use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
詳しくは検索FAQを参照
高度な検索: 投稿者や、subredditで……
109 現在のここのユーザー
Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to retain") is a political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional social institutions.
Immigration Discussion Post
Sidebar Tribute History
Posting Guide
Our Twitter Page
U.S. Constitution Discussion
Use the report button for violations of the rules or message the modqueue.
We are for Conservatives (fiscal and social) to discuss political and cultural issues.
Non-conservatives are welcome as long as they are respectful and non-antagonistic towards Conservative posters and opinions at all times and have appropriate flair. (Click here to request flair.)
To debate and challenge Conservatism, visit Ask a Conservative.
Post no more than 4 submissions per hour.
Don't ask: "Why is this here?" or: "How is this Conservative?"
Don't complain how liberal /r/politics or Reddit is.
Don't post stories visible on the first page of "Hot" or "New."
Use the "np" prefix if you link to another subreddit.
Submit no more than one image post per day.
Don't complain about a topic or content of an article without offering substantive criticism.
Don't create meta discussion threads. Use Conservative Meta instead.
Don't create cross-subreddit drama or instigate vote brigading.
Don't post racist articles or comments.
Please see our Posting Guide for more details.
Ask a Conservative
Fiscal Conservative
Libertarian
Monarchism
New Right
Paleoconservative
Republican
Republicans
SocialConservative Click here to message the moderators for an invite.
Atheist Conservative
Conservative Meta
Convention of States
The Liberty Amendments
Best of Conservative
Conservative Ladies
Liberal
The Red Pill
The Red Pill Women
Catholicism
Entrepreneurship
Judaism
Personal Industry
Protestantism
Capitalism
Traditional Marriage Click here to message the moderators for an invite.
Immigration Reform
PornFree
ProLife
ProGun
Adam Carolla
Rand Paul
Ted Cruz
European New Right
Tory
Tories
Name one. (i.imgur.com)
robert32907Revanchist Conservative が 1 年 前 投稿
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Maxmidget 293 ポイント294 ポイント295 ポイント 1 年 前 (146子コメント)
What does this have to do with being conservative or liberal?
[–]MorningLtMtn 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
What does Ann Coulter have to do with being a conservative? Yet embarrassingly enough, she's in the side bar. She died with Romney. Why do we have to continue to endure these death spiral old school types who aren't conservative, and only preach hate?
[+][削除されました] 1 年 前 (25子コメント)
[deleted]
[+][削除されました] 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
[+][削除されました] 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
[–]steve-d### 19 ポイント20 ポイント21 ポイント 1 年 前 (15子コメント)
Holy Christ, Ann Coulter should not be looked up to by anyone.
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 1 年 前 (14子コメント)
Occasionally, she has good points.
[–]steve-d### -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 年 前 (12子コメント)
So does everyone. She is no better than Rush Limbaugh.
[–]Anal_Explorer 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 年 前 (4子コメント)
Does that make her good points less good?
[–]steve-d### -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 年 前 (3子コメント)
Do Sharpton's crazy comments make his good points less good? Absolutely.
[–]Anal_Explorer 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
No. As long as the thought by itself is a good thought. If Sharpton says you shouldn't kick dogs, does that become bad because he's a racist?
[–]SpoonHanded 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
There is a thing called ethos. Without ethos an orator must rely on other tactics in order to sway an audience. A speaker who discredits themself discredits their ethos. This is why any point made by such a speaker must be taken lightly.
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
No, Sharpton's crazy comments make me less likely to listen to him overall. However, if I do find myself listening to him and he makes a good point, it doesn't somehow make the logic more fallible.
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (6子コメント)
Well, if you're upset about people idolizing conservative spokespeople, you probably shouldn't be on a conservative forum board.
[–]steve-d### 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
I am an independent, and I am fiscally conservative while liberal when it comes to social issues. I enjoy seeing the conversations from both sides.
However both sides often idolize people who make their party look crazy. Rush and Ann for the right, and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson for the left.
I feel someone like Jon Huntsman could have made a huge difference for the right and actually swayed those who didnt like Obama, but still voted for him out of spite for Romney.
