UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-13-2013, 11:34 PM   #26
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
If Zimmerman is white, then Obama is white. There are certainly racial issues surrounding the case itself, but please don't turn this into a white on black racial issue when it isn't one. The dude is latino.
Highly doubt that is what he was getting at deo.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2013, 11:36 PM   #27
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
FW, I'm 15. If I walked down the street and started beating up someone, I'd only have myself to blame if I got seriously hurt. That argument is bullshit. Him being a minor doesn't mean he doesn't have basic brain function.

And as per your points:

1. WHAT ZIMMERMAN DID WASN'T AGAINST THE LAW. WHAT MARTIN DID WAS. That's all there is to it.

2. That's yet another problem altogether. But that's beyond the letter of the law, unfortunately as it is. Martin's duty was to call the cops. But he had no business attacking Zimmerman. That much is certain and that part is 100% a crime in itself.

3. See above.

4. He was bleeding from his nose and had lacerations on the back of his head. That much in itself would be enough for me, at least. If he was being paranoid which seems likely, being attacked could have been enough. But he definitely had injuries and I think it's likely that could have easily led to him being afraid for his life.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2013, 11:38 PM   #28
Ethereal
Creepy Hand Person
 
Ethereal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,988
Send a message via AIM to Ethereal Send a message via MSN to Ethereal Send a message via Skype™ to Ethereal
tangential, but being latin@ and coming from a primarily hispanic/latin@ area, there is a LOT of prejudice and discrimination against black people and afrolatin@s from white-passing latin@s such as myself. yes, there is some inflation regarding the racism in the case, but that does not make it dismissable.

and about the stand your ground law, this case leads me to question its application x

>zimmerman... obama...

zimmerman is white, though; his father is white and his mother is latina. i don't know if he considers himself multiracial, but he's definitely white.
__________________

Last edited by Ethereal; 07-13-2013 at 11:52 PM.
Ethereal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2013, 11:39 PM   #29
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazeVA View Post
Highly doubt that is what he was getting at deo.
Maybe, maybe not, but this is an issue I've seen several people try to use as a point now on other social sites when it simply isn't accurate. Such is the reason why I felt the need to say something.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 01:12 AM   #30
Tyranidos
beebooboobopbooboobop
 
Tyranidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Krusty Krab
Posts: 3,800
Send a message via AIM to Tyranidos Send a message via MSN to Tyranidos
Tyranitar

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
PikaGod brought up the fact that Martin didn't want to call the cops because he was a young black male. That was just my rejoinder to that part, not any other portion of the argument, unless of course it becomes relevant again.
If Trayvon called the cops, there's a chance they would have arrested him instead of Zimmerman, which is what PikaGod might have been insinuating. Police in this country tend to behave prejudiced against blacks more than any other racial/ethnic group. I've seen more black people be pulled over by cops than any other race/ethnicity by far.
__________________
Tyranidos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 03:47 AM   #31
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Would Americans reading this thread say that it's fair that my immediate reaction when seeing this verdict was "well, it's America, of course the black guy loses"? Because I had that reaction and immediately felt bad for just writing off your entire country as a cesspit of racism and hypocrisy but then I see that much of the internet thinks the same. Truth is not decided by majority opinion but I know nothing of the case so I didn't know what to think.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 05:10 AM   #32
Lady Kuno
The hostess with the mostess
 
Lady Kuno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 226,522
This ruling is retarded and I highly doubt anything the kid said or did required shooting him dead.
__________________
JUST NUKE THE FUCKING SUN


PROUD OWNER OF A MISSINGNO. IN FIZZY BUBBLES
Lady Kuno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 05:45 AM   #33
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Emperor View Post
This ruling is retarded and I highly doubt anything the kid said or did required shooting him dead.
He attacked Zimmerman.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 05:51 AM   #34
PikaGod
Marsh Badge
 
PikaGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,736
Zimmerman has a history of alleged domestic violence and resisting police arrest as well as abusing 911 calls in regards to 'suspicious, black youths'.
__________________
Fizzy Bubbles: Karmas
PikaGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 06:22 AM   #35
SoS
Ducks gonna duck
 
SoS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,824
So if the "stand your ground" defence applies to Zimmerman, why doesn't it apply to Marissa Alexander?

