Activism Discussion: Established Fact: Zimmerman Was Not "ordered" Not To Follow Martin

Established Fact: Zimmerman Was Not "ordered" Not To Follow Martin
Posts: 145

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)

George Plimpton
2012-06-07 11:51:58 EST
This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
just enough.

1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/

2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
lawful police orders to civilians

3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
operation


Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.

MarkA
2012-06-07 14:55:30 EST
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:

> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
> just enough.
>
> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>
> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
> lawful police orders to civilians
>
> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
> operation
>
>
> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.

Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good idea
to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and not have
trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a 9 mm
hanging heavy on their hip.

--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock


Scout
2012-06-07 16:41:43 EST


"MarkA" <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2012.06.07.18.55.28.4890@nowhere.invalid...
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
>> just enough.
>>
>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>
>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
>> lawful police orders to civilians
>>
>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>> operation
>>
>>
>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>
> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good idea
> to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and not have
> trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a 9 mm
> hanging heavy on their hip.

First you tell us to leave it to the police, but then you claim you don't
want trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a
9mm....

So which is it?




George Plimpton
2012-06-07 16:54:30 EST
On 6/7/2012 11:55 AM, MarkA wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
>> just enough.
>>
>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>
>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
>> lawful police orders to civilians
>>
>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>> operation
>>
>>
>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>
> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good idea
> to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and not have
> trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes

No evidence he was "trigger-happy" or that he had delusions of being
like Clint Eastwood. This is just your moronic political narrative.

MarkA
2012-06-08 08:15:05 EST
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 16:41:43 -0400, Scout wrote:

>
>
> "MarkA" <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
> news:pan.2012.06.07.18.55.28.4890@nowhere.invalid...
>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but
>>> here's just enough.
>>>
>>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>>
>>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to
>>> issue lawful police orders to civilians
>>>
>>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that
>>> is
>>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>>> operation
>>>
>>>
>>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>>
>> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good
>> idea to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and
>> not have trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with
>> a 9 mm hanging heavy on their hip.
>
> First you tell us to leave it to the police, but then you claim you don't
> want trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a
> 9mm....
>
> So which is it?

Police are trained in how to prevent a situation from escalating to the
point of an unarmed civilian getting shot. It may not always work, but
that's how they're trained. Any officer that shows a pattern of being a
trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannabe is going to wind up on the
unemployment line.

--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock


MarkA
2012-06-08 08:15:55 EST
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:54:30 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:

> On 6/7/2012 11:55 AM, MarkA wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>
>>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but
>>> here's just enough.
>>>
>>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>>
>>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to
>>> issue lawful police orders to civilians
>>>
>>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that
>>> is
>>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>>> operation
>>>
>>>
>>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>>
>> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good
>> idea to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and
>> not have trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes
>
> No evidence he was "trigger-happy" or that he had delusions of being like
> Clint Eastwood. This is just your moronic political narrative.

No evidence at all, if you don't count the dead nigger in the gutter.

--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock


George Plimpton
2012-06-08 10:48:45 EST
On 6/8/2012 5:15 AM, MarkA wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:54:30 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>
>> On 6/7/2012 11:55 AM, MarkA wrote:
>>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but
>>>> here's just enough.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>>>
>>>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>>>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to
>>>> issue lawful police orders to civilians
>>>>
>>>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that
>>>> is
>>>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>>>> operation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>>>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>>>
>>> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good
>>> idea to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and
>>> not have trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes
>>
>> No evidence he was "trigger-happy" or that he had delusions of being like
>> Clint Eastwood. This is just your moronic political narrative.
>
> No evidence at all, if you don't count the dead nigger in the gutter.

The dead kid is not evidence of what you claim.

Waldo Tunnel
2012-06-08 11:17:57 EST
On Jun 7, 8:51 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> This is simply a fact.

You're half right. It ain't a fact but you are simple. QED

Waldo Tunnel
2012-06-08 11:22:48 EST
On Jun 7, 11:55 am, MarkA <nob...@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
> > This is simply a fact.  Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
> > just enough.
>
> > 1.  Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>
> > 2.  Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
> >      not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
> >      lawful police orders to civilians
>
> > 3.  Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
> >      otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
> >      operation
>
> > Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin.  The
> > race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>
> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good idea
> to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and not have
> trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a 9 mm
> hanging heavy on their hip.

But Plimp--the paper tiger--is one of those 4-F slackers who think a
gun makes him macho. The coward never served his country.


George Plimpton
2012-06-08 11:27:56 EST
On 6/8/2012 8:22 AM, Waldo Tunnel wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:55 am, MarkA<nob...@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:51:58 -0700, George Plimpton wrote:
>>> This is simply a fact. Not much elaboration of it is needed, but here's
>>> just enough.
>>
>>> 1. Following someone is not illegal /per se/
>>
>>> 2. Police dispatchers who speak with civilian callers on the phone are
>>> not sworn law enforcement officers; they have no authority to issue
>>> lawful police orders to civilians
>>
>>> 3. Even sworn l.e.o. cannot order civilians not to do something that is
>>> otherwise legal and that isn't interfering with a lawful police
>>> operation
>>
>>> Zimmerman was not "ordered" by the police not to follow Martin. The
>>> race-obsessed anti-Zimmerman lynch mob needs to find something else.
>>
>> Zimmerman was doing his civic duty by demonstrating why it is a good idea
>> to leave investigating suspicious individuals to the police, and not have
>> trigger-happy Clint Eastwood wannbes prowling the streets with a 9 mm
>> hanging heavy on their hip.
>
> But

But it is an established fact that no police "order" was given to Mr.
Zimmerman. In fact, no police order *could* have been given, because
Mr. Plimpton never spoke with a sworn police officer until they arrived
at the scene of the shooting.



Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron