Jump to content

Exploitation Of The Trayvon Martin Killing


Recommended Posts

First I've seen numberous mention of the size of this kid, second from accounts that are being released today he was suspended for a pot related offence. Are either of these things all that relevant considering the only reason any of this happened is because while armed he followed a kid because he looked suspicious (ie black, in a hoodie)? People saying "if he wasn't dressed that way" or "look at his history" are right in line with questioning a rape victim for what she wore and he sexual history.
I think the whole point is the media caused all this. Dude the media is the one saying he followed him just because he was black wearing a hoodie. Anyone unknown walking in a gated community where there have been several recent break ins would be rightly considered suspicious. The bold part is silly. No one is saying he deserved to die, in fact mainly, at least in this thread, people are commenting on how the media is portraying this.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 369
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Anyone unknown walking in a gated community where there have been several recent break ins would be rightly considered suspicious.
I just want to be clear that I do NOT agree with this.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the whole point is the media caused all this. Dude the media is the one saying he followed him just because he was black wearing a hoodie. Anyone unknown walking in a gated community where there have been several recent break ins would be rightly considered suspicious. The bold part is silly. No one is saying he deserved to die, in fact mainly, at least in this thread, people are commenting on how the media is portraying this.
The media didn't cause any of this! Zimmerman did..the 911 tapes are saying that he followed him and its pretty clear in those tapes its in large part because he was black- how else did he look suspicious? It wasn't stating he was lurking in bushes or peeking in windows it was that he was a black/dressed a certain way. As to the bolded part there are idiots such as Geraldo pointing out the way he was dressed, and you yourself have pointed in this thread to his "history" which again is as relevant to the subject as is how many sexual partners a rape victim has had.
Link to post
Share on other sites
ding, ding, ding. Not to mention you can't say the media is biased and is crucifying Zimmerman and then claim that all these new reports about his pot suspension and gold teeth and tattoos came from liberal media biased for Martin. Unless, Zealous is admitting that the mainstream media isn't really that biased after all.
Usually the way it works is that more conservative leaning reports uncover this new stuff the MSM never even bothered to investigate (because they have their narrative already). Finally they are forced kicking and screaming to finally report these new findings. But Brietbart is dead and I haven't read anything other than sympathetic reports towards Martin in the conservative blogs and news sites. There are those critical of the media, black panthers, Sharpton, Jesse, ect, but not towards Martin. So maybe the msm is actually digging some of this new info up. Irish says he read some of these things in the MSM. The few reports I had read all had a picture of what appeared to be a 13 or 14 year old kid with a story about how he took a break from watching tv to have some skittles and tea. When all of sudden he was attacked and shot by an armed white man. BTW, the race of the perps is never revealed at least in reports in the St. Louis post dispatch. But this guy was immediately called white when he is really Hispanic.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The media didn't cause any of this! Zimmerman did..the 911 tapes are saying that he followed him and its pretty clear in those tapes its in large part because he was black- how else did he look suspicious? It wasn't stating he was lurking in bushes or peeking in windows it was that he was a black/dressed a certain way. As to the bolded part there are idiots such as Geraldo pointing out the way he was dressed, and you yourself have pointed in this thread to his "history" which again is as relevant to the subject as is how many sexual partners a rape victim has had.
Your damn right its relevant. If this guy is violent then he may have confronted and attacked zimmerman just for following him or questioning him. From what I have read I agree with what you stated in your earlier post about him being scared, confused, ect. That Zimmerman probably was at fault. But you saying that other stuff isn't relevant when self-defense is being claimed is wrong. Now ideally it wouldn't be reported in the media, but, thats the problem with the way these things always get handled. It is the nature of the beast. When you trial someone through the media, the victim is going to eventually be scrutinized.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This was the way it was for most of this countries history. What is gross is this feminzation of this country telling us to cower and hide and let bad guys take our stuff as long as they don't hurt us. Good advice for a single mom alone, but if you cower when a guy breaks into your house, then turn in your man card.
You somehow managed one of the most racist and sexist posts I've ever read, all into one. Congratulations, you're a bigot!
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 shot, 10 killed including a little girl i south chicago over the weekend. Is there no national outrage over this, or is black on black crime not open for outrage.
Did the person who commited the crime not get arrested for it despite him very likely killing the people without a reasonable basis for doing so?If not, you might want to shut the hell up.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I just want to be clear that I do NOT agree with this.
Your simply lying here to make your self feel superior. You may not call the cops or act on your suspicion in any way at all. But I dare say if you lived in a gated community in which you and/or several of your neighbors had experienced recent break-ins that you would be at least somewhat suspicious of a stranger walking through at night. I will even go as far as to say that seeing a large, young black man wearing a hoodie would make you even more suspicious. Especially if the gated community were overwhelmingly white. I am not picking on you, I believe this applies to almost every human being of any race.
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 shot, 10 killed including a little girl i south chicago over the weekend. Is there no national outrage over this, or is black on black crime not open for outrage.
