Thread: One thing I don't get about this Zimmerman/Martin thing

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Ah. Makes sense now. Thanks.

I wondered why there'd be a book store in Wisconsin. Didn't they make the readins illegal?

Nope just the teachers unionz

144

.....

Originally Posted by Moeghoul

I don't think Zimmy was a "racist" in terms of wanting to go out and kill minorites or belonging to some KKK kinda group or even endorsing that kind of blind hatred. His racism was confined to stereotyping a young black male he didn't know, wearing a hoodie and walking around his neighborhood after dark...

In case it was not clear - I was not accusing Zimmerman of being a KKK type. What I said is old fashioned KKK style racism is clearly alive and well in America. And I'll stick with that statement.

Do this simple thought experiment: Change the races of the kid and the person who pulled the trigger. Consider the storyboard where you have a black shooter, massively bigger than a skinny white kid who was shot while walking along with a bag of Skittles. A shooter who, while carrying a loaded weapon and wearing a hoody, seemingly stalked the skinny white kid. After being told not to by 911. Do you seriously believe, in that scenario, that the black person who discharged that firearm would have gotten the same treatment by the local police and the prosecutor as Zimmerman got?

And now let's turn to the "usual suspects" in the land of conservative punditry. Given the above hypothetical situation, do you think any of them would have raised concerns about "white on white" violence being the real problem? Or the case of a bunch of "racist white kids who beat up hispanics" as evidence of a critical national epidemic that should cause us to stop paying any attention to the case at hand? Framing it like that with the correct pigment inversions makes it sound so crazy that I had to triple check what I typed. But that is the exact same crazy "logic" that Coulter, O'Reilly, and others have been implanting in gullible minds.

All I can say is that if you believe that any of the police, prosecutor, and pundits would have behaved the same way in our little thought experiment scenario as they did in real life - I have a bridge to sell you. If you think that their logically flawed attempts at misdirection would have passed any sort of public muster in our alternative storyboard - I have second bridge to sell you.

And if you still want to claim that this does not paint a pretty compelling picture of racism still being afoot in America - all I can do is shake my head in some combination of wonder and pity.

For my .02, I think Trayvon Martin's family has been amazingly composed and rational. All they have asked for is a credible, transparent investigation and for the justice system to do its proper job. As far as I can tell, the only reason that has not happened is simple racism. Perhaps with a dollop of incompetence blended in for good measure.

Would you be calmly asking the legal system to do its job if your kid had been gunned down while walking home with a bag of candy and the person who pulled the trigger had been released, seemingly without even a rudimentary investigation? When to any rational analysis, part of why the system was dragging its feet was simple racism?

Originally Posted by spindrift

In case it was not clear - I was not accusing Zimmerman of being a KKK type. What I said is old fashioned KKK style racism is clearly alive and well in America. And I'll stick with that statement.

Do this simple thought experiment: Change the races of the kid and the person who pulled the trigger. Consider the storyboard where you have a black shooter, massively bigger than a skinny white kid who was shot while walking along with a bag of Skittles. A shooter who, while carrying a loaded weapon and wearing a hoody, seemingly stalked the skinny white kid. After being told not to by 911. Do you seriously believe, in that scenario, that the black person who discharged that firearm would have gotten the same treatment by the local police and the prosecutor as Zimmerman got?

And now let's turn to the "usual suspects" in the land of conservative punditry. Given the above hypothetical situation, do you think any of them would have raised concerns about "white on white" violence being the real problem? Or the case of a bunch of "racist white kids who beat up hispanics" as evidence of a critical national epidemic that should cause us to stop paying any attention to the case at hand? Framing it like that with the correct pigment inversions makes it sound so crazy that I had to triple check what I typed. But that is the exact same crazy "logic" that Coulter, O'Reilly, and others have been implanting in gullible minds.

All I can say is that if you believe that any of the police, prosecutor, and pundits would have behaved the same way in our little thought experiment scenario as they did in real life - I have a bridge to sell you. If you think that their logically flawed attempts at misdirection would have passed any sort of public muster in our alternative storyboard - I have second bridge to sell you.

And if you still want to claim that this does not paint a pretty compelling picture of racism still being afoot in America - all I can do is shake my head in some combination of wonder and pity.

