ajs510 122 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 I <3 Dubey. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 Yes but I he was tried and what I heard makes me at least go for manslaughter or aggravated assault. Maybe 2nd degree murder. Seems that during first jury vote it was 3 vs 3. 3 to let him go 3 felt he wasn't completely innocent. But that is his luxury of killing Martin. He can make up any story he wants. Which goes back to my point before that I think we agree on which is we all speculating at this point and forming our opinions on what we have heard or read. Only Zimm and Martin know what really happened. But everything I have read and heard was that he was a cop wannabee and had a John Wayne like attitude with his "duty". A boy doesn't die if he just calls the cops and leaves it be. By following him and stalking him he essentially initiates the confrontation. I know I would take it as an aggressive act if someone was following me in a vehicle and then on foot. I've had to deal with suspicious characters at my old apartment job. I kept driving and went back to office and called police. Never did I want to confront or follow/stalk the person for the sime reason if not wanting to get into a confrontation. The police are trained for the job and each time I was also told not to pursue. Just like he was. There is a reason for that and what happened in Florida is why. It's obvious to me at this point that Martin was not a thief or murderer and would have talked to the police then been in his way. Probably pissed but not dead. If Zimmeam had no gun he either would not have confronted Martin (most likely IMO) or got his ass beat and Martin arrested for assault. Still in all cases, calling and walking away would be the best result. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 Right... the biggest problem with the movement to stop urban sprawl is that the population doesn't seem to want it. At least the vocal portion of it. I never read about urbanists speaking at these things, it's always the NIMBYs and people trying to shut it down, or trying to impose a suburban lifestyle in the urban core. I'm all for better mass transit; however way too many suburbanites seem to not care . Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 I <3 Dubey. Chances of someone dying in this scenario where neither person had a gun is miniscule. Chances when one gun is in play, probably exponentially more likely. I'm all for better mass transit; however way too many suburbanites seem to not care . Yeah, and Ottawa has a serious suburban culture. Maybe it just hasn't reached it's choke point yet. They aren't going to just keep widening the highways to appease the commuters. For one, there's no room, and secondly it activates the phenomenon of Induced Demand. That, in turn, puts more stress on local roads and the downtown core. Most stress on parking, etc. The LRT they are building, and more specifically the Western leg, is basically a commuter rail train, though. It's not really a subway, despite it being underground for 3 or 4 stations through the core. It's not rapid transit, it's for the commuters from the west at peak times, so maybe that will help out a little. It does very little for making the downtown itself a more livable, walkable community (although downtown isn't particularly big, it's just not going to increase the vibrancy after business hours). The positive though, is once we finally get a trunk line like the Confederation Line, and expanded O-Train service, people tend to warm up to the idea of the train, and it tends to lead to easier expansion of the network. Once you get a foot in the door, it's easier to expand to underserved areas. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 Yes but I he was tried and what I heard makes me at least go for manslaughter or aggravated assault. Maybe 2nd degree murder. Seems that during first jury vote it was 3 vs 3. 3 to let him go 3 felt he wasn't completely innocent. But that is his luxury of killing Martin. He can make up any story he wants. Which goes back to my point before that I think we agree on which is we all speculating at this point and forming our opinions on what we have heard or read. Only Zimm and Martin know what really happened. But everything I have read and heard was that he was a cop wannabee and had a John Wayne like attitude with his "duty". A boy doesn't die if he just calls the cops and leaves it be. By following him and stalking him he essentially initiates the confrontation. I know I would take it as an aggressive act if someone was following me in a vehicle and then on foot. I've had to deal with suspicious characters at my old apartment job. I kept driving and went back to office and called police. Never did I want to confront or follow/stalk the person for the sime reason if not wanting to get into a confrontation. The police are trained for the job and each time I was also told not to pursue. Just like he was. There is a reason for that and what happened in Florida is why. It's obvious to me at this point that Martin was not a thief or murderer and would have talked to the police then been in his way. Probably pissed but not dead. If Zimmeam had no gun he either would not have confronted Martin (most likely IMO) or got his ass beat and Martin arrested for assault. Still in all cases, calling and walking away would be the best result. We agree on a lot of things in this post. Most importantly: 1. " If Zimmeam had no gun he either would not have confronted Martin (most likely IMO) or got his ass beat and Martin arrested for assault" 2. "Still in all cases, calling and walking away would be the best result" 3. "A boy doesn't die if he just calls the cops and leaves it be" I guess the problem I have, just because number 1 and 2/3 are true, doesn't make him a murderer, or even guilty of manslaughter. Even in the best case scenario for Zimmerman, the one I laid out above, he is not without fault. He should have stayed in his car, I think he would probably agree with you on that point right now. While I personally don't agree that he should be carrying a gun, the law in his state says that he is legally allowed to be carrying