For those who haven't heard: Alexander fired a "warning shot" at a wall in order to try and frighten off her husband, who was known to be abusive, and whom she felt very threatened by, and received twenty years for her crime.

Now, I am aware that obviously she discharged a weapon in a public place. Firing at the wall was dangerous, and someone could easily have been hit on the other side. But then again, the same could apply to Zimmerman. What if he'd missed when shooting Martin and hit someone else?

I'm probably phrasing this badly, so I'll let someone more intelligent and more nuanced than I take this one up.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
Why are you always a pretty princess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son_of_Shadows View Post
Because I look damn good in a dress.
Fizzy Bubbles Team
PASBL
Wild Future
SoS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 06:41 AM   #36
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Because you don't fire warning shots. You just don't. If you're shooting a gun, either you're doing target practice, or you are attempting to kill a man. There is never any in-between. If she was firing a warning shot, then she wasn't feeling threatened for her life- THAT'S WHAT THE LAW STATES. And that is the entire point of gun safety. She might, MIGHT, have had a chance if she had actually shot her husband, but since she didn't, that's what happened.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 06:43 AM   #37
SoS
Ducks gonna duck
 
SoS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,824
Ok, speaking as a man from Northern Ireland, that is the single most bullshit law I have ever heard in my life. For warning her husband and showing mercy she gets 20 years. Fuck that. Fuck that so hard.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
Why are you always a pretty princess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son_of_Shadows View Post
Because I look damn good in a dress.
Fizzy Bubbles Team
PASBL
Wild Future
SoS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 07:05 AM   #38
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Pretty sure warning shots are a thing.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 07:06 AM   #39
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
For not knowing how guns work she gets 20 years. The logic goes that if she actually thought her life was in danger, she would shoot her husband. I'm not necessarily saying I agree with that logic, but warning shots just...aren't done. Period.

But guys, do not mess around with guns if you don't know the basic rules. In fact, don't mess around with guns, period. They're very serious things.

Edit: No Kush. You're wrong. Warning shots aren't a thing and they're definitely not a thing for civilians.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 07:28 AM   #40
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Zimmerman and his legal team never invoked the "Stand Your Ground" law. That is straight up some media bullshit.

None of us know the circumstances of the fight. We weren't there. Trayvon was a 17 year old grown man and big enough and capable enough of roughing someone up. We don't know how much stronger he was than Zimmerman in the fight. What if he had Zimmerman on the ground pounding his face to a pulp? Evidence from gunshot wound experts suggests Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot. What if Zimmerman was basically laying there taking it? You don't know. I don't know. All we have is the evidence. And the situation is entirely plausible that he was getting shit kicked out of him to a point where he was afraid for his life so he pulled out his gun.

Should he have called 911 and said "This kid looks like he's up to no good, I'm going to keep an eye on him"? No. He should have minded his own damn business unless Trayvon was actually doing something dangerous or against the law. Should he have pursued Trayvon to begin with? Fuck no. Did these two individuals make awful decisions that resulted in the worst of all consequences? Yes. Should Trayvon still be alive today? Yes, he should be. Zimmerman should have kept to himself. Trayvon shouldn't have started beating the shit out of him. It's like this fact is completely exempt from this entire argument to some of you people, I don't understand it. Was him being shot over it justified? Probably not. I can only imagine myself in that situation and I would only have pulled my gun out if I was seriously laying on the ground and thinking "this is it, I'm going to die right here". Was Zimmerman thinking that? Maybe. I don't know, you don't know.

And you know what? I'm looking at this as a human issue. A conflict between two men that most unfortunately occurred. Not a conflict between a black male and a white male or a black male and a white-latino male or however you see them. There are race issues here, but when we exam the actual physical conflict itself, it's entirely irrelevant. Person A attacked Person B. His reasons for attacking him are unknown. Perhaps he himself felt threatened? Perhaps he was getting pissed off that Person B was following him? It doesn't matter now. He did it, and what happened next was the worst kind of consequences that Person B delivered. Is he innocent for killing Person A? No.


The whole thing is fucked. But neither side is innocent here. I don't know why Zimmerman didn't get manslaughter. He didn't murder Trayvon in cold blood like a lot of people seem to believe though. People think he was some racist old asshole looking for an excuse to pull his trigger on a black kid.