For my .02, I think Trayvon Martin's family has been amazingly composed and rational. All they have asked for is a credible, transparent investigation and for the justice system to do its proper job. As far as I can tell, the only reason that has not happened is simple racism. Perhaps with a dollop of incompetence blended in for good measure.

Would you be calmly asking the legal system to do its job if your kid had been gunned down while walking home with a bag of candy and the person who pulled the trigger had been released, seemingly without even a rudimentary investigation? When to any rational analysis, part of why the system was dragging its feet was simple racism?

I wasn't defending the guy, just profiling him a bit. I've withheld judgment because I had similar instinctive responses when this story broke and have very few facts/evidence to go on. I can't disagree with your hypotheticals and points that you make. I do know that there's a swath of white folks that think the statute of limitations on racism has run its course. That explains the hard right's response to cases like this, even though they won't admit it.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

That can't be right....can it? It'd mean Leroy's point was pointless?

And leave him looking silly...

Are you fucking kidding me? Reread your posts, they are nonsensical nonsense based on failed reading comprehension, and grammatical corrections. Thats really all youve contributed in this thread. Good job dumbass. Yes I said I'd wear a shit, its mildly amusing in a way I suppose.

Originally Posted by Jer

omg - total pwnage..


If you're gonna post here at least try.

Sad thing is I think he is trying. I think he thinks he's killing it.

Zimmerman is as white as Obama.

He's being portrayed as white for political purposes.

Originally Posted by Jer

I like my concealed carry permit 'cause now I can keep a loaded 9mm in my truck as long as it's not visible from the outside. I hardly ever actually keep the gun on me when I'm in a public place, except maybe just to piss off liberals. I mean - they'll never know, but it's kinda fun to go to Barnes and Nobel and look at all the snooty fags slurping down their $5 coffee and imagine how they'd piss thier pants if they knew an evil firearm was in their midst.

Keep in mind that I never go to big cities. If I did I'd carry all the time. People are freaky and most of them should be shot.

Plus, I always have a knife on me and that is considered a concealed weapon. Thank god for sanity.

This post tells so much about you....you don't even know yourself.....LOL

144 my ass.

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

You're a fucking idiot. I really have no dog in this fight as I think the majority of posters in this thread, and people reacting to this story in general are choosing to believe skewed narratives that fit into their world view, depending on whether they believe 'brown people (or liberals)' or 'gun nuts' are the bigger problem in our society. The facts really don't support either story very well, and its the court's job to figure out the truth, not a bunch of hand wringers on the internet. Perhaps you can help them though, since you obviously have a crystal ball.

However, youre still a fucking idiot. Once you start hurting other people, your rights go out the window, armed or unarmed. If I see someone getting raped, I am damn well going to try and stop it. If the rapist looks like someone I could subdue without causing serious harm to, I might try and do that, but the only two hard and fast rules in such a situation are I am not ok with letting someone get raped in front of me without doing anything to stop it, and the second is that that while I am ok with risking my life to a certain extent to save someone from being raped, I am not ok with risking my life just so mr rapist doesnt get hurt when I stop him from hurting someone else. If it looks like i can take the guy, I might try, but I am not trained in unarmed combat and although I don't carry a gun, I'd most likely look for a weapon of some sort to give me every advantage, and if the guy looked like someone that I had no realistic hope of defeating without killing him, I would do my very fucking best to kill him, as quickly as possible.

Everyone is born with equal rights, but the moment you start infringing on other peoples rights to not be raped, hurt, placed in fear for your life, etc, is the moment your rights start to matter a whole lot less than the people you are hurting.




So its totally politically correct if I put the above picture on a t shirt with the caption "Confrontational Nigger" right? everyone cool with that?

BINGO! Fucking hypocrite.

Originally Posted by k2skier112

BINGO! Fucking hypocrite.

You seem to be very dense. I said people believing one side or the other based are partial evidence are jumping to conclusions. Tell me, which sides story is it I purport to be truth and which story do I claim is false? Oh you can't tell me, thats cus I didnt choose sides in this drama, I merely made a bit of social commentary and talk about my opinion of the moral justifications for violence in extreme circumstances.

You can tell the difference right? Youre not that dumb are you?

Leroy - why are you argueing with an angstridden 16 year old?

I guess I just couldnt figure out whether he was really that dumb or just trolling. I'm going to assume just a really boring troll because I really hope hes not that dense.

