Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

In my foreign land, murder is OKFollow

#52 Mar 21 2012 at 6:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
27,898 posts
Nilatai wrote:
WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE GETTING SIDETRACKED BY GBAJI'S RACISM BULLSHIT?

This kid was killed, regardless of if the guy was racist or not, he still murdered a child.

He needs to be put away for a long time.



Well, that's the question. If the guy thought he was in danger, it plays differently. In Florida, at least; granted, Florida is Derp Central.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#53 Mar 21 2012 at 6:18 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Thumbelyna Quick Hands wrote:
I stand corrected on the numbers. But every call that Zimmerman made to police that day were to report "suspicious persons" were African-American.


The six calls released by the Sheriffs department were not all from "that day", but were calls made to the non emergency number over a period of a month or so prior to the incident (or even up to 6 months, the information isn't completely clear in the articles I've read).

Quote:
Further, Zimmerman actually didn't even call 9-1-1. He called the nonemergency line to report. That leads me to believe that it wasn't a true emergency. If it was a true emergency, where he thought his life was threatened, he would have called 9-1-1.


Yup. Which would also indicate that he wasn't intending to escalate this up to the point of shooting the guy either.

Quote:
By law, he didn't have to follow the dispatcher when the dispatcher told him not to follow Martin. But he did anyways. If he truly thought it was an emergency where his life or his neighborhood was threatened and could justify use of deadly force, why didn't he call 9-1-1?


Because at the time he called, he was just reporting a suspicious person, so he correctly called the non emergency line. It was only when Martin ran and he followed that an altercation occurred and things escalated to the point of him shooting. Surely we can all envision the possibility that he intended to just confront Martin about what he was doing, but once they got into a scuffle (regardless of how exactly that started) he might have felt threatened enough to justify the shooting.

Quote:
Have you listened to the 9-1-1 call? Zimmerman is completely calm during the call. He doesn't sound scared, never stated that he was scared, never said that he thought he was in danger. He said that Martin was checking him out, had something in his hand, and then Martin started running. That's when he started chasing after Martin. Dispatch told he didn't have to run after Zimmerman but Zimmerman did. He wasn't obliged to do what dispatch told him to do, but he did anyways. Listen to 2:22, which is where the supposed slur is said.


Again, I can't listen to audio right at the moment, but I've read the transcripts and two different news agencies who've had audio experts examine the tape. If you hear the word "coon" it's because you've already been told that's the word being said. Suggestion is an amazing thing.



A selection of witnesses, presumably those with the stories most likely to elicit responses of outrage. Witnesses who've gone to the media after the event became national news, but how many went to the police and filed reports? How then can we blame the police for their actions? It just seems like there's a lot of "start with an assumption about what happened and the only report stuff that supports that assumption" going on.

I prefer to base my opinions on objective facts. But a lot of this seems biased and selectively reported by people with a vested interest in making Zimmerman's actions out to be horrific, and Martin's to be completely innocent. In reality, it's more likely that something in-between happened though.


Quote:
ETA: I already pointed out why there is such a fury over this situation. The police investigation was shoddy and witnesses are claiming that their statements were twisted or leading questions were used.


According to several news articles, Martin's girlfriend never went to the police. She chose instead to file her testimony to the court of public opinion. And while that's a sure way to whip up a nice mob, it's *not* the best way to investigate something. You can't place all the blame on the police here.

Quote:
Remember, Trayvon Martin died on February 26. It's now March 21, almost a month later. During that entire time, the one witness that the police NEVER contacted was Trayvon Martin's girlfriend.


And she never contacted them either, and is still remaining anonymous (last time I checked at least). Goes both ways. The police found no evidence at the scene to dispute Zimmerman's account. In fact, if you'd read the second page of your own link, they found plenty of evidence that supported his account (and disputed some of the witnesses now being repeated in the media):

Quote:
Mr. Zimmerman’s claim is that the confrontation was initiated by Trayvon,” Police Chief Bill Lee said in an interview. “I am not going into specifics of what led to the violent physical encounter witnessed by residents. All the physical evidence and testimony we have independent of what Mr. Zimmerman provides corroborates this claim to self-defense.”

To claim self-defense, someone has to show there was danger of great bodily harm or death, Lee said. “Zimmerman had injuries consistent with his story,” Lee said.

Zimmerman had a damp shirt, grass stains, a bloody nose and was bleeding from a wound in back of his head, according to police reports


That's a heck of a lot of injury and mess for someone who supposedly never got into a physical altercation. Yet, the main pair of witnesses reported hearing a boy screaming or crying, but insisted that there was no physical fight or struggle. Clearly, they were wrong, unless Zimmerman did all that damage to himself somehow. So if the cops dismissed their insistence that there wasn't a physical struggle, it might be because the physical evidence right in front of them told them a better story than two people hearing sounds through a window.

Quote:
The one he was on the phone with just seconds before Zimmerman caught up with him. What excuse is there for the police not to cover that glaring hole in their investigation? If the police did their job correctly, Zimmerman's self-defense theory would have have been weakened weeks ago.


You're assuming that they failed to try to contact her.

Quote:
I will say that I am going to wait to see what the autopsy results say about Trayvon Martin's body. If the autopsy comes out that he had no marks (and I should Smiley: lol with that phrase in this forum) to indicate a fight with Zimmerman, I want to see how Zimmerman can say that he was in fear for his life to justify deadly force under the Stand Your Ground law, particularly when he was already chasing Trayvon.


Again, we can question how the encounter escalated into a physical fight, but it's absolutely clear that there was one. There's also clearly more information than is being broadly repeated out there. What I see is a large number of people who've chosen to pre-judge this and who are repeating only the parts of the story that support their own position. Anyone reacting to just their claims is only hearing half the story.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 5:31pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#54 Mar 21 2012 at 6:20 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
Quote:
Again, I can't listen to audio right at the moment, but I've read the transcripts and two different news agencies who've had audio experts examine the tape. If you hear the word "coon" it's because you've already been told that's the word being said. Suggestion is an amazing thing.


I watched the video without knowing what the supposed slur was, so no. And it certainly wasn't the word I was expecting.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#55 Mar 21 2012 at 6:22 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,595 posts
I can't help but wonder how it would have played out if it was an unemployed black man in a ghetto that shot a lost, pretty, white cheerleader? I can't help but see the racial divide in this case.
____________________________
Nicroll 65 Assassin
Teltorid 52 Druid
Aude Sapere

Oh hell camp me all you want f**kers. I own this site and thus I own you. - Allakhazam
#56 Mar 21 2012 at 6:24 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Nilatai wrote:
WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE GETTING SIDETRACKED BY GBAJI'S RACISM BULLSHIT?


It's not a sidetrack when several people insisted that the killing was racially motivated and the Justice Department is getting involved in the issue specifically because of the potential of this being a hate crime (ie: racially motivated). The primary reason a whole lot of people are getting involved in this is because of the assumption of racial motivation. You think the NAACP would be involved if the kid wasn't black and there wasn't a claim that his killer was motivated by race?

Quote:
This kid was killed, regardless of if the guy was racist or not, he still murdered a child.

He needs to be put away for a long time.


And why bother with things like police investigations, courts and juries when you know this for a fact right now! Mob rule is just great, right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#57 Mar 21 2012 at 6:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
I agree that it needs an investigation. I don't agree with you that the department in question (which doesn't have the best track record in racial bias cases) has handled it appropriately. Frankly, the hate crime aspect just makes it worse.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#58 Mar 21 2012 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
xythex wrote:
I can't help but wonder how it would have played out if it was an unemployed black man in a ghetto that shot a lost, pretty, white cheerleader? I can't help but see the racial divide in this case.


Make it a fair comparison. What if it were a middle class black man with no criminal record, who was part of a citizen patrol or neighborhood watch or whatever he was part of, who encountered a young white kid wearing a hoodie and otherwise doing exactly what Martin did. Same case. Same struggle. Same result.

Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

I'm betting none of us would have heard about it. So let's not play the "if things were reversed" game. The police absolutely would have sided with the guy who regularly communicated with them as a citizen living in the area, who had a concealed carry permit and was otherwise appearing to be acting to protect his community. They would have done this regardless of the skin color of the man himself. Hell. They *did* do it in this case. Looked at a picture of Zimmerman? He's pretty obviously Latino, yet I don't see anyone falling over themselves to argue that the police were more likely to believe him because he's Latino. Strange, isn't it?

Where's all the folks being shocked that a Latino with a gun who just shot someone wasn't immediately assumed to be a criminal, and perhaps even an illegal immigrant, and hauled off by the evil police? Funny how situational our racial perceptions are.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#59 Mar 21 2012 at 6:36 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
So two of the co-authors of the bill have chimed in, saying that it should not protect Zimmerman in this case, as his choice to pursue the boy invalidates his right to protection under it. Even if the actual confrontation was started by the boy, it seems the pursuit should apparently cause the case to exceed the broad boundaries of protection--even if you want to argue that ultimate blame lies with the Maxly, enough lies with Zimmerman.

[EDIT]
Quote:
Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

I'm betting none of us would have heard about it. So let's not play the "if things were reversed" game. The police absolutely would have sided with the guy who regularly communicated with them as a citizen living in the area, who had a concealed carry permit and was otherwise appearing to be acting to protect his community.


That's one of the biggest critiques at the moment. The federal investigation was launched several weeks after the event, and most people feel that the outrage is what prompted them to question the police department. If it hadn't gained news coverage, there's a good chance nothing would have been done. And even if you want to argue that the events aren't clear enough for an arrest, we can both agree that they are clear enough to warrant a more critical investigation.

