ot; trayvon martin

User Forum Topic
Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 16, 2013 - 7:07am

guns. self-defense. 2nd am. neighborhood watch, guns make us safer, racial profiling.

I think I could sum up the piggingtonian positions, but not sure on this case...

and etc...

as michael moore said, "if trayvon martin had been white and george zimmerman had been black--do I even need to finish that sentence?"

Submitted by FlyerInHi on July 16, 2013 - 1:38pm.

Blogstar, I have friends who constantly talk about the opportunity to shot someone in self defense. They think that they are joking, i believe they are dead serious. It's that kind of culture that leads to tragic accidents.

Obviously these guys are not my close friends as I can only take so much being around those people.

Z is not guilty of 2nd degree murder. But I believe that he's very much of that culture. He is definitely liable for the loss of life and should pay accordingly.

Submitted by SK in CV on July 16, 2013 - 2:04pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
SK in CV wrote:

The dispatcher never asked him to stop following. What she said was "we don't need you to do that". He didn't claim during his police interrogation that he stopped following. And nobody testified during the trial that he stopped following. There was evidence presented that he never stopped following until the physical altercation began.

Quote:


Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: OK, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: OK.

Dispatcher: Alright sir, what is your name?
Zimmerman: George. He ran.
Dispatcher: Alright George, what's your last name?
Zimmerman: Zimmerman.
Dispatcher: And George, what's the phone number you're calling from?
Zimmerman: xxx-xxx-xxxx
Dispatcher: Alright George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Alright where you gonna meet with them at?
Zimmerman: If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse, and uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left. And then they go past the mailboxes. They'll see my truck.
Dispatcher: OK, what address are you parked in front of?
Zimmerman:Um, I don't know. It's a cut-through, so I don't know the answer.
Dispatcher: OK, do you live in the area?
Zimmerman: Yeah, yeah.
Dispatcher: What's your apartment number?
Zimmerman:It's a home, it's 1950, ah c--- I don't want to give it out loud, I don't know where this kid is.

Then apparently, Zimmerman is one cool collect sociopath liar.

He very well may be a sociopathic liar. But I don't see any evidence of it there. There is no inconsistency between this transcript and the testimony that Zimmerman continued to follow him after he was told that he didn't need to follow.

Submitted by mike92104 on July 16, 2013 - 2:48pm.

The simple fact is that it was Martin who assaulted Zimmerman. Until that point, no crime had been committed by anyone.

I've also been disgusted by the media reporting on this. I don't think Zimmerman would have even been arrested if it wasn't for ll the false reporting by the press trying to spin this as a hate crime.

I definitely feel sorry for Martin and his family. I'm sure Martin had no idea Zimmerman was armed, but I also feel sorry for Zimmerman who has been slandered, libeled, and forced to go through an arrest and trial for a bunch of political BS.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on July 16, 2013 - 3:48pm.

I don't have a problem with public pressure. That's how the world runs.

In the past we has lynch mobs seekIng justice. We had prosecutors prosecuting innocent people just to satisfy the communities' demands for crime solving.

This is just an event in the arc of history. The notoriety brings about a much needed conversation.

Submitted by SD Transplant on July 16, 2013 - 8:31pm.

hmmmmmmm.....he's got some great points

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sL2f0PoqME

Submitted by Reality on July 16, 2013 - 9:20pm.

The prosecution didn't prove its case. But they never really had a case and the initial review had already concluded that. But political considerations forced it to trial.

Much of the media ought to be ashamed of itself for the coverage. Just one example: Zimmerman a "white Hispanic". Really?

Is Obama a white African American?

Submitted by mike92104 on July 16, 2013 - 9:37pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
I don't have a problem with public pressure. That's how the world runs.

In the past we has lynch mobs seekIng justice. We had prosecutors prosecuting innocent people just to satisfy the communities' demands for crime solving.

This is just an event in the arc of history. The notoriety brings about a much needed conversation.

Public pressure is one thing, but when it's being driven by the media misrepresenting the facts,that is a problem. This does highlight a need for conversation, but it's about the media and their relentless pursuit of ratings that would drive them to try to make an obviously innocent man look guilty to stoke racial tensions when race had nothing to do with it.

Submitted by paramount on July 16, 2013 - 10:51pm.

Tragic, certainly.

But to be blunt, we have bigger problems: an ever expanding fascist police state, police brutality, endless wars, IRS, Benghazi, questions about Syria, AP/Michael Hastings.

