like african americans were when OJ was found not guilty4/5 wrote:So white people are pretty happy about this, eh?
George Zimmerman found not guilty
- Peeps
- Fake NYC Setlist Relayer
- Posts: 7306
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 12:41 pm
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Did the Mother Fucker pay extra to yell?
- broken iris
- Future Drummer
- Posts: 2868
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:24 pm
- Location: Death Machine Inc's HQ
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
"White Hispanics". Zimmerman's mother was Hispanic and the mother contributes slightly more in terms genetic info / nature, so if Zimmerman "self identifies as Hispanic" (Assoc. Press term) then Obama must "self identify as Black" since his mother was White. OR, it doesn't fucking matter because a young person died a violent and unnecessary death and all the talk about race distracts from that fact.Peeps wrote:like african americans were when OJ was found not guilty4/5 wrote:So white people are pretty happy about this, eh?
If people want to honor Treyvon, work to change laws in your communities to try and reduce violence and improve anti-gang and anti-violence resources for kids. Don't set up a lynch mob for Zimmerman.
the sentinel remains vigilant
- 4/5
- See you in another life, brother
- Posts: 6985
- Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Yes.Peeps wrote:like african americans were when OJ was found not guilty4/5 wrote:So white people are pretty happy about this, eh?
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle
-
digster
- Rank This Poster
- Posts: 3972
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 1:10 am
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
This is an interesting point, I'm unsure of the legality on it, but I imagine that Zimmerman is not required by law to listen to the commands of a dispatcher as is the case with a PO. Either way, it was stupid of him to get out, but I don't necessarily begrudge him for it. His neighborhood has been ravaged by hooligans breaking and stealing shit and he wanted to stop it.Orpheus wrote: Like I said, if Zimmerman just stays in his car (which he was told to do), none of this ever happens.
Did he plan on getting out of his car and hoping he had a chance to shoot this black kid? I don't know, but even if he didn't, it seems to me he's not thrilled about the whole aftermath.
Lastly, I think at any point of being on your back and getting punched in the face or having your head slammed into the ground is good enough to pop somebody...all you have to do is watch a boxing match, UFC bout or hockey fight and you know it can take just one perfect blow to knock you out and then who knows what can happen.
Ideal outcome for both parties? Certainly not. Fair considering the circumstances? Certainly.
And we can't say whether all the circumstances Zimmerman's defense laid out are true for sure, but unless we can prove something else, it's all we have. I'll be scared for the day when somebody's "maybe racist" motives are good enough for a murder conviction in an American courtroom.
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Yes, his desire was to engage him...how? we can't be sure.digster wrote:I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
Zimmerman was not initially threatened by him on a personal, self level, but on a "he might break something or steal something" level. That was Martin's threat to Zimmerman. At that time though, Martin is unaware of Zimmerman's thought process.
But for Martin, the law doesn't allow him to perceive Zimmerman as a threat to his personal safety just for walking by or walking in the same direction as him. And therefore doesn't allow him to become an aggressor in a violent confrontation. From that point on, Zimmerman was in defense mode and utilized self-defense.
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Thu March 09, 2023 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- Jorge
- NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
- Posts: 36490
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
- Location: Buenos Aires
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
So brave.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
- E.H. Ruddock
- Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
- Posts: 51787
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Oh big surprise, Jorge takes the side of the hispanic.theplatypus wrote:So brave.
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
thats such a white male thing to say.E.H. Ruddock wrote:Oh big surprise, Jorge takes the side of the hispanic.theplatypus wrote:So brave.
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
E.H. Ruddock wrote:Oh big surprise, Jorge takes the side of the hispanic.theplatypus wrote:So brave.
-
digster
- Rank This Poster
- Posts: 3972
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 1:10 am
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
How is that a threat to Zimmerman? Surely he wasn't thinking, when he first saw and suspected Martin, that he was coming to rob him. Or are you just saying this is Zimmerman's thought process, not anything that actually would give him justification to act out.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Yes, his desire was to engage him...how? we can't be sure.digster wrote:I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
Zimmerman was not initially threatened by him on a personal, self level, but on a "he might break something or steal something" level.That was Martin's threat to Zimmerman. At that time though, Martin is unaware of Zimmerman's thought process.