[–]omgwtfbbq0_0 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
I'm still bitter that people labeled Jon Huntsman "unelectable" right off the bat
[–]steve-d### 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
He was such a better candidate than Romney ever was.
[–]SpoonHanded -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
If an individual idolized hitler on a conservative board, they would be ostracized. This is an extreme example
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
This is an extreme example
And irrelevant to the discussion.
[–]SpoonHanded -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Well his extremities nullified the substance of his argument. The holocaust has come to make all fascist ideology as a faux pas. I am explaining the negative reaction to your utilization of extremist figureheads.
[+]matthewhale スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Occasionally, she has good tits.
FIFY
[+][削除されました] 1 年 前 (5子コメント)
[–]I_am_salad### 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
Do I detect... Envy?
[–]EnviousDan 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Guilty as charged!
[–]ZeeHanzenShwanz 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
GO team purple!!! Uhh wait a sec...
[–]vriemeister -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
I'm a libertarian. While you are watching your teams, I'm in the parking lot keying your cars! (upvote if someone can make this make sense)
[–]armedohiocitizen 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Why would you key my car? WHYYYYYYYY? Whyyyy? (Softly sobbing). whhy?
[+][削除されました] 1 年 前 (106子コメント)
[–]Ovedya2011 8 ポイント9 ポイント10 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
For the record, I think he was guilty...
Of what? The rest of your statement makes no sense.
[–]drdelius 15 ポイント16 ポイント17 ポイント 1 年 前 (82子コメント)
Is it so hard to believe he was innocent, not because he was morally right, but because the laws pertaining to his case purposely allow such actions?
He was afraid, and therefore according to the state of Florida, he had the right to take violent, lethal action.
[–]masters1125### 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
What if Trayvon was afraid of the larger man in the vehicle that was following him? Does that mean he had the right to take violent action against Zimmerman? This whole thing is a mess and we can't know what really happened, but it's the laws that are misguided and broken.
[–]JoshuaQuail 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 1 年 前 (68子コメント)
he wasn't afraid, he was being physically assaulted.
[–]wtiger46 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 1 年 前 (67子コメント)
Another way to put it is that he was losing a fight that he started, so he shot the guy.
[–]Impune 31 ポイント32 ポイント33 ポイント 1 年 前 (29子コメント)
Or... he was losing a fight that Martin started. A tiny detail that could have huge implications on whether Zimmerman's actions were justifiable.
[–]brsfan519 16 ポイント17 ポイント18 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
And since there is not enough evidence backing up that tiny detail, not guilty.
[–]Impune 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Eh? It was likely exactly evidence suggesting that rendition of events that delivered the not guilty verdict: Zimmerman, regardless as to whether he was the original antagonizer (by following Martin in his car), was seen as the "defender" in the actual physical altercation (because he was on his back, being punched by Martin).
[–]KingGorilla -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 年 前 (26子コメント)
Both were fools. Zimmerman had a gun and was looking for trouble. Trayvon started the fight.
[–]--- 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 年 前 (24子コメント)
Zimmerman had a gun and was looking for trouble.
Baseless assumption. How can you prove that Zimmerman was looking for trouble?
[–]KingGorilla 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 年 前 (16子コメント)
The dispatcher asked Zimmerman if he was following him. When Zimmerman answered, "yeah", the dispatcher said, "We don't need you to do that."
[–][deleted] -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
The same dispatcher that told Zimmerman to let him know if he does anything else?
[–]--- -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前* (14子コメント)
looking for trouble
implies malice on Zimmerman's party. Following Trayvon is part of Zimmerman's duty as the nightwatch. The suspect might run away before the cops get there The person whom Zimmerman suspects of casing houses could have ran away, so Zimmerman was keeping an eye on where he goes.
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント-11 ポイント 1 年 前 (6子コメント)
Can't prove anything outside of mathematics, doesn't mean it's baseless.
[–]--- 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (5子コメント)
Definition of prove
Demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument
Do you have any evidence to support your claim that Zim was "looking for trouble"?