I won't doubt that my opinion might be ripped apart here and some of you might even think less of me now. I didn't even want to state my opinion really because I get fairly anxious when it comes to stating my opinion on something so, so touchy, and I don't want to isolate people from me for it; I mostly just agreed with Talon's post in its entirety. But Rangeet is doing such a piss-poor job at arguing the point of view some people see it from and in such a passive aggressive manner that I suppose I have to do it for him. And yes, that was somewhat passive aggressive of me, I realize.

I'm not here to fight or argue. But I do have an issue with the point of view some people have on this. As if this entire thing was fueled by race and hate and a motivation to somehow demonize the black community. That's not the case. We have a lot of race problems in America that need to be addressed. I encourage people to check out this video just as a taste and perhaps even the full length panel discussion on the topic. There is a real problem in our society with how black people are treated and it needs to be addressed so, so badly. But there are a lot of people on social sites right now trying to make this case out to be entirely one sided and entirely composed, fueled, and motivated by racism and racism alone. Again, should Zimmerman have been calling up and complaining about young black kids as his record suggests? No, and that definitely does sound racist. But when he was on the ground, his head being smashed against the concrete and being beaten to a pulp, was it self-defense to pull the trigger? Yes.


I'm out. Probably not going to respond to any rebuttal to this because I don't like this situation in the least. I made the thread for people to debate it since it was inevitable, but as one person put it, "The case was a sensationalized, racial baited, shit show. Should have never left the 10 o'clock news."
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 07:39 AM   #41
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I'd like to point out that we don't even know that Zimmerman disobeyed the policeman and followed Martin in the first place. The evidence doesn't discount the possibility of Martin attacking Zimmerman right after he finished the phone call to the police.

By the way, I am struggling to find, but with any luck I hopefully will if it's true, a source that Martin often refereed in illegal MMA fights(which I've seen said a lot). I think that answers FW's big question once and for all.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 08:31 AM   #42
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercutio View Post
Pretty sure warning shots are a thing.
This is true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Emperor View Post
This ruling is retarded and I highly doubt anything the kid said or did required shooting him dead.
This is also true

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercutio View Post
Would Americans reading this thread say that it's fair that my immediate reaction when seeing this verdict was "well, it's America, of course the black guy loses"? Because I had that reaction and immediately felt bad for just writing off your entire country as a cesspit of racism and hypocrisy but then I see that much of the internet thinks the same. Truth is not decided by majority opinion but I know nothing of the case so I didn't know what to think.
Of course it's fair, it's true, and it's particularly shitty that it's true and fair, but in cases like this the United States has a long way to go in this case and in many communities they expect this kind of treatment, though it's the incorrect response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
For not knowing how guns work she gets 20 years. The logic goes that if she actually thought her life was in danger, she would shoot her husband. I'm not necessarily saying I agree with that logic, but warning shots just...aren't done. Period.

But guys, do not mess around with guns if you don't know the basic rules. In fact, don't mess around with guns, period. They're very serious things.

Edit: No Kush. You're wrong. Warning shots aren't a thing and they're definitely not a thing for civilians.
What.

I don't understand any part of your, or anyone else's argument that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin. I don't understand how, or even think you do understand how a weapon works. There's a reason why guns are still legal/a thing. If someone was forced to use a gun every time they pulled it out, there would be a lot more dead/hurt people, and no one would be allowed to have one. Your justification for why someone should get 20 years simply for giving a warning, instead of actively shooting the person being a threat is EXACTLY the thing that Kush, PikaGod and multiple other people have pointed out both on the internet and real life to me. Black Americans lose in this situation. This case proves that if the woman had shot her assailant, she would be MUCH more fucked, I'd bet that she would be getting an even worse sentence even if she claimed SYG after she shot her former husband, etc. Warning shots are a thing because most people have common sense, and are just human beings. Injuring another human intentionally is serious, especially when using a weapon that is designed to kill others, and very few people outside of warzones think that when they use or have to pull out their gun that they will shoot someone. Most of the time, people use guns to intimidate, and will do everything in their power to NOT shoot, or shoot to kill another human being.

