Jump to content

Exploitation Of The Trayvon Martin Killing


Recommended Posts

Even if you get punched in the face repeatedly, if you draw a gun and kill a guy, it should be manslaughter, minimum.
I don't know if I agree with this without exceptions, but something similar seems reasonable. Zimmerman could have ended it by shooting him in the leg. Shooting someone is just raising the bar quite a bit, and I would prefer a deterrent. However, many people have died without the use of a gun, and he could have been legitimately fearing for his life.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 369
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Your issue seems to be with lobbying more than gun laws.
Well, yeah. Especially when the lobby owns the congressmen and rights the laws and provides the marketing and writers to influence America pass stupid laws. You can see the anti-Trayvon campaign all over the internet and you only have to look at the sources to notice they come for the right wing conspiracy media to know what is happening. Unfortunately many don't.And it really isn't just the lobbying, it is the laws. When the laws are encouraging people to shoot each other and buy more guns just so the manufacturer can sell more of them, and the prisons can make money housing them, yeah, I have a problem with that too.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, yeah. Especially when the lobby owns the congressmen and rights the laws and provides the marketing and writers to influence America pass stupid laws. You can see the anti-Trayvon campaign all over the internet and you only have to look at the sources to notice they come for the right wing conspiracy media to know what is happening. Unfortunately many don't.
How do you feel about lobbying that results in laws that you agree with?
And it really isn't just the lobbying, it is the laws. When the laws are encouraging people to shoot each other and buy more guns just so the manufacturer can sell more of them, and the prisons can make money housing them, yeah, I have a problem with that too.
Laws that encourage people to shoot each other are bad. (Some people might say that laws that discourage home break-ins are good.)Laws that result in certain industries making money aren't necessarily bad. It seems like you're jumbling up a few different issues.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know agree with this without exceptions, but something similar seems reasonable. Zimmerman could have ended it by shooting him in the leg. Shooting someone is just raising the bar quite a bit, and I would prefer a deterrent. However, many people have died without the use of a gun, and he could have been legitimately fearing for his life.
Quite right.Deterrents: Pepper spray? Taser? Better yet, leaving the guy alone and reporting properly to the real authorities?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Better yet, leaving the guy alone and reporting properly to the real authorities?
He was the neighborhood watch president. It was his job to watch the neighborhood. Especially focusing on people that he doesn't recognize, walking around at night. I don't have a problem with him keeping an eye on the guy. The cops would have never come for just a suspicious looking person.
Link to post
Share on other sites
He was the neighborhood watch president. It was his job to watch the neighborhood. Especially focusing on people that he doesn't recognize, walking around at night. I don't have a problem with him keeping an eye on the guy. The cops would have never come for just a suspicious looking person.
If the cops aren't going to come when the neighborhood watch president tells them there is a suspicious person in the neighborhood, then what is the point of neighborhood watch? VB already pointed out that Neighborhood Watch specifically tells you not to follow people, just watch and report.
Link to post
Share on other sites
He was the neighborhood watch president. It was his job to watch the neighborhood. Especially focusing on people that he doesn't recognize, walking around at night. I don't have a problem with him keeping an eye on the guy. The cops would have never come for just a suspicious looking person.
That loops back to what the definition of what "suspicious" is. And the allegations of Zimmerman harassing Trayvon prior to this incident are a factor, too. Godammit...what a huge cartload of shit
Link to post
Share on other sites
If the cops aren't going to come when the neighborhood watch president tells them there is a suspicious person in the neighborhood, then what is the point of neighborhood watch? VB already pointed out that Neighborhood Watch specifically tells you not to follow people, just watch and report.
It was a small area. He could have kept an eye on him without following him, if you know what I mean. I agree with two things though, a neighborhood watch is basically meanless, and Zimmerman made several mistakes, up to, and possibly including, murder.
That loops back to what the definition of what "suspicious" is. And the allegations of Zimmerman harassing Trayvon prior to this incident are a factor, too. Godammit...what a huge cartload of shit
Anyone you don't recognize walking around in your neighborhood at night, after several break-ins.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, about the "anyone you don't recognise" part: I live in Toronto, a city with more than 5mm people in the GTA. I live less than 5 minutes from a major crossroad and I see literally dozens of people I don't recognise every single day. My street has a couple of halfway houses on it and young people, these days, tend to dress like they are gang bangers or street people.It is simply not possible for me to tag someone as suspicious just because I don't recognise them and I think it would be unreasonable for anyone to do so. This is probably true for most major cities and many smaller cities, such as Cleveland, etc.That being said, neither of us knows the neighbourhood where this happened and what kind of "through traffic" of people it has. Sanford is part of the Greater Orlando Met area (I looked it up) and more than 2mm people live in the general vicinity, but it's possible the area where this happened was a lot smaller and through traffic was at a minimum, but there are far too many unknowables...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know if I agree with this without exceptions, but something similar seems reasonable. Zimmerman could have ended it by shooting him in the leg. Shooting someone is just raising the bar quite a bit, and I would prefer a deterrent. However, many people have died without the use of a gun, and he could have been legitimately fearing for his life.
That isn't how guns work. You don't, even at close range, have that sort of ability to take a non-lethal shot. You're either going to accept that you're about to use lethal force, or you're not. And a gun isn't a deterrent or a threat. In fact, in most cases if you are carrying a concealed weapon, it MUST stay concealed until you are forced to use it. Brandishing it is illegal. If someone punches you in the face make no mistake about it, that IS lethal force too. Waiting to decide that the next blow is the one that is really going to kill you may result in your death or inability to defend yourself.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This women is a chip off the old block!! Excellent! I wish she was getting more publicity. http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/28/alveda-k...trayvon-martin/Don't be turned off by the title, actually very little in it about Sharpton and Jackson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also wouldn't be surprised if he didn't get charged for something. Good or bad, he's generated too much pressure for the local law enforcement not to do something.But if they reach too high, he'll get a full acquittal and then we can expect a riot.