This was a very convenient diversion for Obama.

Submitted by Cube on July 17, 2013 - 12:21am.

livinincali wrote:
This is in interesting case when you see how people reacted to it. The logic and facts clearly indicated that Zimmerman was not guilty of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. On the other hand the media clearly built up an emotional response in the public which has led people to believe Zimmerman is guilty because of how they feel. We really don't want a justice system that determines justice based on feelings.

livinincali, you might find this take interesting:

http://www.popehat.com/2013/07/15/the-zi...

"[T]he more I observe American culture, the less enthused I am at the notion that a jury's verdict in a criminal case is wrong if it doesn't reflect the collective beliefs of our society."

Submitted by CA renter on July 18, 2013 - 12:19am.

livinincali wrote:
This is in interesting case when you see how people reacted to it. The logic and facts clearly indicated that Zimmerman was not guilty of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. On the other hand the media clearly built up an emotional response in the public which has led people to believe Zimmerman is guilty because of how they feel. We really don't want a justice system that determines justice based on feelings.

Agreed.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 7:19am.

true. so, you're a prosecutor somewhere and you hear these facts in Florida.

Older black male is out at night on his porch and sees a young white kid walking down the street who is looking for a half pound of marijuana from a dealer he knows. Black male adult knows the white kid doesn't belong there, and is sick of white kids coming to his neighborhood and fostering the drug trade. Black male adult starts following white kid, who gets freaked out. Black male adult yells "hey you, what the fuck are you doing in my 'hood? Yeah you, stop and explain what the fuck you are doing here!"

Black male adult corners white teen; teen starts frantically punching the black male. Black male adult is losing the fight when he reaches into his waistband, pulls out a saturday ngiht special and blasts the white kid away. White kid is an honors student in a local white neighborhood who had been accepted to an Ivy League school and was trying to score drugs for a going away party for all his friends, whoa re also goign to ivy league schools.

black male was dressed in gang-like attire; white kid was dressed in preppy button down and khakis and arrived in his physician dad's lexus.

Question: Is the black guy here as innocent as Zimmerman? Clearly the white kid here was more blameworthy in terms of his criminal intent for being in the location. But what about the black male. We definitely don't want "feelings" to intrude, only facts...

Bonus points: you're the prosecutor. Do you think it will be easier to get a conviction on the above facts than on George Z.?

Submitted by livinincali on July 18, 2013 - 7:54am.

squat300 wrote:

Question: Is the black guy here as innocent as Zimmerman? Clearly the white kid here was more blameworthy in terms of his criminal intent for being in the location. But what about the black male. We definitely don't want "feelings" to intrude, only facts...

Bonus points: you're the prosecutor. Do you think it will be easier to get a conviction on the above facts than on George Z.?

Hopefully the jury would come to the same conclusion and find him innocent. Or some appeals judge would eventually come to that conclusion.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 8:40am.

What if the white teen was only in the neighborhood to help a disabled black kid as part of a big brother program? Change anything? I know you think the black guy here with the unregistered gun was within his rights to chase down the white teen who looked out of place...,but do you think the black guys trial odds look good?

Appeals courts reverse only a tiny percentage of cases and only deal with legal errors not issues of fact, which are for the jury to decide.

Submitted by SK in CV on July 18, 2013 - 8:45am.

squat300 wrote:
What if the white teen was only in the neighborhood to help a disabled black kid as part of a big brother program? Change anything? I know you think the black guy here with the unregistered gun was within his rights to chase down the white teen who looked out of place...,but do you think the black guys trial odds look good?

Appeals courts reverse only a tiny percentage of cases and only deal with legal errors not issues of fact, which are for the jury to decide.

The trial odds, at least in Florida, aren't near as good for the black defendant as the white defendant, if he ends up with an all white jury. A single African American on the jury, and his odds are about the same.

http://today.duke.edu/2012/04/jurystudy

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 9:24am.

There's facts...

There's feelings...

And there's no clear line between them...

Submitted by outtamojo on July 18, 2013 - 10:43am.

squat300 wrote:
true. so, you're a prosecutor somewhere and you hear these facts in Florida.