The larger concern I have is your continued idea that Martin either A. Deserved to get shot, or B. Started the conflict. There's no evidence that he started any part of the fight, in fact if you listen to the witness testimony of the young woman he was talking to right before he died, that whole conversation had nothing that sounded like he would fight Zimmerman. Why is he not allowed to defend himself from someone who is stalking him, who he is creeped out by? That's not to say that things would have been different if he knew Zimmerman was armed, in fact they would be and Martin would have done anything he could to avoid him, or even get into a fight at all. The point is that he got shot for doing nothing wrong. I'm not saying he did not fight back, but none of the evidence points to Martin starting the conflict... except from the OBVIOUSLY biased testimony of the shooter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
Zimmerman and his legal team never invoked the "Stand Your Ground" law. That is straight up some media bullshit.

None of us know the circumstances of the fight. We weren't there. Trayvon was a 17 year old grown man and big enough and capable enough of roughing someone up. We don't know how much stronger he was than Zimmerman in the fight. What if he had Zimmerman on the ground pounding his face to a pulp? Evidence from gunshot wound experts suggests Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot. What if Zimmerman was basically laying there taking it? You don't know. I don't know. All we have is the evidence. And the situation is entirely plausible that he was getting shit kicked out of him to a point where he was afraid for his life so he pulled out his gun.

Should he have called 911 and said "This kid looks like he's up to no good, I'm going to keep an eye on him"? No. He should have minded his own damn business unless Trayvon was actually doing something dangerous or against the law. Should he have pursued Trayvon to begin with? Fuck no. Did these two individuals make awful decisions that resulted in the worst of all consequences? Yes. Should Trayvon still be alive today? Yes, he should be. Zimmerman should have kept to himself. Trayvon shouldn't have started beating the shit out of him. It's like this fact is completely exempt from this entire argument to some of you people, I don't understand it. Was him being shot over it justified? Probably not. I can only imagine myself in that situation and I would only have pulled my gun out if I was seriously laying on the ground and thinking "this is it, I'm going to die right here". Was Zimmerman thinking that? Maybe. I don't know, you don't know.

And you know what? I'm looking at this as a human issue. A conflict between two men that most unfortunately occurred. Not a conflict between a black male and a white male or a black male and a white-latino male or however you see them. There are race issues here, but when we exam the actual physical conflict itself, it's entirely irrelevant. Person A attacked Person B. His reasons for attacking him are unknown. Perhaps he himself felt threatened? Perhaps he was getting pissed off that Person B was following him? It doesn't matter now. He did it, and what happened next was the worst kind of consequences that Person B delivered. Is he innocent for killing Person A? No.


The whole thing is fucked. But neither side is innocent here. I don't know why Zimmerman didn't get manslaughter. He didn't murder Trayvon in cold blood like a lot of people seem to believe though. People think he was some racist old asshole looking for an excuse to pull his trigger on a black kid.


I won't doubt that my opinion might be ripped apart here and some of you might even think less of me now. I didn't even want to state my opinion really because I get fairly anxious when it comes to stating my opinion on something so, so touchy, and I don't want to isolate people from me for it; I mostly just agreed with Talon's post in its entirety. But Rangeet is doing such a piss-poor job at arguing the point of view some people see it from and in such a passive aggressive manner that I suppose I have to do it for him. And yes, that was somewhat passive aggressive of me, I realize.

I'm not here to fight or argue. But I do have an issue with the point of view some people have on this. As if this entire thing was fueled by race and hate and a motivation to somehow demonize the black community. That's not the case. We have a lot of race problems in America that need to be addressed. I encourage people to check out this video just as a taste and perhaps even the full length panel discussion on the topic. There is a real problem in our society with how black people are treated and it needs to be addressed so, so badly. But there are a lot of people on social sites right now trying to make this case out to be entirely one sided and entirely composed, fueled, and motivated by racism and racism alone. Again, should Zimmerman have been calling up and complaining about young black kids as his record suggests? No, and that definitely does sound racist. But when he was on the ground, his head being smashed against the concrete and being beaten to a pulp, was it self-defense to pull the trigger? Yes.


I'm out. Probably not going to respond to any rebuttal to this because I don't like this situation in the least. I made the thread for people to debate it since it was inevitable, but as one person put it, "The case was a sensationalized, racial baited, shit show. Should have never left the 10 o'clock news."
1. fair enough, but SYG was the basis for WHY Zimmerman wasn't arrested for a month and a half after this originally occurred.