Originally Posted by spindrift

Consider the storyboard where you have a black shooter, massively bigger than a skinny white kid who was shot

Treyvon was 6'3", Zimmerman was 5'9".

I spent years teaching people how to fight, and the greater the disparity in limb length, the less the weight difference matters, especially if the longer limber person is aggressive and the shorter person is not.

Even with a 100lb+ weight difference I have no trouble believing the account given by Zimmerman and the eyewitness account.

I know this wasn't the point you were making, you were talking about the greater narrative and how it relates to racism. But I keep hearing this incredulous narrative of "the big guy got beat up by the little guy", and that simply isn't an accurate representation of the situation.

Rubicon is right. But he neglected to mention that Trayvon was also BLACK! You, gentle TGR reader, should you accept your trite generalizations about 6’2” 140lb teenagers from the lamestream media or from no less than an expert in Karate and the way of the ninja: Rubicon? I say no! Conservatives should trust in the inherent righteousness of armed vigilantes and the inherent badness of all non-whites wearing hoodies. Us conservatives should trust the police and continue to put out the simple conservative message: dark-skinned teenagers deserve to die.

Martin was 6'3"? Not that it changes anything, but it makes Zimmy appear even dumber and more likely he intended to use the gun. He's told that his pursuit is unneeded, but he gets outta his car and chases after someone he describes as a potential threat, in the dark, whose bigger than him. Meanwhile, the public is lead to believe Martin is this angelic little kid based on the pictures of him released to the media. I'm waiting for the revenge killing news. What's the law say if you intentionally place yourself in harm's way after identifying a potential threat to 911, they tell you not to pursue and that the cops will be there shortly, you agree, then go ahead like a dumbshit and do it anyway? Unless he was in pursuit, stopped, retreated back towards his car, and then got jumped.

Originally Posted by archer

Us conservatives should trust the police and continue to put out the simple conservative message: dark-skinned teenagers deserve to die.

Just the teenagers???

This is speculation, but I am willing to bet that the vast majority of those calling Zimmerman a zealous racist self-appointed watch-captain, who went out of his way to get a chance to kill Martin, have never had to kill another human before. Might have something to do with how they view Zimmerman as being eager to kill.

Originally Posted by XavierD

have never had to kill another human before.

Or at least maybe not gone out of our way looking for someone to kill....?

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Or at least maybe not gone out of our way looking for someone to kill....?

Really ? You think Zimmerman was looking for a kill ? Seriously ? $100 says the guy is having emotional issues about it already.

I think it's quite likely based on his actions. He certainly didn't seem to be really trying very hard to avoid it?

I hope he is having emotional issues about it... it'd be even weirder if he wasn't.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

I think it's quite likely based on his actions. He certainly didn't seem to be really trying very hard to avoid it?

I hope he is having emotional issues about it... it'd be even weirder if he wasn't.

Who knows. I just don't think the guy was looking to kill somebody. He sure as hell wasn't gonna call 911 and tell them he was following somebody and then look out, "I shot him in self
defense". Just a theory.

Originally Posted by OSECS

Who knows. I just don't think the guy was looking to kill somebody. He sure as hell wasn't gonna call 911 and tell them he was following somebody and then look out, "I shot him in self
defense". Just a theory.

Or he was calling 911 in an attempt to legitimize his actions. Looking for a problem, found something that seemed to fit into his definition of a "suspicious person". Obviously he made a huge mistake. We'll see if he gets punished for it.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

Or he was calling 911 in an attempt to legitimize his actions. Looking for a problem, found something that seemed to fit into his definition of a "suspicious person". Obviously he made a huge mistake. We'll see if he gets punished for it.

Yep, he sure could have been doing just that. That takes a pretty ballsy mofo to try that one I think.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

Or he was calling 911 in an attempt to legitimize his actions. Looking for a problem, found something that seemed to fit into his definition of a "suspicious person". Obviously he made a huge mistake. We'll see if he gets punished for it.

He OBVIOUSLY made a huge mistake? Dude I dont think anything about this case is obvious except one guys is dead and another killed him. The self defense claim if not plausible at the very least is entirely possible. But yea, you and everyone else got this all figured out.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Or at least maybe not gone out of our way looking for someone to kill....?

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

I think it's quite likely based on his actions. He certainly didn't seem to be really trying very hard to avoid it?

