2012 Elections in 3-D!

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Did 911 tell him not to chase...?

The actual language on the 911 tape was ambiguous: "we don't need you to follow him any more."

Did that mean, "stop following him"? or can a person with neighborhood watch responsibilities reasonably hear that as "we don't need you to follow him" [but if you are able to point him out to us when we arrive, that would be helpful.]

Now, I am not defending the shooter, I'm merely saying that for people to jump in and make this a cause celebre before all the facts emerge might lead to some embarrassment later, that's all.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Now, I am not defending the shooter, I'm merely saying that for people to jump in and make this a cause celebre before all the facts emerge might lead to some embarrassment later, that's all.

This strikes me as a case where a brainless left wing narrative is going to be supplanted by a brainless right wing narrative. That'll be good, since it will insulate everyone from having to actually rethink their set positions.

Most of the "news reporting" of the event has been covering the coverage of the event. If 9/11 happened again, the networks would probably lead with how this would affect the elections.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

This strikes me as a case where a brainless left wing narrative is going to be supplanted by a brainless right wing narrative. That'll be good, since it will insulate everyone from having to actually rethink their set positions.

Which is exactly what Juan Williams was lamenting in his article.


Funny how you and I arrive at the same place from opposite directions sometimes.....

 

[LynahFan]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

So I guess if a guy follows a suspicious guy and gets beat up, he was asking for it? But if a provocatively dressed woman follows a suspicious guy, no still means no?

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

So by the Florida law, if Zimmerman chased Martin and Martin felt threatened...

You won't hear me defending that law.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Not sure why the issue of this guy's decision to ignore the instructions of the 911 operator is being emphasized so much. It was obviously a foolish decision but, I guess I don't see that that issue is all that relevant in determining whether or not the shooting was justified. There seems to be this belief among the 'string up now, ask questions later' crowd (not to say that you are one of those) that because Zimmerman decided to pursue Martin against the instructions of the operator, he has lost all right to physically defend himself IF attacked.

Had he stopped following Martin, Zimmerman would not have had to defend himself (if that even happened). Whatever happened, he put himself in the situation by following the kid. Had he stopped following the kid and left it to the police the shooting would never have taken place. It isn't like he came across Martin committing a crime and stepped in to stop it. He saw a young black man walking down the street and decided that looked suspicious. I realize that in the right hands Skittles might be lethal weapons, but in this case I'm going out on a limb and guess he was just going to eat them.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Had he stopped following Martin, Zimmerman would not have had to defend himself (if that even happened). Whatever happened, he put himself in the situation by following the kid. Had he stopped following the kid and left it to the police the shooting would never have taken place. It isn't like he came across Martin committing a crime and stepped in to stop it. He saw a young black man walking down the street and decided that looked suspicious. I realize that in the right hands Skittles might be lethal weapons, but in this case I'm going out on a limb and guess he was just going to eat them.

So because he put himself in the position that might make Martin want to attack him, Martin is free to do so and Zimmerman is not free to defend himself from him?*

*not saying that this is how things transpired, but it looks as likely as any explanation so far.

 

[mookie1995]

Ya..

First of all, it always seems like there is a backhand to some on liberal side from Juan so that it can make it on the air over at Fox. This is 'civil rights leaders ignore the problems' is the one in this story.

But most importantly it seems to me Juan is missing the point here. He asks why the outrage about Martin...but none regarding all the other similar crimes, 'guilty' police outfits and the larger black problem. But in reality...the civil rights orgs are doing just that. The methodology is to highlight high profile cases to show abuses. This creates public awareness and sensitivity. And ultimately, that's how society wide change happens.

Does Juan not see this or is he just talking to talk?

Maybe he is bringing up the societal change approaching its 50th anniversary

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

So because he put himself in the position that might make Martin want to attack him, Martin is free to do so and Zimmerman is not free to defend himself from him?*

*not saying that this is how things transpired, but it looks as likely as any explanation so far.

In the end (assuming this is the story), Zimmerman had the choice 1) to force the issue putting the two of them in a dangerous situation even when instructed to 2) to kill Martin.