[–]Impune 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
That's my personal take on it. And that's what I'm assuming was going through the minds of the jurors.
[–]chaeloha 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 1 年 前 (12子コメント)
I don't think the pudgy Mexican wannabe cop started a fight with some physically fit young dude. Martin should've just told him off, but chose to pound his face in and got shot. Both of them were stupid, no one deserved to die that day, but neither of them went into that situation intent on killing the other based on the facts we know
[–]JordoomLibertarian Conservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Both were dumb.
One was aggressive and dumb. And he paid for it, because he lived in one of the few areas of the world where it isn't illegal to defend yourself against dumb, violent attackers.
[+]UnconfirmedCat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 1 年 前 (9子コメント)
He was nowhere near pudgy when the event took place. He actually gained over 100 pounds between when he posted bail and the start of the court case. Some wonder if it was intentional as it was about a 3 month time span. Zimmerman had also been convicted of felonies prior, he was no wimpy dude.
[–]WyoVolunteer 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
If he was a felon he wouldn't have been issued a concealed carry permit and he would be in jail for being in possession of a firearm.
[–]MetricConversionBot 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
100 pounds ≈ 45.36 kg
*In Development | FAQ | WHY *
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
IF SOMEONE NEEDS THIS INFO THEY CAN GOOGLE IT. LETS JUST POLLUTE THIS WEBSITE WITH BOTS FOR EVERYTHING.
[–][deleted] 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (3子コメント)
Felons can't legally own guns. Lets be realistic now.
[–]UnconfirmedCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
From the Orange County, FL Circuit Court Clerk of the Court Records page: http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/default.aspx
2005-CF-009525-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL 10/05/1983 07/18/2005 Div 10 OKane, Julie H Criminal Felony Closed CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITH VIOLENCE BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2005-MM-010436-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL 10/05/1983 07/18/2005 Orlando Miller, W Michael Misdemeanor Closed CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITHOUT VIOLENCE 2005-DR-012980-O ZUAZO, VERONICA vs. ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M 08/09/2005 Div 44 44, TBA Domestic Violence Closed - SRS 2005-DR-013069-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M vs. ZUAZO, VERONICA A 08/10/2005 Div 46 White, Keith F Domestic Violence Closed - SRS
2005-CF-009525-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL 10/05/1983
07/18/2005 Div 10 OKane, Julie H
Criminal Felony Closed
CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITH VIOLENCE BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2005-MM-010436-A-O ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL 10/05/1983
07/18/2005 Orlando Miller, W Michael
Misdemeanor Closed
CR-RESISTING OFFICER WITHOUT VIOLENCE 2005-DR-012980-O
ZUAZO, VERONICA vs. ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M
08/09/2005 Div 44 44, TBA
Domestic Violence Closed - SRS
2005-DR-013069-O
ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE M vs. ZUAZO, VERONICA A
08/10/2005 Div 46 White, Keith F
As his father is a powerful judge, he was extremely influential in getting these things closed on technicalities. Does this man sound wimpy to you?
[–]kks1236Natural Rights Conservative -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
First of all, his own martial arts teacher called him wimp and unsuitable for martial arts. Second of all, do you think Martin was some kind of golden child who did everything right? I challenge you to look up Trayvon Martin's criminal records and show me whether he was not the violent, drug user that he was. Here's most of his criminal history: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120504/Trayvon-Martin-case-He-suspended-times-caught-burglary-tool.html Includes drug use/possesion as well as burglary.
[–]monobarreller 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Felon's can't own guns? That doesn't work with my premise...therefore you're racist!
[–]chaeloha -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
No he had not been convicted of felonies prior, or he would not legally be able to own a handgun.
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (10子コメント)
Law says : in fear for your life, you can is deadly force.
[–]jianadaren1 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (9子コメント)
Do they use a subjective test or an objective one? I.e. do you just have to believe you're re in danger or does it require that a reasonable person would have felt in danger?
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (8子コメント)
Which are both subjective. There is no purely objective test.
Police officers have shot people because they came at them suddenly or reached into their pocket with no actual weapon on them. You get the same charge if you rob someone with your hand in your pocket pretending to have a gun as you would actually pulling out a gun.