And the shooter has a criminal record that includes a fight with a cop. And even if he did have a perfectly clean slate, I'm not okay with the police choosing sides. Ever.

[EDIT2]
Quote:
Where's all the folks being shocked that a Latino with a gun who just shot someone wasn't immediately assumed to be a criminal, and perhaps even an illegal immigrant, and hauled off by the evil police? Funny how situational our racial perceptions are.


Until today, I didn't even know that he considered himself Hispanic. And I still don't care. I wouldn't care if he was black, white, Asian, etc. He shot a defenseless kid, and I want to know what justified him to do so.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 8:41pm by idiggory
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#60 Mar 21 2012 at 6:39 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
7,426 posts
Quote:
The six calls released by the Sheriffs department were not all from "that day", but were calls made to the non emergency number over a period of a month or so prior to the incident (or even up to 6 months, the information isn't completely clear in the articles I've read).


Yet you provide arbitrary dating based on that incomplete information. Do you even know how to make an effective argument?
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#61 Mar 21 2012 at 6:47 PM Rating: Excellent
******
41,289 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Quote:
"report and hope for the best" isn't exactly correct when it comes to civilian organizations like neighborhood watch and such.
Being allowed by law, and being what he should do are two different things.
Well yeah, if you cut the first half of the sentence you quoted to remove the context you could make that argument.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#62 Mar 21 2012 at 6:48 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
So two of the co-authors of the bill have chimed in, saying that it should not protect Zimmerman in this case, as his choice to pursue the boy invalidates his right to protection under it. Even if the actual confrontation was started by the boy, it seems the pursuit should apparently cause the case to exceed the broad boundaries of protection--even if you want to argue that ultimate blame lies with the Maxly, enough lies with Zimmerman.


I'm not an expert on the specifics of this law in particular, but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they're taking that position so as to avoid the law being questioned in relation to this case. In reality though, that law has been cited for not pursuing shooting cases claimed to be self-defense in situations that are far less applicable. One article I read spoke of a case where two groups of gang bangers got into a shootout on a public street, and one was killed. Both sides claimed self defense, so the police just sorta threw up their hands.

Given that he is claiming self defense, I think that the law absolutely does apply. And in this case, it's more applicable than in other cases (like the example above). He's on private property within a gated community. He's a member of that community, and presumably pays homeowner fees (making it property he can defend just like if he were on his front yard). He's also a member of the neighborhood watch organization (or whatever they call it specifically) and has been active in interacting with police for some time. Those lawmakers would have a point if this had occurred on a random public street, but that wasn't the case here. And, as I pointed out, the law has been used in cases that were on public streets with neither party having any specific property claim to protect, so their claim in this case is particularly weak.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#63 Mar 21 2012 at 6:57 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,246 posts
Samira wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE GETTING SIDETRACKED BY GBAJI'S RACISM BULLSHIT?

This kid was killed, regardless of if the guy was racist or not, he still murdered a child.

He needs to be put away for a long time.



Well, that's the question. If the guy thought he was in danger, it plays differently. In Florida, at least; granted, Florida is Derp Central.


Unless the kid was armed, which he wasn't, there's no way he's taking down that other guy. That's the point, isn't it? The only way to justify him killing the kid is if his life was in danger.

From what I can see, he was the only one who was armed.

Also, gbaji, fuck you. This guy should be in a cell, pending investigation. From what I've read, the police chief pretty much decided he was innocent right off the bat. Not cool.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#64 Mar 21 2012 at 7:08 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
The six calls released by the Sheriffs department were not all from "that day", but were calls made to the non emergency number over a period of a month or so prior to the incident (or even up to 6 months, the information isn't completely clear in the articles I've read).


Yet you provide arbitrary dating based on that incomplete information. Do you even know how to make an effective argument?


Huh? What argument? I'm just stating that the article isn't clear about what exact time period those six calls it released were from. It's clear that the calls occurred on different days, but what's not clear is what time period the calls occurred over. The article mentions that police only keep the audio records for 6 months (so that's the longest period of time), but it's not clear if these six are the only six calls he made in 6 months (which seems unlikely if he made 46 calls over a period of just over a year), or if those are the most recent ones, or if there's some other criteria going on.

That's all I was saying. All we can say for sure is that those six recordings had to have all occurred within the last 6 months. We can't say when exactly, or how many more there are, or frankly anything else about them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#65 Mar 21 2012 at 7:11 PM Rating: Good
******
41,289 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Unless the kid was armed, which he wasn't, there's no way he's taking down that other guy.
Just to play devil's advocate correctly, how exactly do we know the kid couldn't handle himself in a fight? Size and age don't really mean much. Just look at Morihei Ueshiba. He was in his late 70s/80s, had trouble moving unassisted and probably weighed a good 90lbs soaking wet, yet could easily throw people a third of his age and four times his size.