Older black male is out at night on his porch and sees a young white kid walking down the street who is looking for a half pound of marijuana from a dealer he knows. Black male adult knows the white kid doesn't belong there, and is sick of white kids coming to his neighborhood and fostering the drug trade. Black male adult starts following white kid, who gets freaked out. Black male adult yells "hey you, what the fuck are you doing in my 'hood? Yeah you, stop and explain what the fuck you are doing here!"

Black male adult corners white teen; teen starts frantically punching the black male. Black male adult is losing the fight when he reaches into his waistband, pulls out a saturday ngiht special and blasts the white kid away. White kid is an honors student in a local white neighborhood who had been accepted to an Ivy League school and was trying to score drugs for a going away party for all his friends, whoa re also goign to ivy league schools.

black male was dressed in gang-like attire; white kid was dressed in preppy button down and khakis and arrived in his physician dad's lexus.

Question: Is the black guy here as innocent as Zimmerman? Clearly the white kid here was more blameworthy in terms of his criminal intent for being in the location. But what about the black male. We definitely don't want "feelings" to intrude, only facts...

Bonus points: you're the prosecutor. Do you think it will be easier to get a conviction on the above facts than on George Z.?

Funny, that's almost the same thing I envisioned except it was the Griswolds taking a wrong turn on their vacation and some black guy asks them if they have drugs in their station wagon then when the Griswolds try to speed away in panic they are all shot dead cause the black guy felt like they were gonna run him over.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 11:25am.

A black man running down the street as fast as he can in a white neighborhood.

A white man running down the street as fast as he can in a black neighborhood.

Do you think it likely they're running for the same reason?

Submitted by jstoesz on July 18, 2013 - 12:52pm.

Scardey, I think you are falling for the "all else equal" fallacy.

If all else between the two men is identical but the color of their skin. Meaning they have the same clothing, mannerisms, facial expressions, etc. I doubt many would judge the runners differently.

Now the questions is are some of those other characteristics fair to judge on. Seems to me, sometimes yes, sometimes no. Hows that for muddying the waters.

Submitted by jstoesz on July 18, 2013 - 12:55pm.

I think there is a dave barry latin term for that...
Ceteris paribus.

Submitted by outtamojo on July 18, 2013 - 1:17pm.

squat300 wrote:
A black man running down the street as fast as he can in a white neighborhood.

A white man running down the street as fast as he can in a black neighborhood.

Do you think it likely they're running for the same reason?

I think most people would answer no. I thought it hilarious when New York Giant Victor Cruz tweeted

"Thoroughly confused. Zimmerman doesn't last a year before the hood catches up to him."

Is that not profiling the hood?

Is not the lesson here don't go where you don't fit in? How un-American have we become...

Submitted by FlyerInHi on July 18, 2013 - 1:40pm.

Yep, feelings is how people decide based in the incomplete facts they have.

My personal feeling is the Zimmerman needs to be convicted of something and go to prison. Otherwise there is no justice.

In talking to friends and acquaintances one issue that came up again an again was "what did Martin expect dressed like a thug in a white neighborhood?".

That's a very establishment point of view. I tend to be anti establishment simply because the establishment has too many protectors already. It doesn't need more.

I'm happy that the Zimmerman trial causes us to reflect on some ugly parts of our society. I'm also glad that Dzohar Tsarnaev is on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 1:47pm.

Eric holder, black, got stopped while running; probably looked as joggerly as your avg white dude who is so unlikely to get stopped running.

Submitted by CA renter on July 18, 2013 - 1:52pm.

squat300 wrote:
A black man running down the street as fast as he can in a white neighborhood.

A white man running down the street as fast as he can in a black neighborhood.

Do you think it likely they're running for the same reason?

How about a white kid with a shaved head, neck and face tattoos, and a "methy" look about him? Think he'd be treated the same in any neighborhood as a clean-cut kid of any color?

The fact is that all animals profile. It's a survival tactic. The "dangerous" looking animal/thing is never going to be treated the same as something more benign looking. It's not about color, but about culture. People who **look** like they are criminals (and many of them try their damndest to look like criminals) will be treated like criminals. They will be watched more closely and people will be on their guard around them, ready to fight if need be. Why would anyone expect any different?

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 1:51pm.

jstoesz wrote:
Scardey, I think you are falling for the "all else equal" fallacy.

If all else between the two men is identical but the color of their skin. Meaning they have the same clothing, mannerisms, facial expressions, etc. I doubt many would judge the runners differently.

Now the questions is are some of those other characteristics fair to judge on. Seems to me, sometimes yes, sometimes no. Hows that for muddying the waters.