But for Martin, the law doesn't allow him to perceive Zimmerman as a threat to his personal safety just for walking by or walking in the same direction as him. And therefore doesn't allow him to become an aggressor in a violent confrontation. From that point on, Zimmerman was in defense mode and utilized self-defense.
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Poor use of words...not threatened, Zimmerman felt suspicious of Martin and thought he might steal something (Zimmerman saying he saw him looking into houses and what not)digster wrote:How is that a threat to Zimmerman? Surely he wasn't thinking, when he first saw and suspected Martin, that he was coming to rob him.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Yes, his desire was to engage him...how? we can't be sure.digster wrote:I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
Zimmerman was not initially threatened by him on a personal, self level, but on a "he might break something or steal something" level.That was Martin's threat to Zimmerman. At that time though, Martin is unaware of Zimmerman's thought process.
But for Martin, the law doesn't allow him to perceive Zimmerman as a threat to his personal safety just for walking by or walking in the same direction as him. And therefore doesn't allow him to become an aggressor in a violent confrontation. From that point on, Zimmerman was in defense mode and utilized self-defense.
-
digster
- Rank This Poster
- Posts: 3972
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 1:10 am
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
I also don't really see how somebody following you is inherently non-threatening. Yes, the context matters, which may be why they had difficulty proving his guilt, but there's plenty of instances of following that extends far beyond somebody "just walking by you."
Is there any understanding of how the first contact between them was made? Did Martin approach Zimmerman, vice versa, what?
I guess my hypothetical question is this; if Zimmerman approaches Martin in a threatening manner, in the heat of it Martin responds and has the upper hand, and Zimmerman kills him, that is self-defense?
Is there any understanding of how the first contact between them was made? Did Martin approach Zimmerman, vice versa, what?
I guess my hypothetical question is this; if Zimmerman approaches Martin in a threatening manner, in the heat of it Martin responds and has the upper hand, and Zimmerman kills him, that is self-defense?
Last edited by digster on Tue July 16, 2013 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
warehouse
- Rank This Poster
- Posts: 4993
- Joined: Sat January 05, 2013 3:34 pm
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
so ur argument is the guy w/ the gun had a legit reason to feel threatened, but the kid w/o a guy didnt have a reason to feel threatened?sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Poor use of words...not threatened, Zimmerman felt suspicious of Martin and thought he might steal something (Zimmerman saying he saw him looking into houses and what not)digster wrote:How is that a threat to Zimmerman? Surely he wasn't thinking, when he first saw and suspected Martin, that he was coming to rob him.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Yes, his desire was to engage him...how? we can't be sure.digster wrote:I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
Zimmerman was not initially threatened by him on a personal, self level, but on a "he might break something or steal something" level.That was Martin's threat to Zimmerman. At that time though, Martin is unaware of Zimmerman's thought process.
But for Martin, the law doesn't allow him to perceive Zimmerman as a threat to his personal safety just for walking by or walking in the same direction as him. And therefore doesn't allow him to become an aggressor in a violent confrontation. From that point on, Zimmerman was in defense mode and utilized self-defense.
- Rob
- Future Drummer
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Fri January 04, 2013 1:46 am
- Location: Connecticut
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Maybe you wouldn't think twice about some guy following you home, but I'd bet most people would feel threatened.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
this is getting kind of out of hand...lots of irrelevant facts being put into the questions.warehouse wrote:so ur argument is the guy w/ the gun had a legit reason to feel threatened, but the kid w/o a guy didnt have a reason to feel threatened?sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Poor use of words...not threatened, Zimmerman felt suspicious of Martin and thought he might steal something (Zimmerman saying he saw him looking into houses and what not)digster wrote:How is that a threat to Zimmerman? Surely he wasn't thinking, when he first saw and suspected Martin, that he was coming to rob him.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Yes, his desire was to engage him...how? we can't be sure.digster wrote:I'm not too well-versed in the legal subtleties case, so let me ask this...broken iris wrote:Well, it could be interpreted to mean you can kill at will and then just make it look like you were defending yourself. Slam your head into the ground once or twice on purpose and bingo!Mecca wrote:or a person of any race in any state that allows you to kill to defend your own life.Rob wrote:What it seems to say, is that you can follow the black kid and shoot once he's kicking your ass.
as Orpheus has repeated, he should have just stayed in his car.