I feel the need to point out that, again, not so much a comment on the Zimmerman case, just that the assumption that size and age mattering isn't really a fair assessment when it comes to fighting prowess. For all we know, he could have torn the older and heftier man apart. It really doesn't take much.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 9:12pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#66 Mar 21 2012 at 7:11 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Quote:
"report and hope for the best" isn't exactly correct when it comes to civilian organizations like neighborhood watch and such.
Being allowed by law, and being what he should do are two different things.
Well yeah, if you cut the first half of the sentence you quoted to remove the context you could make that argument.


I don't really know what context I'm missing, tbh. I was just commenting on the policies of the organizations, not what someone is legally allowed to do. You said that "report and hope for the best" wasn't the policy of NW organizations, but that's false--that's exactly their policy.

Granted, he wasn't actually a part of a NW, afaik. My impression of the situation is that he's just taken it upon himself to do this.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#67 Mar 21 2012 at 7:15 PM Rating: Good
****
4,595 posts
Has the media further clarified what exactly "Head of the Neighborhood Watch" means in this case? Does this community actually have a recognized elected post, or is this like how I've declared myself exquisite, supreme emperor and undisputed beloved ruler for all eternity, and then a little beyond, of my local park?

Also, I'd like to distance myself from the quarter and hang him from his own community gate guardshack flagpole crowd. He's certainly not guilty yet, but he should be charged with manslaughter and appropriately detained similar to anyone else in the free world whom is suspected of gunning down an unarmed kid in the street. I would say that the evidence is more than reasonable for that.
____________________________
Nicroll 65 Assassin
Teltorid 52 Druid
Aude Sapere

Oh hell camp me all you want f**kers. I own this site and thus I own you. - Allakhazam
#68 Mar 21 2012 at 7:19 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
xythex wrote:
Has the media further clarified what exactly "Head of the Neighborhood Watch" means in this case? Does this community actually have a recognized elected post, or is this like how I've declared myself exquisite, supreme emperor and undisputed beloved ruler for all eternity, and then a little beyond, of my local park?

Also, I'd like to distance myself from the quarter and hang him from his own community gate guardshack flagpole crowd. He's certainly not guilty yet, but he should be charged with manslaughter and appropriately detained similar to anyone else in the free world whom is suspected of gunning down an unarmed kid in the street. I would say that the evidence is more than reasonable for that.


I know their watch, if they have one, is not actually recognized by the larger organization (USA on Watch), and I haven't seen anything suggesting it's one that the police group organizes (as Zimmerman doesn't identify himself as a member in the police call). That doesn't mean he's not part of a group that set one up and, for some reason, has just decided not to take advantage of the resources available to them. But my impression is that he is the neighborhood watch.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#69 Mar 21 2012 at 7:23 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,246 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Unless the kid was armed, which he wasn't, there's no way he's taking down that other guy.
Just to play devil's advocate correctly, how exactly do we know the kid couldn't handle himself in a fight? Size and age don't really mean much. Just look at Morihei Ueshiba. He was in his late 70s/80s, had trouble moving unassisted and probably weighed a good 90lbs soaking wet, yet could easily throw people a third of his age and four times his size.

I feel the need to point out that, again, not so much a comment on the Zimmerman case, just that the assumption that size and age mattering isn't really a fair assessment when it comes to fighting prowess. For all we know, he could have torn the older and heftier man apart. It really doesn't take much.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 9:12pm by lolgaxe

Fair point, probably a bad assumption. The point still stands Zimmerman was armed and the kid wasn't, though. I just don't see how he can justify shooting him.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#70 Mar 21 2012 at 7:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Nilatai wrote:

Unless the kid was armed, which he wasn't, there's no way he's taking down that other guy.


So no one has ever been harmed by an assailant who wasn't armed (presumably you mean "armed with a gun")?

Quote:
That's the point, isn't it? The only way to justify him killing the kid is if his life was in danger.


Not according to the law. I just quoted the statement from the police on this matter. Sigh:

Quote:
To claim self-defense, someone has to show there was danger of great bodily harm or death, Lee said. “Zimmerman had injuries consistent with his story,” Lee said.

Zimmerman had a damp shirt, grass stains, a bloody nose and was bleeding from a wound in back of his head, according to police reports.


Saying that he's only justified if his life is in danger is simply wrong. Great bodily harm is sufficient. Um... And frankly, protection of property is sufficient as well, which may be applicable in this case.

Quote:
From what I can see, he was the only one who was armed.


Doesn't matter.

Quote:
Also, gbaji, fuck you. This guy should be in a cell, pending investigation. From what I've read, the police chief pretty much decided he was innocent right off the bat. Not cool.


The police took him downtown, questioned him, examined the evidence and made a determination that his story matched the evidence. They then decided not to pursue any charges against him and let him go. Which is precisely what the police are supposed to do.