Did they arrest the shooter(s) or at least attempt to do so? If so, it's not remotely the same thing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your simply lying here to make your self feel superior. You may not call the cops or act on your suspicion in any way at all. But I dare say if you lived in a gated community in which you and/or several of your neighbors had experienced recent break-ins that you would be at least somewhat suspicious of a stranger walking through at night. I will even go as far as to say that seeing a large, young black man wearing a hoodie would make you even more suspicious. Especially if the gated community were overwhelmingly white. I am not picking on you, I believe this applies to almost every human being of any race.
Miami is really multi-racial.....I see hispanic and black people in my neighborhood all the time. We have had a good number of break-ins in our garage lately. I live in a big apartment building in an urban area so I guess it's not really the same. But, I'm not sure I agree with the above assessment.And even if I was suspicious of them, I'd do what the 911 person told me to do because that's what why we pay them our tax dollars: to handle these things professionally. I think you really need an overt/obvious reason to charge after someone with a gun.
Caine why do you think there hasn't been an arrest yet?
I think the police at first were lazy, then stubborn. Then, when this became a media shitstorm, the police chief and local DA (happily) stepped down and let the governor's task force take over. That task force is convening a grand jury in early April to decide whether to prosecute Zimmerman. The first part is my guess, the second part is reported fact.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Miami is really multi-racial.....I see hispanic and black people in my neighborhood all the time. We have had a good number of break-ins in our garage lately. I live in a big apartment building in an urban area so I guess it's not really the same. But, I'm not sure I agree with the above assessment.And even if I was suspicious of them, I'd do what the 911 person told me to do because that's what why we pay them our tax dollars: to handle these things professionally. I think you really need an overt/obvious reason to charge after someone with a gun.I think the police at first were lazy, then stubborn. Then, when this became a media shitstorm, the police chief and local DA (happily) stepped down and let the governor's task force take over. That task force is convening a grand jury in early April to decide whether to prosecute Zimmerman. The first part is my guess, the second part is reported fact.
What are the chances they over react and try to charge this guy with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Remember the attempted murder trial of the Rodney King cops.I ask as unbiased observer, if it was my family member killed, I think I would want to see this pushed to the max, and rightly so.
Link to post
Share on other sites
...There's plenty of proof who initiated the conflict. He followed after someone with a gun after being told not to do so...
This just simply isn't true, and I think you know it. A "conflict" doesn't begin with someone following another guy. Zimmerman does have bodily injury to support his claim of self defense. Still to be proven is if Zimmerman escalated the conflict. 911's statement to hold back and wait for Police isn't "being told not to" follow someone. Trayvon's history of being suspended from school and fighting with a bus driver is relevant to establish a history of anti authority and violent behavior., not to explain Zimmerman's thought process leading up to his decision to follow Trayvon.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Did I say that?
Well, you implied it with this:
Zimmerman was bloodied and beaten. You can die from a single punch to the face. Easily. You don't have to wait for your dying breath to use lethal force.Zimmerman might have been able to deescalate the situation better. But had no legal requirement to do so.
Taking those words, you're saying that if Zimmerman is in a fight, regardless of who caused it, and he has a fear of being punched (which can be lethal), he is in his right to kill. You later hedged that statement, saying that it didn't count if Zimmerman started the fight.
Did I say that?By punching me in the first place you've started an assault. Most Self Defense laws require that you are acting within the law when you defend yourself - you can't be in the process of committing a crime or in a place you are not legally allowed to be. So, no. You don't get to start an assault and then claim self defense. By all accounts that I have read, Zimmeman was acting in a legal manner prior to using lethal force. The one thing that might doom Zimmerman is that you can't be actively escalating a situation. Some legal definitions of Self Defense include a provision for avoidance of a deadly situation (This is true even with some "Stand Your Ground" legislation). The "avoidance" can refer to you not also being part of the escalation. For example someone cuts you off on the road (or you cut them off). You start screaming at each other. You flip him off. He stops his car. You decide to stop your car too, and keep screaming at the other guy, then get out of the car and continue to escalate. You approach each other. And then finally the other guy pulls a gun and then you shoot him in self defense. You had plenty of opportunity to avoid this confrontation, but kept engaging and escalating.Zimmerman probably has the right to investigate and detain. The question in this case is: "Did Zimmerman under Florida law have a requirement to Avoid the conflict?"
I don't think that should be the only question. The important question is, "under what circumstances can a person use lethal force outside of one's home." I think any law under which Zimmerman's actions are legal is a bad law. I think there should be a very high standard for an "unavoidable situation" where lethal force is necessary. I don't think you should be allowed to kill anyone who is threatening to hurt you. And I don't think you should be allowed to kill when you can easily escape or avoid a situation.The threshold should be that you are in a lethal situation and where you can't reasonably avoid the situation without lethal force. And suspects should be especially scrutinized when he initiates or escalates an encounter.I mean, while we're at it, I don't think citizens should be allowed to carry concealed guns in public. I'm not sure if the gun was visible in this case, but it's difficult to imagine that the kid attacks Zimmerman if he sees a holster around his waste. If you're a citizen and carrying a gun, I should be know about it, and I should be able to deny you entrance into an establishment I own (the last part part of course not being applicable in this case).