2. have you looked at the recent pictures, or even looked at Zimmerman or Martin? Martin looks quite a bit smaller than Zimmerman, and obviously in a fight like that both people would be on top at some point, and even if that's true, if the gun's at Zimmerman's back, how the heck is he getting to it in a pitch-black, dark night?

3. I already explained it before but Martin did not attack Zimmerman, and Zimmerman became the aggressor when he got out the car and started following Martin.

4. Agree, he should have gone to jail for this, and furthermore, I think race is important/a part of this case, just not a sole factor. Though no one denies that if the roles had switched, Zimmerman would be on his way to jail right now/already there. At the same time, what about Martin's concerns? or feeling threatened? why is it ok for Zimmerman to stalk and or attack Martin, and shoot him, but not justified for Martin to fight back? or that it was ok for Zimmerman to shoot him if what he said was true and Martin attacked first? This is a double standard that makes no sense BECAUSE in either way the victim is at fault. You can't have it both ways, you can't have the victim not have the opportunity to defend themselves if confronted or feeling threated, AND say that it was ok for the murderer to shoot him because he was losing a fight that he may or may not have started.


5. Racism is the largest part of the case dude. Why did it take a month and a half for an investigation or even an arrest to happen? Why were there few/no people of color on the jury? That clip you posted not only answers Rangeet's reasoning for why black people don't call the police, but why black people don't trust the legal system. Cases like this don't help when a case involving a black person trying to enact this law ends with multiple people being convicted, when their cases were far more justified (violation of a restraining order, violent group of people, etc.) and one where the dead person does nothing wrong gets away because he's not black. This case has a lot to do with race because it exposes how racist the legal system is against black people in America.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 09:55 AM   #43
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
In my opinion, race had nothing to do with the ruling (despite what Firewater thinks) but it did probably have quite a lot to do with the murder itself (despite what Deo might seem to think). The Zimmerman-Martin story reminds me so, so much of the scene in the movie Crash where:

(actual spoiler for a big moment deep into the movie)
Spoiler: show
Peter (young black man), who is hitchhiking, is picked up by Hansen (white police officer). They awkwardly try to bridge the gap between their cultures. Peter sees that Hansen has a small statuette of Saint Christopher, which he also has. He begins to laugh as he realizes that there is no difference between the two of them, but Hansen thinks that he is being racist. Peter then pulls his statuette out of his pocket, but Hansen thinks it is a gun and shoots and kills Peter.

Every single time I hear about this case, I'm reminded of that scene. Like Deo points out, none of us can ever know with certainty what happened that night. But I can't help but to think, given the available evidence, that Zimmerman probably experienced something very similar to what the character in Crash experienced. I don't doubt that he felt his life was in jeopardy. I don't doubt that he is deeply remorseful for having killed a defenseless boy. But I also think that his plea of Not Guilty largely stems from a sincere conviction that he was, at the time of the shooting, very much so acting in self-defense. It doesn't mean that his actions weren't probably overkill and weren't probably born from a mix of paranoia and subconscious racial profiling. It just means that he really did fear that Martin might have been reaching for a gun or some such (though that isn't what he testified) and so he pulled his own gun out first and shot him.

Of course, this belief tosses out the entire Zimmerman defense of Martin physically accosting the guy. So if you believe that that really happened, then I guess you'd place about as much value on my take on the events as a clod of dirt at the side of the road. ^^;
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 11:20 AM   #44
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
For not knowing how guns work she gets 20 years. The logic goes that if she actually thought her life was in danger, she would shoot her husband. I'm not necessarily saying I agree with that logic, but warning shots just...aren't done. Period.

But guys, do not mess around with guns if you don't know the basic rules. In fact, don't mess around with guns, period. They're very serious things.

Edit: No Kush. You're wrong. Warning shots aren't a thing and they're definitely not a thing for civilians.
What the hell crime did she get that got her 20 years? I highly doubt Assualt with a Deadly Weapon nets you twenty, unless her husband was a police officer.

For 20 years, you aren't telling us something I think.

EDIT: Wait, nvm. I didn't see the link in SoS's post.

And that evidence was dubious in that case, but I'll get to that later. Alexander was lucky she didn't also get risk of injury to a minor.