Let me repeat (again) another part of a quote I already provided:

Quote:
Mr. Zimmerman’s claim is that the confrontation was initiated by Trayvon,” Police Chief Bill Lee said in an interview. “I am not going into specifics of what led to the violent physical encounter witnessed by residents. All the physical evidence and testimony we have independent of what Mr. Zimmerman provides corroborates this claim to self-defense.”


The police did not just take his word for it. They looked at "all the physical evidence" and "all the testimony" and found that it corroborated his story. What you (and many others) are doing is ignoring the physical evidence and looking only at a subset of the testimony, basing a judgment off of that, and then insisting that since the cops didn't see it the same way that they must be wrong, or incompetent, or something more sinister. It's you who are looking only at part of the picture and leaping to a conclusion.


Look at all the information out there, not just the stuff being shouted the most loudly. Be objective. It's not as simple as some are making this out to be. Let me be clear, I'm not precluding the possibility that Zimmerman is an evil racist who cruises around looking for black kids to hunt down and kill, but that just seems unlikely in this case. Why this kid? Why this night? I mean, it's possible he just snapped and went off on some crazed racist rampage or something, but you'd need more than just the facts of this case to make that claim.

Which is more likely? That a guy who lives in a mixed race community just out of the blue picked this one black kid out of presumably thousands he's seen walking around over the last year and decided to kill him. Or that Martin did something which gave him cause to suspect him, and then did something which made him believe his life was in danger? I've personally been accosted by neighborhood watch types in the past. And while I usually think that they're a bit overbearing and self-important, I've never fled from one, and certainly never got into a scuffle with one. I think that sometimes, people's own assumptions can make them do things which bring on these sorts of altercations. That can be said of Zimmerman's actions, but it can (and should) also be said of Martin's. The fact is that had he simply been walking along normally and hadn't tried to duck Zimmerman, and then hadn't run when Zimmerman found him again, he would be alive today.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Mar 21 2012 at 7:39 PM Rating: Excellent
******
41,289 posts
iddiggory wrote:
I don't really know what context I'm missing, tbh.
It was that "while the guidelines say to not engage, there is no rule or law saying that the individuals can't stop and detain an individual should they be capable of doing so." Like the rest of the post, it would require both a crime to have been committed and witnessed, and the need and capability to restrain the suspect. Just because an organization (or a generic offspring of said organization) suggests not to, it doesn't mean to not try to prevent a criminal from getting away. If someone steals a purse and runs past you, would you honestly just stand there or would you try to trip up the thief? Especially if he was smaller than you and unarmed?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#72 Mar 21 2012 at 7:49 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
Ah, I misread you then. I apologize.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#73 Mar 21 2012 at 8:16 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Nadenu wrote:
If everyone in this thread was arguing that Martin deserved it, gbaji would be arguing that Zimmerman was a racist. It doesn't matter what anyone here says, gbaji's going to argue in the other direction. It's been this way ever since he came off his meds, or got dropped on the head, or whatever it was that's changed him so much.

It's nothing that complex. Gbaji argues against the media, or scientists or experts or whoever because he thinks it makes him the smartest guy in the room to totally go against what "those guys want you to think" but he's such an independent thinker and unwilling to be led.

The difference between him and your average 15 year old is... around thirty years.

I'm speaking generally. I haven't been following this particular story at all except for bits and pieces.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 9:17pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#74 Mar 21 2012 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
Seriously? I always pictured gbaji as being 28, max. Then again, I've pictured him at that age for years now...
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#75 Mar 21 2012 at 8:23 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
Nilatai wrote:
WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE GETTING SIDETRACKED BY GBAJI'S RACISM BULLSHIT?

Because it's the easiest argument for gbaji to pick apart, which is why he focused on it.

Quote:
This kid was killed, regardless of if the guy was racist or not, he still murdered a child.

He needs to be put away for a long time.

I would like to see an actual investigation done, not some dog and pony show by the good ol' boy network.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 10:24pm by Debalic
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#76 Mar 21 2012 at 8:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Now that everyone around me has left for the day I've listened to the full audio. While it's not completely clear what he said, I'm inclined to agree with the the audio experts at one of the news outlets (can't find the name right at the moment) who concluded that he said "fucking punks". The second word very clearly starts with a "p" sound, not a "c". It sounds like he trailed off the last part of the word, making it sound like "oon". Given that it's said under his breath, it makes more sense that he just softened the "k" sound at the end, than anything else.

Also, he does not make a huge point of the fact that Martin is black like is implied in some of the reports. He is asked whether the suspect is black, white, or hispanic, and he says that he looks black, but it's clear in the audio that he's not sure at that point. Then he says that the guy is walking towards him. Then he says "he's a black male". I interpreted that to mean that once he got close enough and was facing him, he was able to confirm that he was a black male and fully answer the question asked of him earlier. There was nothing unusual about this IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#77 Mar 21 2012 at 8:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
27,898 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Unless the kid was armed, which he wasn't, there's no way he's taking down that other guy. That's the point, isn't it? The only way to justify him killing the kid is if his life was in danger.


