I would hit him to, I'm sure anybody would.
For me this case points out racism and the abuse of gun laws in america, it's not really a valid case for good use of guns, as chances are without the gun he wouldn't have felt equipped enough to go and confront the teen, and just stayed indoors and nobody would have got hurt.

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

heres a link showing that crime has actually gone up in places where guns have been banned.http://johnrlott.(delete)tripod.(delete)com/op-eds/BritainToyGunsWSJE.htm l

I see your point, but that Trayvon Martin case was completely unacceptable, something that never would have happened without the ownership of a gun.
I think there are more effective methods of crime prevention then citizens owning guns.

The trouble is there aren't,and if you check the facts of the case you will notice the marks on zimmermans head from when trayvon bashed it against the sidewalk,it only takes one hit for you to be killed when having your head getting banged on the sidewalk,if zimmerman didn't have a gun he'd likely be dead.

Have you not heard the 911 call footage? He is perfectly safe and Martin possessed no threat at all.

1.You don't know if martin posed a threat
2.As a neighborhood watch it was his duty to investigate these things,he was the watch for years and recieved no complaints only positive feedback from whites and blacks
3.the police were not ordering him not to investigate,they were suggesting he not
4.Zimmerman is the one with all blunt force trauma recieved from melee hits,not trayvon who only recieved bullet wounds,this implies that trayvon was the one attacking not zimmerman
5.my gun argument can still be easily used for trayvon,if he had a gun he may still be alive.

How about neither of them have a gun, then both could be alive.
A neighborhood watchmens duty is to investigate, but not to follow and shoot a teenager, after buying skittles.
If I saw a stranger following me with a gun, I would hit him to, I'm sure anybody would.
For me this case points out racism and the abuse of gun laws in america, it's not really a valid case for good use of guns, as chances are without the gun he wouldn't have felt equipped enough to go and confront the teen, and just stayed indoors and nobody would have got hurt.

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

untrue here.We do background checks before we sell them,so its not "easily obtainable".Some US states are trying to regulate or downright ban the civilians right to own a gun guaranteed by our constitution,but luckily in Texas we trust our populace,and we also realize that if the civilians didn't have guns then the only people with guns would be criminals and the government,each of whom i'm not comfortable with running my life.

no they don't ignore the robbers death.First they confirm that he broke into the house,if he dead then its pretty much an open and shut case,they take any accounts of what happened,take the body away,confiscate your gun for a few days,then return it to you once their done doing their thing. It show criminals that they have no protection under the law to harass the civilian populace, in Texas we protect the citizens,not the criminals.We also don't try to limit gun ownership so people actually have a chance against the robbers.

I don't really agree with the ability to easily obtain firearms in the USA, they do more bad then good in my opinion.

heres a link showing that crime has actually gone up in places where guns have been banned.http://johnrlott.(delete)tripod.(delete)com/op-eds/BritainToyGunsWSJE.htm l

I see your point, but that Trayvon Martin case was completely unacceptable, something that never would have happened without the ownership of a gun.
I think there are more effective methods of crime prevention then citizens owning guns.

The trouble is there aren't,and if you check the facts of the case you will notice the marks on zimmermans head from when trayvon bashed it against the sidewalk,it only takes one hit for you to be killed when having your head getting banged on the sidewalk,if zimmerman didn't have a gun he'd likely be dead.

Have you not heard the 911 call footage? He is perfectly safe and Martin possessed no threat at all.

1.You don't know if martin posed a threat
2.As a neighborhood watch it was his duty to investigate these things,he was the watch for years and recieved no complaints only positive feedback from whites and blacks
3.the police were not ordering him not to investigate,they were suggesting he not
4.Zimmerman is the one with all blunt force trauma recieved from melee hits,not trayvon who only recieved bullet wounds,this implies that trayvon was the one attacking not zimmerman
5.my gun argument can still be easily used for trayvon,if he had a gun he may still be alive.