But a civilian shooting anyone would normally need a little more evidence on their side.
1) the person being in your property without permission. Preferably at night.
2) the person physically hurting you or showing a weapon.
Either of those would probably be a good case for self defense.
[–]jianadaren1 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (7子コメント)
My question was a legal one. Tests are considered objective when you ignore how the person actually felt.
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (6子コメント)
I'm aware what the word means. You can't exactly test whether a person felt in danger without asking how they felt can you...
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント 1 年 前 (12子コメント)
Yes, but Florida's laws allow for that.
[–]osoII 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 1 年 前 (11子コメント)
No they don't
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント 1 年 前 (10子コメント)
Stand your ground allows him to shoot the kid, despite him starting the fight. That's how it works and that's why the law is stupid. It let's this situation occur. Zimmerman was CLEARLY guilty of stalking and potentially obstruction of justice, but not murder. To say he should be in jail for murder under Florida law is to advocate judicial vigilantism.
[–]osoII 15 ポイント16 ポイント17 ポイント 1 年 前 (6子コメント)
No they don't, stand your ground laws don't do that in any way. Also, Zimmerman did not use stand your ground laws, and they are not relevant to this case at all.
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-15 ポイント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント 1 年 前 (5子コメント)
lolwut
[–]Ovedya2011 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
Stand your ground allows him to shoot the kid...
No, it allows people to defend themselves when threatened with serious bodily harm or death.
[–]kelustu 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
Which involved shooting the kid in an incident he caused.
[+]samura1jack スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
'Murica
[–]samura1jack 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
I regret nothing.
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント-7 ポイント 1 年 前 (9子コメント)
No, because that's the fact of the case and the verdict the jury ruled.
Complain all you want about the law (and I'll be right there taking your side), and call Zimmerman a racist if you want, he probably is, but he's not guilty. Guilt means he broke a law.
[–]WyoVolunteer 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 年 前 (3子コメント)
Zimmerman is mixed race and has black people in his family. There's literally no proof he's a racist.
He profiled a young black man because that was the composition of the people robbing his neighbourhood. Why don't you join the TSA and strip search some disabled veterans?
[–]kelustu -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
That escalated quickly, and if you want to talk proof, there's not even implication of TSA groping. Not a single one of those "cases" had any evidence, even the videos that "proved" it really just showed small children complaining. Small children complain about everything.
Zimmerman has called the cops multiple times in the past about people in the neighborhood he thought were suspicious. Every one of them was black.
Also, I don't think I've ever been to a subreddit so hostile to opposing opinions. I've been swarmed with downvotes for trying to have a discussion and I'm agreeing with the circlejerk opinion, adding a small condition.
[–]TNT_Banana 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Can Zimmerman help that the majority of crime in that area is committed by blacks? To call someone a racist based off of reports to the police of suspicious behavior is ridiculous. There have been news stories investigating Zimmerman's interactions with the black community. He went into business with a black man. Most people who despise someone because of the color of their skin don't voluntarily make them their business partner.
He voted for Obama. Your only racist if you didn't vote Obama. /s
You can't take one piece of fact and make an opinion. Well, I guess you can but it makes you look foolish. Before you can opine that he's a racist you really should view all the facts. Those facts just don't add up to your opinion. You're either uninformed or are really having to work at keeping that opinion.
[–]AJinxyCat -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Well it just so happens that your condition is pure speculation on your part.
[–]brsfan519 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (4子コメント)
Guilt means he was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have broken a law.
[–]kelustu -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 1 年 前 (3子コメント)
That means he was proven guilty. You can be guilty of breaking a crime without having been proven guilty.
[–]brsfan519 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
but he's not guilty. Guilt means he broke a law.
You were implying that he didn't break a law, which was not proven (or disproved).
His innocence is presumed. Innocent means not guilty. Until he can be proven guilty, he is not guilty.
[–][deleted] 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Innocence is presumed by the state, people are actually free to make their own assumptions.