If the shooter believed the kid was armed and coming for him, he'd be protected under the law even if he were mistaken. Of course this depends on convincing twelve of your peers that you sincerely thought your life was in danger; but again, Derp Central.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#78 Mar 21 2012 at 8:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
GUYS.

Gbaji just agreed with an expert.

Granted, it's unclear who this expert is, but still. Progress.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#79 Mar 21 2012 at 8:36 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
This doesn't even have to be a racial prejudice crime to know that Zimmerman was already making assumptions, and feeling aggressive about strangers in his neighbourhood at night. Right at the start of the call Zimmerman reports that there have been a string of burglaries in his neighbourhood recently. He then goes on to say that the teen is "looking at the houses". He repeats at least a couple of times that the teen is carrying something that he can't make out, and then says about 1 minutes in or so "these ass-holes always get away". I like to look at houses, and trees, even when it's raining, and Martin was new to the neighbourhood. I presume he was rubbernecking in the same way I would in a new area.

Zimmerman has clearly decided, before he got anywhere near Martin, that Martin is a burgler.

The dispatch caller seems to pick this up, and tries several ways to de-escalate the situation. He says "you don't need to follow him", stresses the police are on their way at least twice, asks for Zimmerman's full name and phone number, and tries more than once to get Zimmerman to park in a specific place, and when Zimmerman refuses, asks Zimmerman to meet the police at a specific rendezvous which Zimmerman also refuses.

If the dispatcher was a police officer, Zimmerman failed to comply with police direction several times before he shot Martin.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#80 Mar 21 2012 at 8:43 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
gbaji wrote:
Make it a fair comparison. What if it were a middle class black man with no criminal record, who was part of a citizen patrol or neighborhood watch or whatever he was part of, who encountered a young white kid wearing a hoodie and otherwise doing exactly what Martin did. Same case. Same struggle. Same result.

Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

If the black man was recorded saying "fuckin' honkey" then yes.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#81 Mar 21 2012 at 8:50 PM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
12,959 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Seriously? I always pictured gbaji as being 28, max. Then again, I've pictured him at that age for years now...
Smiley: lol Really?
____________________________
Banh
#82 Mar 21 2012 at 8:51 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,343 posts
Sir Spoonless wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Seriously? I always pictured gbaji as being 28, max. Then again, I've pictured him at that age for years now...
Smiley: lol Really?


Honestly, I've always kinda seen him as a stereotypical frat boy type character. I dunno, the way he thinks just always struck me that way.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#83 Mar 21 2012 at 8:59 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
I honestly wasn't even aware that "coon" was a racial slur. I've never heard of it.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 10:59pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#84 Mar 21 2012 at 9:03 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Make it a fair comparison. What if it were a middle class black man with no criminal record, who was part of a citizen patrol or neighborhood watch or whatever he was part of, who encountered a young white kid wearing a hoodie and otherwise doing exactly what Martin did. Same case. Same struggle. Same result.

Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

If the black man was recorded saying "fuckin' honkey" then yes.
If Zimmerman was black, called to say that there was a string of burglaries in the neighbourhood recently, described a white teen as looking at all the houses, and as carrying something he couldn't make out, and said "these ass-holes always get away with it", then disobeyed several dispatch suggestions then orders, to wait for police and leave the teen alone, then I'd be screaming for justice for the victim too.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#85 Mar 21 2012 at 9:04 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Debalic wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE GETTING SIDETRACKED BY GBAJI'S RACISM BULLSHIT?

Because it's the easiest argument for gbaji to pick apart, which is why he focused on it.


Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Make it a fair comparison. What if it were a middle class black man with no criminal record, who was part of a citizen patrol or neighborhood watch or whatever he was part of, who encountered a young white kid wearing a hoodie and otherwise doing exactly what Martin did. Same case. Same struggle. Same result.

Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

If the black man was recorded saying "fuckin' honkey" then yes.


Seems like someone else is obsessed with race, and it aint me.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#86 Mar 21 2012 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
I honestly wasn't even aware that "coon" was a racial slur. I've never heard of it.

In Australia we have Coon brand cheese. My Canadian and American acquaintances can't believe it when they bump into it in the supermarket.

Coon used to be a racial slur in Oz a long time ago, but it's not used any more that I'm aware of. An attempt to get Coon cheese's named changed failed because the cheese is named for it's original maker and company owner, Mr Coon, and coon is so archaic as a slur.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#87 Mar 21 2012 at 9:10 PM Rating: Good
******
41,289 posts
I've been known to call people honkey once in a while.

I find it hilarious.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#88 Mar 21 2012 at 9:12 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
gbaji wrote:
Make it a fair comparison. What if it were a middle class black man with no criminal record, who was part of a citizen patrol or neighborhood watch or whatever he was part of, who encountered a young white kid wearing a hoodie and otherwise doing exactly what Martin did. Same case. Same struggle. Same result.