How about neither of them have a gun, then both could be alive.
A neighborhood watchmens duty is to investigate, but not to follow and shoot a teenager, after buying skittles.
If I saw a stranger following me with a gun, I would hit him to, I'm sure anybody would.
For me this case points out racism and the abuse of gun laws in america, it's not really a valid case for good use of guns, as chances are without the gun he wouldn't have felt equipped enough to go and confront the teen, and just stayed indoors and nobody would have got hurt.

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

untrue here.We do background checks before we sell them,so its not "easily obtainable".Some US states are trying to regulate or downright ban the civilians right to own a gun guaranteed by our constitution,but luckily in Texas we trust our populace,and we also realize that if the civilians didn't have guns then the only people with guns would be criminals and the government,each of whom i'm not comfortable with running my life.

I've said it before but let me repeat.It varies from state to state(assuming hes from the US).In Texas where i live we have the "Castle Doctrine" which states that a man's home and those of his friends as well as his person are his castle,and that if you fuck with it you have no more legal right to your life and you better be prepared to lose it considering we dont deny our populace the constitutionally permitted right to own a gun.One of the main reasons i love this state.

It just seems a bit odd to me, I live in the UK so I'm not really up to date with the different laws of different states. But a guy still died, there had to be some investigation into the matter, the police can't just ignore a man's death because he invaded somebody's home can they?

no they don't ignore the robbers death.First they confirm that he broke into the house,if he dead then its pretty much an open and shut case,they take any accounts of what happened,take the body away,confiscate your gun for a few days,then return it to you once their done doing their thing. It show criminals that they have no protection under the law to harass the civilian populace, in Texas we protect the citizens,not the criminals.We also don't try to limit gun ownership so people actually have a chance against the robbers.

I don't really agree with the ability to easily obtain firearms in the USA, they do more bad then good in my opinion.

heres a link showing that crime has actually gone up in places where guns have been banned.http://johnrlott.(delete)tripod.(delete)com/op-eds/BritainToyGunsWSJE.htm l

I see your point, but that Trayvon Martin case was completely unacceptable, something that never would have happened without the ownership of a gun.
I think there are more effective methods of crime prevention then citizens owning guns.

The trouble is there aren't,and if you check the facts of the case you will notice the marks on zimmermans head from when trayvon bashed it against the sidewalk,it only takes one hit for you to be killed when having your head getting banged on the sidewalk,if zimmerman didn't have a gun he'd likely be dead.

Have you not heard the 911 call footage? He is perfectly safe and Martin possessed no threat at all.

1.You don't know if martin posed a threat
2.As a neighborhood watch it was his duty to investigate these things,he was the watch for years and recieved no complaints only positive feedback from whites and blacks
3.the police were not ordering him not to investigate,they were suggesting he not
4.Zimmerman is the one with all blunt force trauma recieved from melee hits,not trayvon who only recieved bullet wounds,this implies that trayvon was the one attacking not zimmerman
5.my gun argument can still be easily used for trayvon,if he had a gun he may still be alive.

How about neither of them have a gun, then both could be alive.
A neighborhood watchmens duty is to investigate, but not to follow and shoot a teenager, after buying skittles.
If I saw a stranger following me with a gun, I would hit him to, I'm sure anybody would.
For me this case points out racism and the abuse of gun laws in america, it's not really a valid case for good use of guns, as chances are without the gun he wouldn't have felt equipped enough to go and confront the teen, and just stayed indoors and nobody would have got hurt.

1.skittles?Why in gods name would that matter in the least bit?
2.He WAS investigating,so far the facts point to him being the one attacked first as my previous observations and evidence suggest.
3.Trayvon didn't know he had a gun,so he would have no reason to just attack him
4.He himself is a minority who tried to get justice for a black man being beaten by police.Google it.
5.If this was type of case some redneck racist child killer as you and the media are trying to make it out to be,which it isnt,then it would have been the "victims" best interest to have a gun.