And if anything, that should prove that Zimmerman should have gotten manslaughter. The evidence isn't enough to prove that Zimmerman started the fight, or could have fought back, or really anything about the events that happened. EXCEPT that Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. That's really the only concrete thing.
__________________

Last edited by Emi; 07-14-2013 at 11:36 AM.
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 12:50 PM   #45
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Some quotes from across the nation courtesy of a BBC article I was reading.

Emily Bazelon, Slate:
Quote:
It feels wrong, this verdict of not guilty for George Zimmerman. It feels wrong to say that Zimmerman is guilty of no crime. If he hadn’t approached 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, if he hadn’t pulled his gun, Martin would be alive.

But that doesn’t mean Zimmerman was guilty of murder, not in the state of Florida. It doesn’t even mean he was guilty of manslaughter, though that was the middle ground I hoped the jury would find its way toward. (And in fact, the jurors asked for a clarification on the manslaughter charge during its 16˝ hours of deliberation.) Here’s the problem: To convict Zimmerman of murder, the six women of the jury had to find that he killed Martin out of ill will, hatred, or spite, or with a depraved mind.

[...]

The jury could have faulted Zimmerman for starting the altercation with Martin and still believed him not guilty of murder, or even of manslaughter, which in Florida is a killing that has no legal justification. If the jury believed that once the physical fight began, Zimmerman reasonably feared he would suffer a grave bodily injury, then he gets off for self-defense.

Maybe that is the wrong rule. Maybe people like George Zimmerman should be held responsible for provoking the fight that they then fear they’ll lose. And maybe cuts to the back of the head and a bloody nose aren’t enough to show reasonable fear of grave bodily harm. After all, as Adam Weinstein points out, the lesson right now for Floridians is this: “in any altercation, however minor, the easiest way to avoid criminal liability is to kill the counterparty.” But you can see the box the jurors might have felt they were in. Even if they didn’t like George Zimmerman—even if they believed only part of what he told the police—they didn’t have a charge under Florida law that was a clear fit for what he did that night.
Beth Kassab, Orlando Sentinel
Quote:
Like it or not, the jury got this one right.

Nobody wants to see two parents who already lost their teenage son also lose out on what they saw as justice.

As painful as it may be, though, acquitting George Zimmerman was the only verdict the jury could logically reach.

The state simply didn't prove second-degree murder. Or manslaughter.

As much as I don't like many of the choices Zimmerman made the night he killed Trayvon, the evidence presented at trial gave way to more than one reasonable doubt about Zimmerman's guilt.
Andrew Cohen, The Atlantic:
Quote:
To me, on its most basic level, the startling Zimmerman verdict -- and the case and trial that preceded it -- is above all a blunt reminder of the limitations of our justice system. Criminal trials are not searches for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They never have been. Our rules of evidence and the Bill of Rights preclude it. Our trials are instead tests of only that limited evidence a judge declares fit to be shared with jurors, who in turn are then admonished daily, hourly even, not to look beyond the corners of what they've seen or heard in court.

Trials like the one we've all just witnessed in Florida can therefore never fully answer the larger societal questions they pose. They can never act as moral surrogates to resolve the national debates they trigger.
Erick Erickson, Fox News:
Quote:
There is only tragedy in the Zimmerman trial. There are no sides but Justice to root for, but a Justice that will leave one side unsatisfied and still empty.

Both sides made mistakes in this awful mess. George Zimmerman may not be guilty of either murder or manslaughter, but he killed Trayvon Martin.

A 17-year-old is dead. A family has lost a son. And George Zimmerman must now now fear for his life because of hatred toward him stirred up by so many who politicized this mess.

There are no winners here save for Zimmerman's not guilty verdict. He will have to live with this for the rest of his life and, sadly, Trayvon Martin will never get that chance.

There is only tragedy here. There should not be politics here.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 01:55 PM   #46
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
I mean, most of those quotes make sense Talon. At the same time, the Erickson report seems to me a bit less, well remorseful on both sides than the other reports. It almost seems like he's trying to make Zimmerman out to be the only victim in this case, with Martin being just a casualty. I could be reading it wrong, but that last one does appear to have an entirely different tone than the other quotes that you posted, if only since it looks like it demonizes the people who acted to make sure that this trial even happened in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I'd like to point out that we don't even know that Zimmerman disobeyed the policeman and followed Martin in the first place. The evidence doesn't discount the possibility of Martin attacking Zimmerman right after he finished the phone call to the police.