I hope he is having emotional issues about it... it'd be even weirder if he wasn't.

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

Or he was calling 911 in an attempt to legitimize his actions. Looking for a problem, found something that seemed to fit into his definition of a "suspicious person". Obviously he made a huge mistake. We'll see if he gets punished for it.

Both of you guys are out of touch with reality. You live in a world of your own imagination.


The 911 call, the eye witness account, Zimmerman's own account, his personal history, his wounds, the actions of the police that night as well as those of the district attorney are all consistent with the image of someone trying to make his world a better place and getting in over his head with admittedly, tragic consequences.

Apparently Zimmerman had been a very outspoken critic of the son of a white police officer who had beaten a black homeless man a year ago. At the time he had worked to organize the community and demand justice for the homeless man. He tutored minority students on the weekends for free. He worked to organize a neighborhood watch after several breakins in the neighborhood. These are facts, and they are uncontested. All these actions paint the picture of a person with a strong sense of community and social responsibility. A strong sense of community and social responsibility he very likely inherited from his dad, a retired judge.

They also explain why he was so adamant about following Tv that night. You can hear him on the 911 recording saying regretfully "they always get away". He was trying to keep track of Tv until the police got there to make sure he didn't get away, he was(as he saw it) doing his part to protect his community. Tv saw that he was being followed, doubled back and confronted Zimmerman, then made the unwise choice of assaulting a stranger who just happened to be armed.


But instead of drawing the obvious conclusion, the conclusion that is consistent with the known facts of the case, both of you, as well as all the other race baiters and community agitators, reject the obvious and instead substitute your own reality where Zimmerman was 'looking for a kill' and got what he was looking for, even going so far as to claim that the evidence which contradict your imaginative projections were really Zimmerman trying to cover his tracks as he hatched his evil plan.


Maybe there is information not known to the public. Maybe there is more to the story than is being told. But until a grand jury has it's say, with just what is known right now, everything that is known is consistent with the narrative I laid out above and there is not a single piece of uncontested information that contradicts it. Yet you both are trying to construct a narrative that has no basis in anything other than your own imagination while rejecting or attempting to explain away what is known and uncontested.


You both are precisely the kind of people our justice system was set up to protect the innocent from.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

Both of you guys are out of touch with reality. You live in a world of your own imagination.


The 911 call, the eye witness account, Zimmerman's own account, his personal history, his wounds, the actions of the police that night as well as those of the district attorney are all consistent with the image of someone trying to make his world a better place and getting in over his head with admittedly, tragic consequences.

Apparently Zimmerman had been a very outspoken critic of the son of a white police officer who had beaten a black homeless man a year ago. At the time he had worked to organize the community and demand justice for the homeless man. He tutored minority students on the weekends for free. He worked to organize a neighborhood watch after several breakins in the neighborhood. These are facts, and they are uncontested. All these actions paint the picture of a person with a strong sense of community and social responsibility. A strong sense of community and social responsibility he very likely inherited from his dad, a retired judge.

They also explain why he was so adamant about following Tv that night. You can hear him on the 911 recording saying regretfully "they always get away". He was trying to keep track of Tv until the police got there to make sure he didn't get away, he was(as he saw it) doing his part to protect his community. Tv saw that he was being followed, doubled back and confronted Zimmerman, then made the unwise choice of assaulting a stranger who just happened to be armed.


But instead of drawing the obvious conclusion, the conclusion that is consistent with the known facts of the case, both of you, as well as all the other race baiters and community agitators, reject the obvious and instead substitute your own reality where Zimmerman was 'looking for a kill' and got what he was looking for, even going so far as to claim that the evidence which contradict your imaginative projections were really Zimmerman trying to cover his tracks as he hatched his evil plan.


Maybe there is information not known to the public. Maybe there is more to the story than is being told. But until a grand jury has it's say, with just what is known right now, everything that is known is consistent with the narrative I laid out above and there is not a single piece of uncontested information that contradicts it. Yet you both are trying to construct a narrative that has no basis in anything other than your own imagination while rejecting or attempting to explain away what is known and uncontested.


You both are precisely the kind of people our justice system was set up to protect the innocent from.

You and Leroy misunderstood what I wrote. I was merely pointing out another reason why he may have called 911. The mistake he made was not listening to the 911 operator and continuing his pursuit, which ended in the death of a teenager.