1. It doesn't. but it does show how little of a threat he was.
2. That doesn't mean anything, no matter what happened there was no reason for martin to have been killed. Plus, what was martin supposedly doing wrong? He would not have just randomly attacked Zimmerman without reason, you can hear him screaming on the footage. He was 64 metres from his own house for gods sake.
3. You are trying to make it out as if Zimmerman was the innocent one, when his actions led to a teenagers death, why not a shot in the leg, why did it have to be a lethal shot?
4.Martin did not harm the black man, so what Zimmerman stuck up for a black man so he can go kill a kid?
5. This is the case of a paranoid man, who shot a teen for simply, in his own words, "just walking around looking about". The use of guns were not beneficial to this case, and without them, both people would still be alive.

1.If i gave skittles to John Wayne Gacy he'd be less scary to you?
2.Burglers and murderers dont just teleport to peoples houses,they have to walk around dont they?Zimmerman could of thought he was one of them easily considering it was at night.
3.When you have your head bashed into the cement you tell me if you're a perfect shot,Its much easier to hit the torso then the legs.
4.How in god's name did you get that out of what i said?It show's that he wasn't racist like the media is claiming
5.He was the night watch captain,it was his duty to investigate things and that might come across as paranoid to some but thats a quality most night watchmen share.You seem to think that banning guns would somehow stop guns from existing,but that's just not true.Banning guns doesnt stop cases like this,it INCREASES them as my link showed.
6.An eyewitness even came out of the apartments and saw trayvon beating zimmerman,you accuse me of trying to make zimmerman out to be innocent,but you're basically trying to claim Trayvon was an angel,but his actions and past encounters with authority refute that.

And by the skittles thing I meant, he had gone out to by skittles, not cause trouble.
I was not inferring the skittles made him harmless.

and him going out to get skittles has nothing to do with this.

Right we have different views here, I just know that I would not want anybody like Zimmerman in charge of my neighborhood watch, and as much as you try to justify it, a kid died, and there is no proof he meant any harm to anybody. This is one of the many reasons I don't like America, but it looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

and there are many,many reasons i dislike england,i wont mention them out of politeness.There is also no evidence at all to suggest that zimmerman attacked first,was a racist,or that trayvon did not pose a threat so you can apply the same logic to you argument.

I dislike England for alot of reasons to, we get alot of things wrong. But i do feel it is a safer country to live in.

and i vehemently disagree

Fair enough

untrue here.We do background checks before we sell them,so its not "easily obtainable".Some US states are trying to regulate or downright ban the civilians right to own a gun guaranteed by our constitution,but luckily in Texas we trust our populace,and we also realize that if the civilians didn't have guns then the only people with guns would be criminals and the government,each of whom i'm not comfortable with running my life.

there would still be an investigation... don't be stupid...

i never said there wouldn't,he was implying(like many others on this thread) that because he "killed" a guy he would face some type of punishment from the police. I stated that where i live if you break into someones house you basically have no more rights no your life,and you shouldn't. All the police would do is confirm that the guy broke into your house and then they take the body away with your account of the incident and gun for a few days until returning it,that's about all the investigation there is. Learn the context of something before calling people stupid next time.

no he said there was no investigation literal beats implication i like you're knowledge on texas law and it would be called as self defense but there would still be an investigation... red thumb all you want but you should read the comment you are disputing

i didn't thumb you down like you did me,stop being paranoid. He said he "killed" a guy, call me crazy but that would make me think he believes he killed someone and not just self defense. He also said the police not taking "action",why are you just focusing on the investigation part? I was responding to his whole comment,not just that.

FunnyJunk logic someone didn't get the joke better thumb him/her down.

Yes, but this joke isn't hard to get. It's so straightforward. You'd have to be 11 not to get this.

Chill out butthurts i get it now, cunts.

The Killing Joke, which is written by Alan Moore (who wrote V for Vendetta and Watchmen).

-Gives everyone the real answer.
-Doesn't receive thumbs.

Don't worry trivia-bro, I got you.

i think its batman

hurr durr no shit