[–]xDOLANx -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 1 年 前 (18子コメント)
Using legal jargon here, he isn't innocent. He is not guilty. There's a difference
[–]CBruce 21 ポイント22 ポイント23 ポイント 1 年 前 (17子コメント)
Innocence is presumed. The prosecution failed to convince a jury to find him guilty, therefore he remains innocent.
[–]xDOLANx -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (5子コメント)
The verdict is not innocent, it's "not guilty"
To say he is innocent is to say he did nothing wrong. Maybe he defended himself, maybe he didn't. My issue is that he is still responsible for Martin's death. The 911 operator told him clearly not to pursue the 'suspicious person' he had called in, and he did just the opposite.
Guilty of murder? Perhaps not.
Responsible for the senseless death of a young man? Entirely.
[–]CBruce 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Again, innocence is presumed. He was found not guilty of the crimes he was charged with, that verdict has no bearing on any non-crimes he was not charged with.
And Martin is the one entirely responsible for his own demise by attacking Zimmerman and putting him in fear of his life.
[–]WyoVolunteer 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Justifiable homocide.
[–]Ovedya2011 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (2子コメント)
Senseless? The only senseless aspect of that scenario was the fact that a young, obviously troubled, young man tried to kill another human being with his bare hands. Consider what may have happened had Zimmerman not been armed and Trayvon was permitted to continue slamming his head into the concrete.
[–]xDOLANx 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
My point is, if Zimmerman doesn't actively follow this kid for no reason (he was just walking down the road), Martin doesn't die. He just walks on back to where he came from
[–]Ovedya2011 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
So then Zimmerman becomes the provocateur for simply observing the activity of a suspicious person in a neighborhood that had had several break-ins in the course of just a few months? I don't buy it. Sure, we can look back now and argue that it perhaps could have been avoided, but that's still a decision any reasonable person could have made. Criminalizing Zimmerman for being a concerned citizen is simply absurd in my mind.
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 1 年 前 (10子コメント)
I think the prosecution proved his innocence. He shot the kid, no one denies that. He made poor choices that were entirely his own fault that led to that situation happening, no one denies that (the cops told him to stop following the kid and he continued to stalk him), but he broke no laws. Stand your ground allows him to do exactly what he did.
[–]CBruce 18 ポイント19 ポイント20 ポイント 1 年 前 (8子コメント)
He told a 9/11 dispatcher he was following, the dispatcher told him they 'didn't need him to do that'. This was not an enforceable command from law enforcement because what he was doing was not illegal, and a dispatcher has no legal authority to order anyone to do anything.
Stand your ground laws never came into play. Those laws protect an individual who has used deadly force for justifiable self-defense by establishing that a person faced with a threat has not duty to retreat from said threat. When that threat has you pinned to the ground, pumelling you in the face, slamming you head into concrete, verbally threatening to kill while reaching for your gun, you don't have the ability to retreat, duty or not. With or without SYG laws the outcome would have been the same.
Zimmerman made some bad decisions, but according to his statement and what evidence there is, he did nothing illegal. But Zimmerman bad decisions pale in comparison to Martin's decision to ambush and attack.
[–]kelustu -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Still a poor decision. And I'm defending the argument that he did nothing illegal.
[–]calle30 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (6子コメント)
And you got that info about the ambush and attack from ... what source exactly ?
[–]AJinxyCat 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 年 前 (5子コメント)
The evidence presented in court?
[–]calle30 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 年 前 (4子コメント)
So that young man actually ambushed zimmerman ?
Thinking about it, that ambush could be considered self defense too. I mean, he obviously saw a strange man getting out of his car and following him.
Almost like if he stood his ground.
[–]AJinxyCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
I don't even have the energy to explain all the reasons you are being a speculating asshat.
Edit: What I mean to say is if you want to deny evidence accepted in a court of law, I don't know what to tell you
[–]AJinxyCat 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
The ambush is based on evidence presented in court. It absolutely in no way, shape, or form can be considered self-defense.
[–]monobarreller 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Just to nit pic a little bit, the cops never told him to not follow a dispatcher did and after saying it once that he didn't need to follow, proceeded to ask him questions about Trayvon as he followed him. Even though he wasn't disobeying an order, it's disingenuous to say that the dispatcher was being clear on the notion of not following.