If Martin took one step towards Zimmerman...why didn't Zimmerman just flash his gun? Would Martin attack him anyways? This isn't hollywood. From what we know, Zimmerman was in full control of this situation.

It seems very likely Zimmerman is at least morally guilty.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

I realize that in the right hands Skittles might be lethal weapons

A diabetic's.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

In the end (assuming this is the story), Zimmerman had the choice 1) to force the issue putting the two of them in a dangerous situation even when instructed to 2) to kill Martin.

If Martin took one step towards Zimmerman...why didn't Zimmerman just flash his gun? Would Martin attack him anyways? This isn't hollywood. From what we know, Zimmerman was in full control of this situation.

It seems very likely Zimmerman is at least morally guilty.

As a response to your first paragraph I refer you back to my post that you quoted.

Zimmerman's version of what happened says that the confrontation happened after he had stopped pursuing Martin and was on his way back to his vehicle. He claims that that is when Martin approached him from behind. I think that would explain somewhat why he wouldn't have been ready to demonstrate he had a weapon. Sadly, people losing their cool and making bad decisions is not confined to the realm of Hollywood.

Lastly, the assertion that we know Zimmerman was in full control of the situation is flat out wrong...we do not know that. In fact, there is a witness that claims he saw Martin in full control of Zimmerman's skull.

I just think there's way too many unknowns (at least in public) to make a sound judgement.

 

[leswp1]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

THis is like watching Pong. First the Shooter is at fault and they crucify his reputation. Then the shot guy is at fault and they crucify his reputation. All of this makes me think that the people who should be shot are the media who are guilty of abominable journalism and should be wearing flip-flops. At this point so many things have been dribbled into the scenario that I don't think you will ever get a clear picture unless you are actually privy to all the documents and able to interview people yourself (not happening)

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

I guess I'm a big picture guy...and GrinCD's whole position is exactly why conceal and carry is such a bad policy for society.

Fist fights are bad. Having said that they occur all the time and often without one party's choosing. Authorities and the legal system can deal with this quite effectively after the fact. But getting hit by fists (which do heal rather quickly) is a far cry from shooting someone dead. We can't really bring Martin back.

Today, someone can instigate a fist fight (of the type that occur daily everywhere) and that person can be shot dead at range in less than a second. And many (including the law) will often consider this justified 'self defense'.

So based on the types of opinions voice by GrinCD (which have validity under the current situation)...we really need to keep guns out of day to day society in order to minimize 'acceptable' homicides.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

I guess I'm a big picture guy...and GrinCD's whole position is exactly why conceal and carry is such a bad policy for society.

Fist fights are bad. Having said that they occur all the time and often without one party's choosing. Authorities and the legal system can deal with this quite effectively after the fact. But getting hit by fists (which do heal rather quickly) is a far cry from shooting someone dead. We can't really bring Martin back.

Today, someone can instigate a fist fight (of the type that occur daily everywhere) and that person can be shot dead at range in less than a second. And many (including the law) will often consider this justified 'self defense'.

So based on the types of opinions voice by GrinCD (which have validity under the current situation)...we really need to keep guns out of day to day society in order to minimize 'acceptable' homicides.

Yikes, I feel like my position's getting a bit railroaded here...maybe that wasn't your intention. I don't really have a strong position on conceal and carry...mainly because I don't think it's been much of a problem in MN. I'll give you one thing on that though, if Zimmerman doesn't have a gun, my guess is that he doesn't get out of the vehicle in the first place.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

THis is like watching Pong. First the Shooter is at fault and they crucify his reputation. Then the shot guy is at fault and they crucify his reputation. All of this makes me think that the people who should be shot are the media who are guilty of abominable journalism and should be wearing flip-flops. At this point so many things have been dribbled into the scenario that I don't think you will ever get a clear picture unless you are actually privy to all the documents and able to interview people yourself (not happening)

Yep, complete media fiasco...I watched Anderson Cooper interview a leader from the New Black Panther party demanding 'eye for an eye'.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Yikes, I feel like my position's getting a bit railroaded here...maybe that wasn't your intention. I don't really have a strong position on conceal and carry...mainly because I don't think it's been much of a problem in MN. I'll give you one thing on that though, if Zimmerman doesn't have a gun, my guess is that he doesn't get out of the vehicle in the first place.