I'm willing to bet the vast majority of people, and cops, are going to say it is statistically more likely that the black guy is running as fast as he can for a bad reason than the white guy and therefore more reasonable to stop him, all other factors being identical and that the white guys trying to get to his max heart rate.

Submitted by CA renter on July 18, 2013 - 1:54pm.

squat300 wrote:

I'm willing to bet the vast majority of people, and cops, are going to say it is statistically more likely that the black guy is running as fast as he can for a bad reason than the white guy and therefore more reasonable to stop him, all other factors being identical and that the white guys trying to get to his max heart rate.

Also true, both the statistics and this being the reason for people feeling this way. Again, why do you think people should ignore common sense?

Submitted by scaredyclassic on July 18, 2013 - 1:57pm.

I don't ... I just don't think we should pretend that we judge people on trial solely on "facts" and not on the thousands of feelings, hunches and statistical intuitions we impart to a situation.

I'm not saying the Zimmerman jury got it wrong. I don't know the Florida laws. It sounds like they were pretty good about following the letter if the law and if so I commend them for it.

However, what makes the jury sometimes want to be punctilious about the law and sometimes not may be matters unrelated to pure fact, if there even is such a thing...

Submitted by FlyerInHi on July 18, 2013 - 2:07pm.

Squat's point was that people don't decide based on objective cold facts alone.

As you said, CAr, the way people look and behave affect how others feel about facts.

My friend told me a couple days ago that Bob Filner just looks like a sexual predator. She would not trust her kids anywhere near him. Fair or not?

Submitted by CA renter on July 18, 2013 - 2:14pm.

I can't comment on Florida law because I understand it even less (far less) than you do.

The fact is that if people want to do something about racism , the next step MUST come from within the African-American community. I don't think the trial verdict was a result of racism, but the hysteria and riots, etc. before and after the trial are the result of racism from all sides. They, as a whole community, need to stand up and take responsibility for their role in racism against black people -- and theirs is the biggest role, IMHO.

If they want their kids to not be treated like criminals (or experience the racism that results from this stereotype), then they need to embrace and enforce an anti-criminal/anti-gang culture within their own communities, and it has to be on all levels. They need to stop having children out of wedlock which only exacerbates the never-ending cycle of poverty and criminal behavior, and they need to stop excusing criminal behavior by blaming it on "whitey" or other external forces that have nothing to do with their kids' criminal behavior.

By embracing "black music" that denigrates women, other black people, white people, etc. they are fueling the fire of racism as well. They need to put a better, more positive face on "Black Society" in a number of ways, and that can only be done from the inside. Time to stop blaming all of their ills on the white man and start doing more to better themselves.

Submitted by outtamojo on July 18, 2013 - 2:20pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Yep, feelings is how people decide based in the incomplete facts they have.

My personal feeling is the Zimmerman needs to be convicted of something and go to prison. Otherwise there is no justice.

In talking to friends and acquaintances one issue that came up again an again was "what did Martin expect dressed like a thug in a white neighborhood?".

That's a very establishment point of view. I tend to be anti establishment simply because the establishment has too many protectors already. It doesn't need more.

I'm happy that the Zimmerman trial causes us to reflect on some ugly parts of our society. I'm also glad that Dzohar Tsarnaev is on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine.

Very much agree. At the very least Zimmerman should be prohibited form owning a gun ever again
as all the genius had to do was pull it out in the first place and then the odds of a physical altercation drop to nearly zero. Seems like he allowed engagement knowing he had a gun and surmised rightly that once things became physical he could pull it out and justify shooting someone.
I am terrified for my son knowing the stupid things males do as teens and fear the idiocy and poor judgement of the establishment and their supposed common sense.

Submitted by CA renter on July 18, 2013 - 2:23pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Squat's point was that people don't decide based on objective cold facts alone.

As you said, CAr, the way people look and behave affect how others feel about facts.

My friend told me a couple days ago that Bob Filner just looks like a sexual predator. She would not trust her kids anywhere near him. Fair or not?

All too often, intuition is the only thing that will protect you from a sexual or other violent attack. I can't blame a mother for going with her "feelings" when it comes to protecting her kids. I do it all the time, too, as I'm sure most other mothers do. Whether that's fair or not doesn't really matter to most of us.

And this leads right back around to "racism" and criminal appearance...

Comment viewing options

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