[–]kelustu -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
He killed Trayvon, that doesn't make him guilty. People have no idea what the hell they're talking about when it comes to law.
Also, that Ann Coulter picture and quote isn't helping anyone sane take you seriously, conservatives. That would be like liberals quoting Al Sharpton; like him or her all you want, but you're just making yourself look insane to everyone on the outside.
[–]AJinxyCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
To hell with everyone on the outsides opinions. A fact is fact, even if you don't like who's mouth it is coming out of.
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10 ポイント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Same. Small minded conservatives will create any controversy they think they can use.
[+]AtheistConservativeNeoconservative スコアが基準値未満のコメント-20 ポイント-19 ポイント-18 ポイント 1 年 前 (4子コメント)
Because liberals across the country couldn't shut the fuck up about how poor wittle Twayvon needed justice. The death of this one young black man was the worstest thing that could happen.
[–]firstquestion 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 年 前* (2子コメント)
No mature adult would speak and make arguments the way you do. If you were from a good family they would be very embarrassed. You don't even seem to realize that you sound very stupid. Inserting baby talk into your argument has to be the most imbecilic and counter-productive way to dismiss other people. Someday the girls you like will start latching onto the boys who seem grown up and you will be left in the group that didn't make the transition. It may already be too late. I recommend a full overhaul of your speaking and debate styles.
[–]AtheistConservativeNeoconservative 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 年 前 (1子コメント)
My point was that liberals picked up on the death of this thug as the next Kony 2012, never mind the fact that he tried to beat a man to death. I chose to call him "wittle Twayvon" because every goddamn picture of him that the media used was from when he was about 12 and he's just a smiling, little sixth grader.
But for the thousands of other young black guys in boxes, liberals aren't out their holding national candle light vigils, or having national calls for justice. They only difference was that they could use this case to feel good about themselves for fighting against the white man's racism and America's dangerous love of guns.
[–]firstquestion -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
See my earlier comment for why I recommend a full overhaul of your speaking and debate styles. Additionally, how about you drop all of the AM radio-quality shock speech and taxi logic from your comments in r/conservative? Don't you think a highly intellectual approach is the best way to advance your own learning and the community's results? Find a casual joke subreddit like r/politics to shit in.
[–]LiemptMonarchist -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前* (0子コメント)
Indeed. It is not closeminded to notice that is nearly always the left that hoists the flags of "oppression" and "racism" every chance they can possibly get.
[–]surfcorpus -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Liberal is the proper way to say black suppression.
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-26 ポイント-25 ポイント-24 ポイント 1 年 前 (3子コメント)
I hate posts like this. Only a liberal in disguise would ask a question with such an obvious answer. If you need to be told, you really don't belong here.
[–]JaggerA 16 ポイント17 ポイント18 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
"A liberal in disguise"
I think it's time to turn off the fox news there, captain
[–]backnblack92Moderate Conservative 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 年 前* (1子コメント)
people don't read the rules. rule # 2 " Please do not ask: "Why is this here?" or: "How is this Conservative?"
If the community upvotes it then it belongs here.
Conservatives aren't the ones who made this a race issue, that was liberals like Sharpton and Jackson. We are only criticizing their blatant attempt to get people riled up about this case, while they ignore the larger problems that are going on in the community. Trayvon martin getting shot doesn't expose an issue in our society. ~11,000 black men being killed by other black men does expose an issue in our society. One much more important than the current bs the media is jerking over.
edit: and now it's deleted. I'd bet money that person will become one of the people who bitch "/r/conservative deleted my comments because I spoke out against them". I've seen it dozens of times. That guy couldn't take 5 min to read the rules of this sub before posting
I've noticed that every time we get bestof'd we have leftovers that hang around for a week or two. I wish there was a way to exclude this sub from ever being submitted to one of those meta subs.
[–][deleted] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
And despite the rules openly opposing that question, my comment has -23 downvotes while the obviously liberal poster who is trolling our board with that question has over 100 upvotes. Interesting.