To the best of my knowledge, Zimmerman exited the car and followed Martin with a concealed weapon. Does anyone dispute that? His intent was to follow Martin and engage him, correct?
Is Martin's desire to defend himself and any fear he had for his well-being irrelevant? Any fear he had for himself is null because he ended up being a better fighter than Zimmerman?
But your second point is not relevant at all. Martin can't defend himself from a non-threat.
Zimmerman was not initially threatened by him on a personal, self level, but on a "he might break something or steal something" level.That was Martin's threat to Zimmerman. At that time though, Martin is unaware of Zimmerman's thought process.
But for Martin, the law doesn't allow him to perceive Zimmerman as a threat to his personal safety just for walking by or walking in the same direction as him. And therefore doesn't allow him to become an aggressor in a violent confrontation. From that point on, Zimmerman was in defense mode and utilized self-defense.
I clarified he didn't feel threatened, yet was suspicious.
and you can't use facts unknown to the parties in the situation to make an argument about anything i.e. it doesn't matter Zimmerman didn't know if Trayvon had a gun and vice versa
It does matter if they DO know if another person has a gun, but otherwise you're just making assumptions
- sportsfreakpete6
- Yeah Yeah Yeah
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 4:55 pm
- Location: West of Cheddah
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Well obviously I'm talking about the context and what they can prove in court. I don't really care about whether Zimmerman was right or wrong in this conversation, I care about what the law says.digster wrote:I also don't really see how somebody following you is inherently non-threatening. Yes, the context matters, which may be why they had difficulty proving his guilt, but there's plenty of instances of following that extends far beyond somebody "just walking by you."
Is there any understanding of how the first contact between them was made? Did Martin approach Zimmerman, vice versa, what?
I guess my hypothetical question is this; if Zimmerman approaches Martin in a threatening manner, in the heat of it Martin responds and has the upper hand, and Zimmerman kills him, that is self-defense?
(If we wanted to have a different conversation about if they law is a good and just law, that's fine, but in this conversation, that doesn't apply.)
And in response to your final question: I'm not sure exactly, but I imagine it all has to do with being the aggressor. By law, I don't believe Martin has a right now claim "self-defense" because Zimmerman was approaching on him. There's one aggressor in a situation, and one defender. Martin was ruled as the aggressor in the court.
Side note: I've lived in and spent plenty of nights in an urban environment where I could feel "scared", but just because I'm scared doesn't mean I turn around and clock a dude.
That's probably a better word usage for Martin...Martin was scared and hit Zimmerman and thus became the aggressor whereas Zimmerman felt his life was threatened when he was getting beaten.
- Rob
- Future Drummer
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Fri January 04, 2013 1:46 am
- Location: Connecticut
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
So I guess if you really want to kill someone, you should just follow them, hide a gun in your pocket, and hope the first couple blows don't knock you out or seriously disorient you.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Martin was scared and hit Zimmerman and thus became the aggressor whereas Zimmerman felt his life was threatened when he was getting beaten.
-
simple schoolboy
- Misplaced My Sponge
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Re: George Zimmerman found not guilty
Only assuming the person you intend to incite to violence doesn't just knock you off your feet and remove themselves from the situation.Rob wrote:So I guess if you really want to kill someone, you should just follow them, hide a gun in your pocket, and hope the first couple blows don't knock you out or seriously disorient you.sportsfreakpete6 wrote:Martin was scared and hit Zimmerman and thus became the aggressor whereas Zimmerman felt his life was threatened when he was getting beaten.