I bet you're right about that.

However, if it's true that his head was being slammed into the curb/sidewalk, at that point he is in fact in mortal danger and this is no longer a fist fight. At that point he gets to shoot away.

It it turns out that Zimmerman was in fact justified in defending himself, the demonstrators and supportive media are going to look ultra-silly. Hoping...

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Yep, complete media fiasco...I watched Anderson Cooper interview a leader from the New Black Panther party demanding 'eye for an eye'.

The "New Black Panther Party" is exactly how many people? 5?

 

[Almington]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

I bet you're right about that.

However, if it's true that his head was being slammed into the curb/sidewalk, at that point he is in fact in mortal danger and this is no longer a fist fight. At that point he gets to shoot away.

It it turns out that Zimmerman was in fact justified in defending himself, the demonstrators and supportive media are going to look ultra-silly. Hoping...

Yes and No, if the case was that Zimmerman was the original "aggressor" and confronted Martin and Martin turned the tables on him and then Zimmerman shot him, Zimmerman is lucky that Martin didn't actually have a gun otherwise Martin would be able to claim self defense.

Doesn't change the fact that 1.) its a bad law and 2.) it is a needless and senseless death.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

The "New Black Panther Party" is exactly how many people? 5?

Yeah, by no means I am I suggesting that anybody with any credibility at all has their position. Just an example of how ridiculous it's gotten. Here's the interview, it's actually kind of amusing (ignoring the fact that someone's dead, of course). The guy to the right of the 'minister' plays his part to perfection (to stand there looking like a scary m'fer).

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Yes and No, if the case was that Zimmerman was the original "aggressor" and confronted Martin and Martin turned the tables on him and then Zimmerman shot him, Zimmerman is lucky that Martin didn't actually have a gun otherwise Martin would be able to claim self defense.

Doesn't change the fact that 1.) its a bad law and 2.) it is a needless and senseless death.

Not sure I'm following. If someone is repeatedly slamming your head into the ground, your life is at risk and you get to defend yourself. At that point, it really doesn't matter why your head is being slammed.

If I call someone a name or look at them funny or even follow them a bit to make sure they aren't doing something wrong, that doesn't give them the right to threaten my life either verbally or physically.

We'll see how this plays out, but if Zimmerman was walking to his car and was approached from behind and then attacked, it will be hard to say that he had no right to defend himself. You don't get to slam someone's head into the ground because they insulted or disrespected you. Might explain the actions, but doesn't make it legal.

For many years, I lived in a neighborhood where you had to keep an eye on folks walking down the street who were clearly not local homeowners. Over those years we had flowers picked from our beds, coz you know, it was mother's day, had a bike stolen from our garage, had the car stolen from our driveway, had our house egged while we sat in the living room with the TV on (yes I saw the kids who did it), had our pool swam in while we were at the store, had vegetables stolen from our garden, had a car with about ten kids in it crash into our elm out front and then had the kids scatter to the wind as soon as a police cruiser started up the street (stolen car of course) and had numerous drug deals consummated on the street right in front of our house - coz you know they don't want to do it at their own place.

These are just the things that we caught people for and we weren't even in a "bad" neighborhood. Unfortunately, we lived between two dicey apartment complexes that were about 4 miles apart. Guess what the common link was amongst all (every single one) of these people that we caught/saw?

It's unfortunate that innocent people are scrutinized due to the misbehavior of others, but most stereotypes are based upon some form of reality. Call me whatever you want, but this was my personal experience. This wasn't "taught" to me. This was witnessed by me.

In case anyone's worried, I live in a VERY different neighborhood now and the only worry that I have now about anyone walking up my street is whether they will scoop the poop. Luckily, they all do.