By the way, I am struggling to find, but with any luck I hopefully will if it's true, a source that Martin often refereed in illegal MMA fights(which I've seen said a lot). I think that answers FW's big question once and for all.
I'll bite since no one else will/or has noticed. Both of these claims are wrong Rangeet, both from what the case has said, and other reports and evidence (the original call that started this, Zimmerman's testimony for the most part, etc.) Zimmerman did not follow directions, AND, the altercation did not occur until after Zimmerman had followed Martin a decent distance.

Also, Zimmerman was the one of the two that had MMA training, not Martin. This evidence you claim exists, doesn't exist and doesn't answer my question Rangeet.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 02:09 PM   #47
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
You've got your blinders on way too tightly, dude, if you can't see all of the sympathy brimming forth in that Fox News quote. The singular, solitary line he offers that I figured might ruffle your feathers is the "Both sides made mistakes in this awful mess" line. That's it. How you can take the remainder of that quote and say "he's trying to make Zimmerman out to be the only victim in this case, with Martin being just a casualty" is ludicrous. "A 17-year-old is dead. A family has lost a son," he says. "Sadly, Trayvon Martin will never get that chance [at life]," he says. "There are no winners here," he says. "There is only tragedy here," he says. How on earth could you possibly think that this guy feels that Zimmerman is the only victim in this case with words like those? Wouldn't such a person be jubilant about an acquittal? Wouldn't it be strange for such a person to say such things in light of an acquittal? C'mon, dude. You don't have to like Fox News -- neither do I! -- to see that this guy is being just as sympathetic towards the Martin family as everyone else. Hell, I'd say his writing reads more sympathetic than Miss Kassab's above. Not to say that hers isn't either! Just that I feel like the Fox News guy's was a touch moreso.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 04:04 PM   #48
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
Eh, the guy works for Fox and is talking about keeping politics out of tragedy. That's fairly heroically hypocritical.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 10:54 AM   #49
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Whether you like CNN or not, here's LZ Granderson's op-ed on the verdict. Quoting what I think is the very poignant bit at the very beginning:

Quote:
Hours before the George Zimmerman not-guilty verdict was announced, my partner and I were discussing ways to prevent our 16-year-old son from getting shot while jogging in the upper-middle-class, predominantly white neighborhood we had recently moved into.

I promise you, it was a very real conversation.

"Maybe we should get T-shirts and sweatshirts with the school's name on it," my partner said.

After the verdict -- it came as a punch to the stomach -- we thought maybe it was best if he only ran inside at the nearby gym.

This is what it means to be a parent of a young black man in America today.
Like I said before, while I don't feel racism factored into the verdict, I do feel that there was very likely an element of racial profiling, subconscious or conscious, on the part of Zimmerman the night he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. And so I feel like Granderson's concerns can't be fairly written off as the paranoid ramblings of a black parent in America. I feel like they're very, very understandable concerns. No parent wants their child to be shot and killed because some neighborhood watchman (or hell, even an official enforcer of the law!) felt he looked suspicious and/or up to no good. What parent wouldn't consider ways in which to make it very clear to locals that their child is one of them, a good boy, someone who is or has family members who are a part of this community? But man if it isn't fucking sad that a black boy visiting his divorced mother or father in upper-scale white suburbia now has to wear a sweatshirt that has the local high school's name emblazoned on it just so he can have a prayer of a chance of not being mistaken from a roaming thug.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 01:03 PM   #50
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
I didn't really follow this case before the verdict, so I'm not really going to say anything about the trial itself or the not guilty since I don't really know the details.

But I do want to comment that at least on the radio, people seem to be complaining about the protests. Several times last night and this morning, people would call in and say something along the lines of "A Caucasian guy shot an African kid and people go protest. But if an African guy shot a Caucasian kid, would there be protesting?" If the whole situation was the same, I sure as hell hope so.

And that's not even the issue. The issue is if Zimmerman is a racist. If Zimmerman saw a white kid walking in his neighborhood, would he have had found him suspicious? Would he have had left his house to follow him? Would he have had shot him? That's the racism issue here.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.