Trayvon Martin & racial profiling in America

"@Caspers Wish: And do you know why he shot? At all? We have theories at best. Not facts."

Exactly; nobody can see any reason for Zimmerman to have shot and killed the young man whom he outweighed and overpowered and outgunned.

"No, we don't know the situation. Intent is extremely important to the act. If we ignore Intent, we could jail and hurt many actual Innocent people. We know the final act, just not the important details that led up to it. Without those, we have no actual factual information and cannot condemn correctly according to what actually happened."

You can't be for real. He killed an unarmed little boy who was doing no wrong, and you're over here emploing the same mental gymnastics that allowed Zimmerman to walk free?

If you think a young kid can't harm you, you're completely wrong. You know what a kick to the nuts can do? Yeah, that can do a lot. If he felt threatened, then yes, he had a right to shoot. That's how the "Stand Your Ground" law works. I highly doubt he did, but we can't prove any actual case because we don't have the actual details, like, at all.

I'm applying the actual law. Without intent, you have no way to tell if it was defense or aggression. If you punched me in the face, and I punched back. And yet I only get in trouble? See the problem there? Intent is extremely important to the law and how it works.

To put it more bluntly, if you got stabbed, and you shot someone in return, you were defending yourself. The other person had the intent to kill or otherwise harm you. You had defense.

That's exactly why the details matter.

You also presume I want him to walk away. I sure as hell don't. What I want is the full details is so he can be put away correctly.

Also, how do you know Martin was doing nothing wrong whatsoever? At all? How do you know he didn't assault Zimmerman for following him? We don't know the details so presuming Zimmerman was not defending himself does not work since we have no proof that anything's the exact case.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:14:56 PM by Hydronix

Your capacity for condescension is admirable Casper, but alas...

There's nothing pretentious about what I said. Yes, a glass of water is not the same as Lake Michigan, and Lake Michigan is not the same as the Atlantic Ocean, but based on your ability to write witty posts, I assume you have the ability to see the connection between the three.

Of course Facebook arguments aren't the same as a dead 17-year-old whose only crime was buying snacks at the wrong time. But the same "leap to conclusions and don't bother to even consider an alternative explanation" attitude is at the root of both.

And I'm saying that even if many people (myself included) get their wish and Zimmerman is sentenced to 25 years, it won't change the disease that stole that boy's life. To change that disease, we have to destroy it at its source.

That means we force ourselves to admit that we judge each other wrongly because it's easier to go on preconceived notions rather than ask difficult questions and we admit that that attitude has cost us too much. Maybe then it stops.

And maybe then we won't have to make another thread about another kid that had no business dying at seven-fucking-teen.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:17:23 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

I would have expected someone to bring this up (again) before now, since it was already mentioned at least once, but it's important to note that 'innocent before guilty' applies as much to Trayvon Martin as it does to Zimmerman. You can't walk into it with the assumption that Zimmerman is innocent because that necessarily assumes that Martin is guilty of doing something that justifies being shot to death. Circumstantial evidence points against Zimmerman, but that's all we have so far, and it would be presumptuous to make a final judgement at this point - that's what the legal system is supposed to be for.

I very much agree with Karmakin's post back on page seven in that the biggest disappointments in this whole scenario are the police, regardless of how you feel about Zimmerman himself. Individuals and individual acts are less troublesome than systematic failures in the law enforcement that's supposed to be looking out for everyone's safety. No matter how it went down, they done screwed up - and it's very hard to imagine a line of reasoning for their screwup that DOESN'T involve some form of racism.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:20:15 PM by Karkadinn

I think the police should have more firmly told Zimmerman not to follow in the first place. With different wording.

What Katrika said. Definitely.

I'm believing both are Innocent till proven Guilty, actually. That's why I want the exact details as is.

What Karkadinn said.

Look, I'm fucking livid a kid my niece's age is dead. But Trayvon Martin already died ostensibly because he was "ghetto-thug until proven innocent". I feel all the facts point to Zimmerman killing the kid in cold blood. But I want him arrested and I want a trial. To declear him guilty is to disgrace that boy's memory and mock the pain his family is going through by co-signing on the same rabid dog mentality that took his life.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:33:58 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

@Irene and Trika - I think you're looking at this wrong. You're looking for proof Zimmerman was dissuaded from engaging Martin.

Wrong angle. It's on Zimmerman to show what earthly reason he had for engaging Martin. The police weren't required to give him a stern "Hey pal. We're the professionals and we're ordering you to chill". No, it was on him (Zimmerman) to get some sort of official sanction for his actions. And he didn't.

If I walk up to a troper here and slug them in the face, I can't say "Well, nobody told me I shouldn't do it" as a defense.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:33:22 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

He did ask for a statement, though. They did not give him a clear one, so he didn't have to follow any orders... cause he wasn't given an order. That's one of the problems with this case. If they said "Do not follow him", we'd have enough to condemn him on atleast something. But we lack that too.