Would anyone assume the killing was racially motivated? Would the same volume of people be calling out for "justice" for the victim? Or would we all just have never heard about it?

If the black man was recorded saying "fuckin' honkey" then yes.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#89 Mar 21 2012 at 9:18 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
Well gee, someone accused Coon Cheese of revisionist history, not that you'll be interested:
lolwiki wrote:
The cheese is said to be named after its American creator Edward W. Coon (1871–1934) of Philadelphia, who patented a method, subsequently known as the Cooning process, for fast maturation of cheese via high temperature and humidity.[2][1][3][4][5] Former manufacturer Kraft, and later Dairy Farmers and National Foods, have vigorously defended the trademark.

E. W. Coon was the grandson of Amherst Coon (1795–1877), a farmer born in Russia, New York, who married Sally Betsey Treat in 1822. His sons Mattison (b. 1823) and Ephraim Coon (b. 1832) were described in 1893 as having been in the butter and cheese business together at 29, South Water Street, Philadelphia, for more than thirty years. Ephraim's son Edward Willie Coon was born on July 30, 1871, and had taken out at least one cheese patent by 1912.[6][7]

In August 1923, The Journal and Republican of Lowville, New York, reported the sale by "E. W. Coon of Philadelphia, maker and shipper of cheese", of five milk plants in villages around Watertown to the Dairymen's League Co-operative Association, Inc. It also stated that

While no announcement is made as to which of the numerous Coon plants in northern New York have been bought by the League, it is understood that the big Cape Vincent plant is not among those transferred... The Coon chain of plants include stations at Brownville, Chaumont, Rosiere, Cape Vincent, Clayton and La Fargeville, with several cheese factories in the surrounding territory... Mr Coon's business has been cheese making primarily...[8]

From 1933 a cheese was marketed as Red Coon, and was coated with red wax. The wax was later replaced with cellophane and the red stripe in the logo is a residual reference to the original packaging.[1]

After selling his processing plants, Edward W. Coon became a cheese dealer in Philadelphia. He died in 1934, aged sixty-two.[9]
[edit] Disagreement

The accuracy of Dairy Farmers' account of the origin of the brand has been challenged. Anti-racism campaigner Stephen Hagan has said that he has been unable to find evidence that Edward Coon was a famous cheese maker, contending that the name came instead from the black wraparound in which it was originally sold.[10] In 2008 he was reported to be "questioning the makers of Coon cheese about the origin of the brand name".[11] Hagan has said that Edward Coon was an obscure factory hand who was induced to subscribe his name to the patent for cheese manufacture some time after the brand had been in use.[citation needed]
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#90 Mar 21 2012 at 9:18 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
I honestly wasn't even aware that "coon" was a racial slur. I've never heard of it.

In Australia we have Coon brand cheese. My Canadian and American acquaintances can't believe it when they bump into it in the supermarket.

Coon used to be a racial slur in Oz a long time ago, but it's not used any more that I'm aware of. An attempt to get Coon cheese's named changed failed because the cheese is named for it's original maker and company owner, Mr Coon, and coon is so archaic as a slur.

Reminds me of an exchange between Ice Cube and Mark Wahlberg in the movie Three Kings:

"I don't wanna hear no dune coon or sand nigger from him or anybody."
"He's right, towel-head and camel jockey are perfectly acceptable substitutes."
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#91 Mar 21 2012 at 9:19 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
If Zimmerman was black, called to say that there was a string of burglaries in the neighbourhood recently, described a white teen as looking at all the houses, and as carrying something he couldn't make out, and said "these ass-holes always get away with it", then disobeyed several dispatch suggestions then orders, to wait for police and leave the teen alone, then I'd be screaming for justice for the victim too.


I don't think you would. More correctly, I don't think you'd have ever heard about it because there would be no national news story. No million signatures on a petition demanding action by/against the police. No NAACP folks showing up and demanding justice. No outrage at all. You would never have heard about it.

You do realize that the only reason you know about this case is because the victim was black, right? It fits into a racial context which groups like the NAACP can use, so they swoop in and raise awareness and garner national attention over the issue. You respond to it because of that, not because of the case itself.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#92 Mar 21 2012 at 9:19 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I've been known to call people honkey once in a while.

I find it hilarious.