[–]hcirtsafonos -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 1 年 前 (0子コメント)
Jesse Jackson and his clone al sharp ton are the biggest democrat/liberal slave sellers in the country
We care about your privacy, and we never spam. By creating an account, you agree to reddit's User Agreement and Privacy Policy. We're proud of them, and you should read them.
π Rendered by PID 2965 on app-102 at 2014-12-16 19:35:00.579200+00:00 running 1b1a7a2 country code: JP.
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Maxmidget 293 ポイント294 ポイント295 ポイント (146子コメント)
[–]MorningLtMtn 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][削除されました] (25子コメント)
[deleted]
[+][削除されました] (2子コメント)
[deleted]
[+][削除されました] (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]steve-d### 19 ポイント20 ポイント21 ポイント (15子コメント)
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント (14子コメント)
[–]steve-d### -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント (12子コメント)
[–]Anal_Explorer 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]steve-d### -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]Anal_Explorer 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]SpoonHanded 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]steve-d### 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]omgwtfbbq0_0 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]steve-d### 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]SpoonHanded -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]SpoonHanded -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]matthewhale スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][削除されました] (5子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]I_am_salad### 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]EnviousDan 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]ZeeHanzenShwanz 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]vriemeister -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]armedohiocitizen 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][削除されました] (106子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]Ovedya2011 8 ポイント9 ポイント10 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]drdelius 15 ポイント16 ポイント17 ポイント (82子コメント)
[–]masters1125### 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]JoshuaQuail 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント (68子コメント)
[–]wtiger46 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント (67子コメント)
[–]Impune 31 ポイント32 ポイント33 ポイント (29子コメント)
[–]brsfan519 16 ポイント17 ポイント18 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]Impune 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]KingGorilla -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント (26子コメント)
[–]--- 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント (24子コメント)
[–]KingGorilla 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント (16子コメント)
[–][deleted] -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]--- -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (14子コメント)
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント-11 ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]--- 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]Impune 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]chaeloha 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント (12子コメント)
[–]JordoomLibertarian Conservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]UnconfirmedCat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]WyoVolunteer 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]MetricConversionBot 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (1子コメント)
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–][deleted] 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]UnconfirmedCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]kks1236Natural Rights Conservative -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]monobarreller 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]chaeloha -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]jianadaren1 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (8子コメント)
[–]jianadaren1 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]Oddblivious 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (6子コメント)
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント (12子コメント)
[–]osoII 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント (11子コメント)
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント-12 ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]osoII 15 ポイント16 ポイント17 ポイント (6子コメント)
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-15 ポイント-14 ポイント-13 ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]Ovedya2011 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]kelustu 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (1子コメント)
[+]samura1jack スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]samura1jack 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント-7 ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]WyoVolunteer 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]kelustu -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]TNT_Banana 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]AJinxyCat -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]brsfan519 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]kelustu -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]brsfan519 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]kelustu 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–][deleted] 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]xDOLANx -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント (18子コメント)
[–]CBruce 21 ポイント22 ポイント23 ポイント (17子コメント)
[–]xDOLANx -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]CBruce 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]WyoVolunteer 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Ovedya2011 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]xDOLANx 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]Ovedya2011 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]kelustu スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]CBruce 18 ポイント19 ポイント20 ポイント (8子コメント)
[–]kelustu -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]calle30 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]AJinxyCat 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]calle30 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]AJinxyCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]AJinxyCat 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]monobarreller 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]kelustu -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]AJinxyCat 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10 ポイント-9 ポイント-8 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]AtheistConservativeNeoconservative スコアが基準値未満のコメント-20 ポイント-19 ポイント-18 ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]firstquestion 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]AtheistConservativeNeoconservative 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]firstquestion -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]LiemptMonarchist -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][削除されました] (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]surfcorpus -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][deleted] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-26 ポイント-25 ポイント-24 ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]JaggerA 16 ポイント17 ポイント18 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]backnblack92Moderate Conservative 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント (1子コメント)
[–][deleted] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]hcirtsafonos -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント (0子コメント)