Wouldn't if he didn't? You mean did.
It is a gated community.
I took a look today and from my views, it's a full gate, not just a toll booth bar you can walk around at two different entrance points. There is also a 4 foot high brick wall surrounding the entire joint, except on one side, which looks like you can just walk in. I didn't get out to investigate. It's possible that opening was part of a neighboring community, but I don't think so. I've seen many gated communities you can simply walk into. And if you live in there (or know anyone that does who gives you the code) usually you can just punch in a code to open the gate.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, about the "anyone you don't recognise" part: I live in Toronto, a city with more than 5mm people in the GTA. I live less than 5 minutes from a major crossroad and I see literally dozens of people I don't recognise every single day. My street has a couple of halfway houses on it and young people, these days, tend to dress like they are gang bangers or street people.It is simply not possible for me to tag someone as suspicious just because I don't recognise them and I think it would be unreasonable for anyone to do so. This is probably true for most major cities and many smaller cities, such as Cleveland, etc.That being said, neither of us knows the neighbourhood where this happened and what kind of "through traffic" of people it has. Sanford is part of the Greater Orlando Met area (I looked it up) and more than 2mm people live in the general vicinity, but it's possible the area where this happened was a lot smaller and through traffic was at a minimum, but there are far too many unknowables...
I never even got close to suggesting that you know everyone in Toronto or that Zimmerman knew everyone in Sanford, FL.
Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you feel about lobbying that results in laws that you agree with?Laws that encourage people to shoot each other are bad. (Some people might say that laws that discourage home break-ins are good.)Laws that result in certain industries making money aren't necessarily bad. It seems like you're jumbling up a few different issues.
Nah, I'm not jumbling anything and understand the issue. First you are equating a lobbying firm as being the same as the large conglomerate of industries writing bills and having congressmen that they contribute to politically in campaign funds, then push those bills through congress and state legislatures. It's more of a conservative hyper-lobbying firm. Also, I really don't have a problem with that as it's most likely legal, what with corporations being people and all, but I don't believe keeping it all a secret from the public should be. As long as there is full disclosure and the people can judge the laws for reasonability (fairly) then I am okay with it.But do you really think the NRA, the gun manufacturers and Prison Inc., care about people being killed, or do you think they care about selling more guns? And that laws was designed to sell more guns and nothing more, despite what the conservative yahoos think.Let's ask a Virginian, "Hey Shake" did you know the conserrvatives in your state passed over 50 laws that ALEC wrote and that many of these same congressmen belong to that organization that isn't a lobbing firm but really is?
Link to post
Share on other sites
As long as there is full disclosure and the people can judge the laws for reasonability (fairly) then I am okay with it.
I don't think laws are secret.
But do you really think the NRA, the gun manufacturers and Prison Inc., care about people being killed, or do you think they care about selling more guns? And that laws was designed to sell more guns and nothing more, despite what the conservative yahoos think.
If the law was designed to sell more guns and nothing more, then it's a bad law. I agreed with you on that principle. I'm not sure where you're going with all this. Is it just that the NRA, gun manufacturers, and Prison Inc are evil?
does anyone know why he was in that neighborhood?
Yes.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I know it shouldnt matter, but does anyone know why he was in that neighborhood?
Square 1, welcome back. His father's girlfriend lived there. He was visiting them.
Link to post
Share on other sites
It was a small area. He could have kept an eye on him without following him, if you know what I mean. I agree with two things though, a neighborhood watch is basically meanless, and Zimmerman made several mistakes, up to, and possibly including, murder.Anyone you don't recognize walking around in your neighborhood at night, after several break-ins.
This is definitely Jesus's definition.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If the cops aren't going to come when the neighborhood watch president tells them there is a suspicious person in the neighborhood, then what is the point of neighborhood watch? VB already pointed out that Neighborhood Watch specifically tells you not to follow people, just watch and report.
They also specifically tell you to not carry a gun, so there's that.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nah, I'm not jumbling anything and understand the issue. First you are equating a lobbying firm as being the same as the large conglomerate of industries writing bills and having congressmen that they contribute to politically in campaign funds, then push those bills through congress and state legislatures. It's more of a conservative hyper-lobbying firm. Also, I really don't have a problem with that as it's most likely legal, what with corporations being people and all, but I don't believe keeping it all a secret from the public should be. As long as there is full disclosure and the people can judge the laws for reasonability (fairly) then I am okay with it.But do you really think the NRA, the gun manufacturers and Prison Inc., care about people being killed, or do you think they care about selling more guns? And that laws was designed to sell more guns and nothing more, despite what the conservative yahoos think.Let's ask a Virginian, "Hey Shake" did you know the conserrvatives in your state passed over 50 laws that ALEC wrote and that many of these same congressmen belong to that organization that isn't a lobbing firm but really is?
So wait.You are "digging" at the GOP for calling corporations "people", and then in the same breath saying that the "people" that make up the NRA, ALL gun manufacturers, and whatever Prison Inc is, EVERY SINGLE person involved with all of these entities, doesn't care at all about humans being murdered, only profits?Really?Delusion much?
This is definitely Jesus's definition.
I don't even understand how you're trying to rip on me.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I would either. and there's like 4 of them.and no randy, I didn't know that! tell me more!(I'm just kidding, please don't tell me more.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...