What more bothers me is that he still went after the kid. What happened after that is unclear in itself. So what could've happened... could've been anything.

I agree it's up to Zimmerman to prove what happened. That's why I'm against calling it a closed case until we got the rest of the data.

I do not think he is innocent at all. But without proof... yeah.

edited 4th Apr '12 8:46:07 PM by Hydronix

Y'know Casper, I think I see where you and I are at an impasse. We both agree Trayvon Martin should be alive and well. We both agree Zimmerman should be sitting in a cell as we type these posts. We both agree people are pissed.

You, if I'm reading you right, think Zimmerman did what he did cause he's a Nazi douche. I don't.

I think he's a product of a diseased society that jumps the gun. I don't think Zimmerman set out to assassinate a 17-yr-old. And that's precisely I think that just as stepping back for 10 minutes has solved so many things from Facebook arguments to the Cuban Freakin' Missile Crisis, so too a cool head would've left Trayvon happily alive, and Zimmerman continuing his patrols.

And before you try to call BS on me, I've seen it. I've done it. I'm a black man in NYC bro. I've been "stopped-and-frisked" more than 10 times in a year. And I know that the only reason I'm alive to type this to you is because I was one of the guys in the hood fortunate enough to be told "Look, in that situation you want to start dissing the cop and talking about what a chump he is. Take a deep breath and keep it cool".

So humor me on this one.

...you lost me there.

Anyhoo, are there any plans for a trial against Zimmerman to be made?

Sadly, none that I know of. I hope we get more information soon.

Woah, woah, I didn't mean to say that I wasn't being sincere, I was trying to justify my bluntness.

We're not aiming for edgy discussion. I can see why you feel strongly about this - it's something that people should feel strongly about. But you're mostly just saying the same thing over and over again, when most of what people here are saying is 'I think he's guilty but he deserves a fair trial anyway'. It's fine to be blunt, but you're treading the line between blunt discussion and personal attacks, as well. Please try to take a step back before posting.

Does this thread need a time-out, guys? An hour or so to cool off?

edited 4th Apr '12 9:05:48 PM by Katrika

Hopefully. If there isn't a case by the police department, Trayvon's family can at least try to do so, right?

edited 4th Apr '12 9:05:30 PM by 0dd1

Edgy? Dude, huh?

..getting back...I'm completely with you in being fucking livid that he was allowed to go hopscotching after the fact. But that's not Zimmerman.

That's the Sanford Gestapo, er, police, that did this. And to make it worse, it seems they were overruled when the head cop wanted to charge him.

We have no new information, unfortunately. So until then, we've said what was needed, and the most agreed upon thing is that we want all information before judging.(I think)

So we could lock it until a new article is gotten.

That's quite true. Maybe they can help?

edited 4th Apr '12 9:06:54 PM by Hydronix

God willing, hopefully.

Trika, if I may. Casper has calmed way down from a few posts back. I don't think there's a need to suspend the thread.

Not trying to overstep my bounds, it's just that I see the guy is making an effort to be civil this go 'round.

Have we gotten an exact duplication/recording of the recorded phone call? That could help a bit.

A thing about "innocent until proven guilty (beyond a reasonable doubt, by a jury, in a court of law)":

That's a LEGAL standard. There are many other standards used in a courtroom that we feel no need to follow, so why this one?

I'm perfectly confidant from the evidence I've seen that Zimmerman murdered Travon Martin, and I'm not shy about saying that. I don't need 12 strangers to certify my personal beliefs about the world.

"We're not aiming for edgy discussion. I can see why you feel strongly about this - it's something that people should feel strongly about. But you're mostly just saying the same thing over and over again, when most of what people here are saying is 'I think he's guilty but he deserves a fair trial anyway'. It's fine to be blunt, but you're treading the line between blunt discussion and personal attacks, as well. Please try to take a step back before posting."

You've obviously missed the point of my whole series of posts here, but I won't argue with you, because I see that your post has turned hot pink, which means that you're asserting your authority.

What I'm trying to say, Katrika, is that it's not materiel to bring in the "Don't jump to conclusions" argument when the whole point of making a big stink is to ensure maximum scrutiny of the case by those involved in the investigation. People (and by that, I mean Irene and TSM) keep bringing in the "Don't judge him yet!" argument, so I have to rephrase my argument so that they get why they need to stop babbling. See? I'm not trolling or repeating myself for no reason; I'm trying to counter what I see as the same pattern-of-thought that allowed Zimmerman ro run free.

That. That's what I mean. You're on point, Black Humor.

edited 4th Apr '12 9:15:53 PM by CaspersWish