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you implied it with this:Taking those words, you're saying that if Zimmerman is in a fight, regardless of who caused it, and he has a fear of being punched (which can be lethal), he is in his right to kill. You later hedged that statement, saying that it didn't count if Zimmerman started the fight. I don't think that should be the only question. The important question is, "under what circumstances can a person use lethal force outside of one's home." I think any law under which Zimmerman's actions are legal is a bad law. I think there should be a very high standard for an "unavoidable situation" where lethal force is necessary. I don't think you should be allowed to kill anyone who is threatening to hurt you. And I don't think you should be allowed to kill when you can easily escape or avoid a situation.The threshold should be that you are in a lethal situation and where you can't reasonably avoid the situation without lethal force. And suspects should be especially scrutinized when he initiates or escalates an encounter.I mean, while we're at it, I don't think citizens should be allowed to carry concealed guns in public. I'm not sure if the gun was visible in this case, but it's difficult to imagine that the kid attacks Zimmerman if he sees a holster around his waste. If you're a citizen and carrying a gun, I should be know about it, and I should be able to deny you entrance into an establishment I own (the last part part of course not being applicable in this case).
Well, you've got some opinions on what should be allowed and what shouldn't be allowed. And I do respect that. But you're mixing your opinion of what should be and what is legally allowed and tolerated by the rest of society. Clearly I do think citizens should be allowed to carry concealed weapons. I do support stand your ground legislation as well as "Shield Laws" preventing someone from Civil Suits when they use their weapon in a legal manner. The legal question here is not should there be a "Stand Your Ground" Legislation and should Zimmerman be allowed to carry a Concealed Weapon. Those rights are already established in many (most?) states. The legal question here is who actually escalated the conflict and was Zimmerman in reasonable fear from Trayvon? I haven't seen any facts that state that Zimmerman was not acting legally. He had a right to be where he was. He had a right to carry his weapon. Just because 911 says to stay away doesn't mean he doesn't have a legal right to investigate. There is evidence he was physically attacked. Investigating the situation does not mean he instigated the attack.
Link to post
Share on other sites

From a conservative blog site. JustOneMinute"...And on the subject of temperment, let's add that Zimmerman had a domestic violence situation with his spouse ending in mutual restraining orders, and an assault charge on a cop that was dropped after he took what sounds like an anger management class. That was all seven or eight years ago and he is now 28, but who's the hothead?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess I have an irrational fear of poisonous snakes and all other things that could easily kill me.There's plenty of proof who initiated the conflict. He followed after someone with a gun after being told not to do so. He said "these ****ers always get away". This kid sure didn't get away. I think the idea that following after someone in the dark who is just walking with a loaded gun isn't an aggressive act is the funniest thing I've heard said in connection to this case.
Again, he was not told 'not to follow the guy'Her was told "It was not necessary"BIG difference.You also have no evidence that the kid knew anything about the gun.The fact you continue to poison the argument with hyperbole shows that the issue is really just another example of liberals willing to force their truths into anything that happens.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd post Fox News coverage of the Martin incident if there was any.
Weird that Fox News hasn't reported anything about this event... :club: Of course as more and more stuff comes out about the facts..you can expect all news shows to drop this once they realize its not anywhere near as cut and dried as the liberals are trying to make it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You somehow managed one of the most racist and sexist posts I've ever read, all into one. Congratulations, you're a bigot!
Only the left can think using a phrase like 'bad guy' means black guy.It really shows how ingrained and suppressed your own racism is.I of course am completely okay with what I wrote, because I recognize that you can judge a person for his actions, regardless of his race, without guilt over slavery that happened 100 years before I was born.Trying to say what I wrote was even in the same ballpark as something racist is insane. You and cane are completely insane about race.Rational thought would find itself all alone in your heads.There is not a chance anyone with the ability to use a rock to make a splash in water would agree that what I said was racist.And sexists? Only feminist would think that was sexists...feminists and neutered males.Which are you?
Link to post
Share on other sites
From a conservative blog site. JustOneMinute"...And on the subject of temperment, let's add that Zimmerman had a domestic violence situation with his spouse ending in mutual restraining orders, and an assault charge on a cop that was dropped after he took what sounds like an anger management class. That was all seven or eight years ago and he is now 28, but who's the hothead?"
He also had said that he was following the kid in his truck, and got out to check a street name so he could report it to the police so they could find him..A guy who was a long time neighborhood watch guy, patrolling the streets with 50+ calls into the police, didn't know the name of a street in his complex? That seems really unlikely.BTW, Zimmerman didn't call 911, he called the police non-emergency number.The 911 call everyone is referring too is the one where Zimmerman is getting hit and calling for help.
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...