faetal on 18/7/2013 at 12:03
I'm not sure I've said it was known that Zimmerman was a racist.
Queue on 18/7/2013 at 12:09
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
None of that changes the fact that a 17 year old boy has been shot and killed. That's not okay.
jay-- Are you saying that a 17-year-old cannot possibly be violent, instigate violence, or do something to get himself killed because he's just a kid?
jay pettitt on 18/7/2013 at 12:13
Of course I'm not saying that. And that's utterly not the point. You can't go around shooting 17 year old kids because they are capable of being violent.
Queue on 18/7/2013 at 12:16
So when can you shoot 'em?
And do you have to ask for their ID first?
Muzman on 18/7/2013 at 12:21
Quote Posted by catbarf
Well, I could have worded it better, but you've all missed the point entirely. My point was that when Zimmerman said 'he looks like he's up to no good' and 'like he's on drugs or something', well, he was talking about a teenager who had been found with stolen goods before (which, excuse the less-than-impartial source, (
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/05/01/m-dspd-cover-up-the-curious-case-of-trayvon-martins-backpack-with-stolen-jewelry-and-burglary-tool/) was ignored by police) and had THC in his system, so
maybe Martin actually was behaving in a suspicious manner and mean ol' Zimmerman didn't just accost a perfectly innocent teen purely because he hates black people. Maybe, given Martin's history, he actually was up to no good and Zimmerman's assessment was wholly accurate. I don't know. You don't know. So why are we outright assuming that this suspicion was unwarranted or racially-motivated?
There's a terminology thing here. I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting Zimm is a Klansman in his spare time. The issue is him profiling the kid. Which is a kind of racism (I prefer adding softer degrees to that like prejudice, since racism is such an emotive term and plenty of people think anything that is not actively herding people to gas chambers isn't "racist" as that's as far as the definition goes for them, so the conversation gets a mess quickly). But him being young and male is also a significant factor.
You don't seem to have heard about Zimm's record as a (not really) Neighbourhood Watchman. He was quite clearly an overzealous paranoid nuisance to the police. He doesn't have a clean record either since we're pulling character into this.
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Do you guys seriously believe that Zimmerman initiated a physical confrontation, yet somehow ended up on his back with a dude punching the shit out of his head? Seriously? And if he had been planning on shooting the guy from the get go, why would he wait until he was getting beaten up? For that matter, how would beating the shit out of Zimmerman for following him be justified but following a suspicious looking person while on watch in your neighborhood not be? Am I just being contrarian because everyone is just nodding and agreeing in unison about something they haven't actually spent 30 seconds thinking about themselves?
You haven't spent that long thinking about either, I'm guessing. Zimm sympathetic versions put forward by actual racists and gun advocates circling facebook providing the bulk of the story are they? Here's a wrinkle for you, there was no evidence on Martin that he had been in physical contact with Zimmerman, especially not the sort you get from holding someone's head to beat it against the ground (never mind the sort of, y'know, damage you'd expect from that. Zimm wasn't hospitalised or put under observation for secondary concussion complications). But hey, it was raining a bit so who knows. We don't even know how his wounds got there is the point. He could have banged his face against a pole and fallen over twice.
The phone call testimony has Trayvon saying "get off me" (as in "let me go") before the call ends.
Is it really that hard to imagine Zimmerman grabbing Martin by the arm or something? How do you usually react when someone supicious who has been following you enough to scare you, confronts you, doesn't identify himself as police or anything (coz he can't) tries to grab you, perhaps insistently, at night while you're walking home? You gonna fight him off or just let it happen?
Neighbourhood watch people aren't supposed to do this crap. So we have a guy who has put himself in the position of threatening someone else for no reason and ends up killing the guy. Even without knowing the particulars of the fight, based on everything leading up to it I'm confident in saying he's definitely the bad guy. He is responsible for this situation.
Of course, if the stupid law didn't exist the police might have done the scene properly in the first place and there'd be a lot less questions.
I don't know what you're talking about with the shooting thing. I don't think anyone has suggested anywhere that he was leaping from his truck to shoot down someone. You are still a murderer of sorts if you start a fight and shoot someone in the process though.
faetal on 18/7/2013 at 12:23
Either Zimmerman thought the kid was threatening and should have stayed in his car after calling the police, or he didn't think he was threatening, which raises the question of why call the police in the first place, or he did think he was threatening, but thought "fuck it, I have a gun".
jay pettitt on 18/7/2013 at 12:27
Quote:
So when can you shoot 'em?
And what about Martin?
Can he answer back if he's harassed in the street. Can he challenge someone's authority to do that? Can he push them away? What if it escalates? You seem to be arguing that the law of the land should side with you if you have a gun, and against you if you haven't. And that can't be a good situation.
--edit--
push comes to shove, do you think justice has been served on Martin?
Queue on 18/7/2013 at 12:28
Muzman-- How does anyone know that Zimmerman truly profiled Martin? Who are the ones saying that he did? The prosecution. The news channels. Bloggers. People who what to presume he did. Where is the actual evidence for profiling?
Queue on 18/7/2013 at 12:35
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
And what about Martin?
Can he answer back if he's harassed in the street. Can he challenge someone's authority to do that? Can he push them away? What if it escalates? You seem to be arguing that the law of the land should side with you if you have a gun, and against you if you haven't. And that can't be a good situation.
He has a cellphone. He can call 911, which would avoid violence altogether.
And no, I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that you cannot make age the issue
Quote:
You can't go around shooting 17 year old kids....
when violence occurs, because many of these teens are extremely violent.
And as far as challenging someone's authority, would he have the right to push back or beat down a uniformed cop if he felt threatened?
(edit) Was justice served in regard to Martin? According to Florida law, yes. According to public opinion, no. Which one is right?
Personally, I think it was just an unfortunate incident, and am instead shocked that more people here in the States are not beyond outrage over this: (
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/world/asia/india-school-meal-poisoning/index.html?hpt=hp_t1) http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/world/asia/india-school-meal-poisoning/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 instead of the Martin/Zimmerman case.
jay pettitt on 18/7/2013 at 12:55
So it's okay to shoot someone with a gun, but not okay to hit someone's head?
wtf?
What preceded Martin hitting Zimmerman? Only it's not clear that Zimmerman was walking back from the shops minding his own business before being randomly pounced on. How many opportunities did Zimmerman have to say sorry for bothering you and back away? Was it 0? 2? 3? Was Martin's life or well being in danger at any point?
You're allowing Zimmerman the extenuating context of being in danger, but disallowing Martin the same. I'm not sure we know nearly enough to be able to do that fairly.
And just as importantly, if you've got a gun, is it okay to escalate a situation that increases the likelihood of using the same without being considered responsible at all?