I often refer to myself as whitebread.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#93 Mar 21 2012 at 9:28 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Well gee, someone accused Coon Cheese of revisionist history, not that you'll be interested:
lolwiki wrote:
] Disagreement

The accuracy of Dairy Farmers' account of the origin of the brand has been challenged. Anti-racism campaigner Stephen Hagan has said that he has been unable to find evidence that Edward Coon was a famous cheese maker, contending that the name came instead from the black wraparound in which it was originally sold.[10] In 2008 he was reported to be "questioning the makers of Coon cheese about the origin of the brand name".[11] Hagan has said that Edward Coon was an obscure factory hand who was induced to subscribe his name to the patent for cheese manufacture some time after the brand had been in use.[citation needed]


Sounds more to me like they're the victims of revisionist history. I'm not sure why there's such a need to single out what really is a pretty obscure racist term as though that's the only use of that word ever. I suppose Davy Crockett never actually wore a "coon skin hat", but the label was invented for the TV show so as to make secret and threatening racist remarks or something equally devious.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#94 Mar 21 2012 at 9:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
No. Excessive Force news stories come up all the time. The latest one in Australia is about the police tasering a guy in his twenties to death. Since no detail of the guy's race came up, I presume he was Caucasian. The guy was running away from the police officer when the officer tasered him and he died of a heart attack.

People are now calling for tasers to be removed from all police except the SWAT type force. They point out that tasers were designed to be used as alternative options to firearms. The most wished for use for them was for tragic situations where psychotic and suicidal men insisted on suicide-by-police. The situations that were too dangerous for police officers to get close enough to use capsicum spray, because the suicidal men/teens are waving a large knife around. However, since tasers were introduced, police fire-arm use has remained exactly the same, deaths by police shootings has remained exactly the same, while taser use has increased exponentially. Obviously tasers aren't being used here as an alternative to fire-arms, but in non dangerous situations where police want a fast way to enforce compliance.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 11:35pm by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#95 Mar 21 2012 at 9:30 PM Rating: Good
**
569 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
I honestly wasn't even aware that "coon" was a racial slur. I've never heard of it.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 10:59pm by Eske



I haven't ever heard it outside the south before but it is widely used down here. Its used in Forest Gump too when he talking about his mom having to run coons(he thought it was the the animal) off the back porch but the guys around him were using it as a slur.


____________________________
.
#96 Mar 21 2012 at 9:30 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
Um, wasn't that hat made out of (or supposedly made out of) Racoon skin?
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#97 Mar 21 2012 at 9:34 PM Rating: Good
******
41,289 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
No. Excessive Force news stories come up all the time. The latest one in Australia is about the police tasering a guy in his twenties to death. Since no detail of the guy's race came up, I presume he was Caucasian. The guy was running away from the police officer when the officer tasered him and he died of a heart attack.
How was that excessive force? Without any details, all it sounds like is the police was following procedure and an unknown complication arose and an unfortunate fatality was the result. Did he fall asleep with his finger holding the trigger for like an hour?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#98 Mar 21 2012 at 9:34 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,621 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Um, wasn't that hat made out of (or supposedly made out of) Racoon skin?

No, black people have brown-and-white ringed tails. I thought everybody knew that...
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#99 Mar 21 2012 at 9:42 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
Tasars have ALWAYS been known to be fatal options when used correctly, in one single short burst to drop the suspect. You are, after all, electocuting someone. They just have smaller odds of killing someone than a torso, head, or thigh artery gun shot. This is why tasers were introduced to be used as an alternative to shooting someone with a gun. Not to be used in any situation where you wouldn't use a gun. From what I've seen on TV, and correct me if I'm wrong, it's illegal for a cop both in American and Australia to shoot someone in the back; from behind; when they're running away, unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#100 Mar 21 2012 at 9:45 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
3,633 posts
Debalic wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Um, wasn't that hat made out of (or supposedly made out of) Racoon skin?

No, black people have brown-and-white ringed tails. I thought everybody knew that...

No, they're orange, but if they catch you staring at it they'll throw a flaming bouncey ball at you.

EDIT:
My bad I was thinking of Italians.

Edited, Mar 21st 2012 11:46pm by SillyXSara
____________________________
Mistress Darqflame wrote:
Sorry, anything representing or remotely resembling a dildo is a nono.
gigasnail wrote:
i'm lighting the freak signal here, sara help me out ~
Redding wrote:
Same ol' Sara now with 50% less hidden penis
#101 Mar 21 2012 at 10:01 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,886 posts
http://abc.com.au/news/2012-03-19/taser-debate-resurfaces-after-death-of-man/3897430

In this Australian case, There was a reported robbery at a convenience store. The police found this man two blocks over, but didn't know if they had the right suspect. He resisted arrest, they capsicum sprayed him, then tasered him. (When I first heard the news report on Melbourne TV news, he was reported as "running away" when he was tasered.) They tried to revive him on the scene. The police are asking for help in identifying the man, as they haven't done so yet. An autopsy is being performed because they don't know how he died. They ALSO have not confirmed that there was a robbery at the convenient store in the first place.

Apparently the suspect didn't produce a weapon while resisting arrest, because no mention of him having a weapon has ever been made. So a police officer used an item they are supposed to use in situations they would previously use a gun in, to arrest a man with no weapon. One single suspect against more than one officer.

Edited, Mar 22nd 2012 12:14am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 53 All times are in CDT
Almalieque, Debalic, Kaolian, Kavekk, lolgaxe, Timelordwho, Anonymous Guests (47)