a gun, so we can't use that point in and of itself to lay blame on him. regarding the "luxury" that Zimmerman has with killing Martin and getting away with it, you aren't wrong. However, there are other cirumstances here that lend credibility to Zimmerman's story. He did have a broken nose and an abrasion on his head. He did call the cops moments before to report the suspicious person. I don't think this is a case of Zimmerman seeing an easy oppurtunity to kill a man and get away with it, though I see the point you are making. I think it's a serious grey area of the law. At what point is Zimmerman unable to use self defense as an excuse? If Zimmerman did indeed step way outside of his boundaries as Neighborhood watch leader, and put himself in a dangerous situation to nobody's fault but his own, but then stil found himself in a literal situation of "Kill or be Killed", is he legally justified to Kill? What about the following scenario? Zimmeran hangs up with 911, but decides to pursue a little further on his own. Martin turns around and says "why are you following me man?" and starts to advance in what is percieved as a threatening manner. Zimmerman is a bit of a John Wayne type, but when faced with actual danger, really wants no part of it. Realizing he is in way over his head, he panics and pulls out his weapon and says "Stay back!" Martin sees the gun and panics, charging straight at Zimmerman and engaging him, attempting to grab the gun. In the heat of the moment, Martin yells "I'm gonna kill you!" as he tried to grab the gun. During the struggle, Zimmerman gets control of the gun and pulls the trigger. The shot hits Martin in the chest and he dies. So, Zimmerman is clearly in the wrong here, obviously. He stepped outside of his boundaries, he pulled his weapon when it wasn't necessary, but he certainly didn't plan on killing anybody. When he did pull the trigger, he truly believed that if he didn't, he would be killed. Is he a murderer by the letter of the law? Is it Manslaughter? Is it justifiable self defense? I don't know the answer to these questions, and like I said, I'm really torn on this case. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 From what I understand, in the real life situation, and especially in that last scenario, the Stand Your Ground laws would exonerate Zimmerman. I think the outrage is just over how crazy the laws that are on the books are. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 It's interesting. So many different scenarios and possible outcomes. I think overall we agree on everything but what kind of person Zimmerman is. You're giving him more benefit of a doubt than I have been willing too. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 It's interesting. So many different scenarios and possible outcomes. I think overall we agree on everything but what kind of person Zimmerman is. You're giving him more benefit of a doubt than I have been willing too. It's funny when I heard this story , your old job came to mind. I saw you referred to it earlier. You being smart call police and don't engage. Zimmerman is a vigilante and gets himself into trouble. Again like you guys say only 2 people know what happened, one is dead. The American way is 4-5 years from now Zimmerman tells the whole story. Books and movies are made. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 I'd like to hear Dale's in-depth take on the Zimmerman case. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Untilted 158 Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 I'd like to hear Dale's in-depth take on the Zimmerman case. I like mine slightly buttered and salted please 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Babying 613 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I am not defending Zimmerman but I do believe that he is innocent because of the Stand Your Ground law. Also if you look Martin is not a saint. Why did the prosecutor not call on Martin's friends and past? Who really knows what happen but I really really really hate when people use the race card. I look at myself as a Canadian first and nothing else. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 So since you think he might be a bad kid he then deserved to die? Or did I read that completely wrong? He had been suspended from school a couple times. Never arrested. Oh he smoked pot. Nevermind. Criminal. Uh. I don't care if he was a thug. Wasn't Zimmermans right IMO to take his life. On a side note. Also skimming through testimony, I see that a dispatcher reported that Martin ran away from Zimmerman. That doesn't seem to any of you that Zimmerman took the initiative to start the confrontation? I really think that was an important part of this boho actually started this thing. To me all signs point to Zimmerman. Who also seemed to call the police about every black person he saw and days after a woman came forward and said he was racist behind knows. Still think race didn't play a large role in the crime, only on the verdict. Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Until a few days ago I was pretty outside all this. I try not to get myself too into such things when I know there are much bigger things going on, and this case seemed a classic example of a situation being blown way out of proportion because it hit all of the sexy media targets....guns, race, death. Throw in today's world of everyone needing an opinion on everything trending and we have a never ending buffet of opinions from the uninformed masses. Armies are taking over governments, but CNN is reporting on a trial about 1 death, and I'm talking BEFORE the verdict was announced last weekend. If this was 2 black guys, we would never have heard about it. Being in Florida this week, it's all Zimmerman, all the time. And the only thing I have to say is "I don't know". That, and I can't figure out how some of you get such strong feelings about people you have never met and convict them in the public eye without knowing anything about them. Im comfortable saying I don't know about a lot of this case, and my biggest I don't know is if Zimmerman is an a hole or if Martin was a criminal waiting to happen. Frankly the more I read and watch, the more conflicted I am. Lots of possibilities. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share Posted July 17, 2013 I'd like to hear Dale's in-depth take on the Zimmerman case. There simply wasn't enough evidence to meet the burden of proof. With so many possible outcomes and Stand Your Ground/Self Defense laws there's a strong argument this case shouldn't even have made it to trial. It makes you wonder why it did. I also wonder why Obama would say Trayvon Martin looks just like the son he would've had? Nothing like a good nationally covered racial trial to distract from the bullshit of a corrupt government. At least the courts still consider people innocent until proven guilty. http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/opinion/thernstrom-trayvon-martin-obama/index.html Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Until a few days ago I was pretty outside all this. I try not to get myself too into such things when I know there are much bigger things going on, and this case seemed a classic example of a situation being blown way out of proportion because it hit all of the sexy media targets....guns, race, death. Throw in today's world of everyone needing an opinion on everything trending and we have a never ending buffet of opinions from the uninformed masses. Armies are taking over governments, but CNN is reporting on a trial about 1 death, and I'm talking BEFORE the verdict was announced last weekend. If this was 2 black guys, we would never have heard about it. Being in Florida this week, it's all Zimmerman, all the time. And the only thing I have to say is "I don't know". That, and I can't figure out how some of you get such strong feelings about people you have never met and convict them in the public eye without knowing anything about them. Im comfortable saying I don't know about a lot of this case, and my biggest I don't know is if Zimmerman is an a hole or if Martin was a criminal waiting to happen. Frankly the more I read and watch, the more conflicted I am. Lots of possibilities. Agree with the bolded. CNN is notorious for front-burnering the "gun control" issue above and beyond anything else, and overreporting any stories that would work to further that agenda. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I haven't watched CNN in years or have visited their website so just want to get that out there. The NSA can checkup phone and computer and probably cable box to prove that. My interest is mostly because of law. I have a paralegal degree and still wavering on going to law school. As I tweeted to Dave yesterday, I'm just enjoying the debate we are having. I'm stuck conversing with a 2 yr old all day about trains fire trucks and yogurt. This is needed for my sanity. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Sorry sitting in eye doctor waiting for eyes to dilate. CNN and FOX news pander to their respective sides. Neither should be your first choice for news and if it still surprises you that they do so it might be time to crawl out if the hole. Daily show and Colbert are better sources than those two. I hate having my eyes dilated Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Yeah I find the law aspect of it pretty fascinating. I don't think it is a more significant murder case than any other number of murders that happen daily. It's just so publicized, and the information is so readily available, that it makes it an interesting case study. I did some more reading last night on the legalities of the self defense claim. Apparantly, even if Zimmerman stalked him, and initiated the confrontation, he is still eligible to claim self defense, as long as he didn't start the confrontation with an action that would be considered a felony assault. So, if Zimmerman started the fight by punching Martin, he would not be eligible for self defense. Ironically, in this situation, had there been no death, both parties probably could have legally argued self defense for their actions. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I can pretty much sum up my minimal feelings about the Zimmerman trial (circus) with two words...Roderick Scott. Never heard of him? I'm entirely unsurprised, because the national and international media completely ignored his case because it didn't fit the agenda and it was only widely reported in the Rochester area. Roderick Scott heard a commotion going on outside his house, and looked out the window to find three teenage kids breaking into his neighbor's car to steal whatever they could find...cigarettes, loose change, cell chargers...anything sitting around that they could easily grab. They had been going up and down the street all night at 1am breaking into every car they could easily access. Mr. Scott retrieved his pistol from it's lockbox, told his girlfriend to call 911 and went outside to confront the kids and stop them from ripping off his neighbor. The three teenagers decided that they weren't interested in hanging around to be arrested, and one of the kids decided to rush and attempt to attack Mr. Scott to get the gun away from him. Mr. Scott defended himself from the attack and the kid died. Mr. Scott was put on trial for manslaughter (a lesser charge than Zimmerman was acquitted for), and he too was (in my opinion, correctly) exonerated as the jury found he acted appropriately under the law and in self-defense. If you're wondering why the media didn't make a firestorm out of this case...here is a picture of Roderick Scott: and here is a picture of Chris Cervini, the teenager who was shot and killed in a very nice Rochester suburb: The media cherry-picks the cases that they want you to get fired up about. Case closed, end of story, they do it and they do it all day long. The national news media is about furthering a very specific agenda, and they will only report on stories that seek to further that agenda. And for the record, I supported Roderick Scott's side of the case when all of this was going on. Yes, he willfully put himself into a dangerous situation that he could have avoided, but in the eyes and the letter of the law he did nothing wrong in the course of defending his own life and personal security. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Steve, or anyone else in the USA, what do you watch for news? I freely admit that while vacationing here, it's CNN I turn to, as the channels are limited and I know of no other choices that allow for unbiased reporting. The night of the verdict, I think every channel including teletoon had someone speaking about the verdict and the possibility of riots, since really that was what worried middle class America the most. Let's face it, the news fear mongers to get as many people as possible to watch. But where do you go for unbiased fair reporting of the news? Where would you read today for the facts of the case or just today's news? I think every source is slanted and every source is tainted in some way. Hate to sound so defeatist but it's my honest opinion. Good one about Scott, Adam. My personal feeling is that the laws that allow these guys to "protect" themselves scares the hell out of me for the future. Or the present, since I'm walking around Florida Link to post Share on other sites
MapleLeafpoker 1,462 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Also, the wife and I have a running joke about occasionally watching Kardashians while on vacation (you know, mindless crap for downtime) and since it's been all rain last 24hrs., I'm now realizing this E channel shows the same KKK episodes like 80% of the day. Is this really that much of a watched show that you gotta watch it like over and over again too? Holy crap. I'm constantly amazed by reality tv, and the constant awfulness of it all. Hollywood ex's? Honey Fat Boo Fat Fart show? Wtf is wrong with people. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I can pretty much sum up my minimal feelings about the Zimmerman trial (circus) with two words...Roderick Scott. Never heard of him? I'm entirely unsurprised, because the national and international media completely ignored his case because it didn't fit the agenda and it was only widely reported in the Rochester area. Roderick Scott heard a commotion going on outside his house, and looked out the window to find three teenage kids breaking into his neighbor's car to steal whatever they could find...cigarettes, loose change, cell chargers...anything sitting around that they could easily grab. They had been going up and down the street all night at 1am breaking into every car they could easily access. Mr. Scott retrieved his pistol from it's lockbox, told his girlfriend to call 911 and went outside to confront the kids and stop them from ripping off his neighbor. The three teenagers decided that they weren't interested in hanging around to be arrested, and one of the kids decided to rush and attempt to attack Mr. Scott to get the gun away from him. Mr. Scott defended himself from the attack and the kid died. Mr. Scott was put on trial for manslaughter (a lesser charge than Zimmerman was acquitted for), and he too was (in my opinion, correctly) exonerated as the jury found he acted appropriately under the law and in self-defense. If you're wondering why the media didn't make a firestorm out of this case...here is a picture of Roderick Scott: and here is a picture of Chris Cervini, the teenager who was shot and killed in a very nice Rochester suburb: The media cherry-picks the cases that they want you to get fired up about. Case closed, end of story, they do it and they do it all day long. The national news media is about furthering a very specific agenda, and they will only report on stories that seek to further that agenda. And for the record, I supported Roderick Scott's side of the case when all of this was going on. Yes, he willfully put himself into a dangerous situation that he could have avoided, but in the eyes and the letter of the law he did nothing wrong in the course of defending his own life and personal security. I agree the media selectively reports stories and that things balloon as half the media hype ends up being about the media hype (or there are "news" stories about jurors getting book deals which only happens because of media hype). But your scenario seems to be laughably different. Among others, there was provable crimes going on, and what appears to be a non-suspicious trail of evidence, as well as living witnesses for the prosecution. Any one of those differences would be very significant relative to the Martin case. I mean, sounds like it is acknowledged Scott confronted people who were stealing from him at the time and visibly committing crimes. You have the right to stop that. Zimmerman followed an unarmed kid going to the corner store. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share Posted July 17, 2013 Also, the wife and I have a running joke about occasionally watching Kardashians while on vacation (you know, mindless crap for downtime) and since it's been all rain last 24hrs., I'm now realizing this E channel shows the same KKK episodes like 80% of the day. Is this really that much of a watched show that you gotta watch it like over and over again too? Holy crap. I'm constantly amazed by reality tv, and the constant awfulness of it all. Hollywood ex's? Honey Fat Boo Fat Fart show? Wtf is wrong with people. There is a reason I don't own a gun. Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 There is a reason I don't own a gun. I can't even remember the last time I turned on the E! channel. I also found it utterly hilarious that KK voiced an opinion about the verdict when her dad is the guy who helped get OJ off. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I read that case and I have zero issue with him being aquitted. But reading the case with Zimmerman I don't come to the same conclusion. And again, I don't give a poop about what the media has to say or whatever. I started reading about the Zimmerman case the day I sat in a restaurant in Mackinac City last Friday watching the closing arguments on their bar TV. Asked Liz what the case was all about and she told me a little as she wasn't following either. Then I read some stuff about what happened. Media played zero part in my opinions in this case. Unless the evil media somehow faked court documents and such. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now