|
the runs formula posted:~*race speculation*~ If you don't understand that the words you are quoting are objectively true then you are deluded as gently caress.
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
Trustfund. posted:I wonder if everyone will be as compassionate when GZ, an innocent man, gets gunned down by someone of another race. Yeah because speculating about the impending riotvengeance that "those people" will soon claim against Zimmerman isn't racist at all. Go gently caress yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 05:56
|
|
|
The best part about this is getting to see everyone talk poo poo about the dead kid. Since the verdict, I've barely seen anyone referring to Zimmerman's innocence -- it's not even framed that way anymore. It's "Trayvon was guilty." So apparently he was guilty and summarily, legally, justifiably executed. Thanks for clearing that up, Florida. Glad to see everyone's abandoned the flimsy front that we weren't putting a dead kid on trial.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
kazmeyer posted:Hypothetical: The Sanford PD rolls up on a 28 year old black man with a gun standing over a dead 17 year old white kid who's unarmed and the excuse is "he hit me in the nose and scratched up my head." Do you think this plays out even remotely close to the same way? Well obviously since you don't have any specific and concrete evidence that it would have played out differently, to even suggest that it might have makes you a REVERSE RACIST which is several orders of magnitude more severe than standard racist.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:It's also kind of sad that Martin gets to be guilty until proven innocent in this case with death as the penalty for his actions. Better give the guy with the gun who undeniably shot and killed someone the benefit of the doubt because there's not enough proof he did something wrong, but the dead black kid is 100% guilty and got what was coming to him without a trial. Zimmerman is the law. Yeah, hands-down the shittiest part of this whole thing is that it's no longer about Zimmerman being innocent. It's now about how Martin was guilty. Everyone has abandoned the flimsy pretext that this was ever about anything other than putting a dead black teenager on trial.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Winkle-Daddy posted:Which is why the defense won, the prosecution simply attempted character assassination. Z is a poo poo head, for sure, but that's not how you prove someone guilty. Both sides attempted character assassination, the difference is that Martin had been literally assassinated beforehand so when they put him on trial he didn't have much to say by way of defense.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Edged Hymn posted:If the races were reversed this would have been an open and shut case, sorry thread Don't you dare say this, you horrible reverse racist. You have no evidence!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
You can all safely quit worrying about federal charges. Even if there were some charge to be had which doesn't violate double jeopardy, which there probably isn't, I can pretty much guarantee that the Obama justice department isn't going to pick this moment to grow a spine, especially with the optics of a black president stirring racial dissent, which however dishonest, is exactly the narrative the media would run with.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Zewle posted:Was there ever an explanation for the unarmed kid walking home to attack an armed man unprovoked beyond being dangerously black? No, and there didn't need to be since the burden was on the prosecution.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 01:02
|
|
|
Zewle posted:Oh, cause it kind of seemed like Zimmermans wild west duel in the panhandle complete with rough and tumble cowboy last words "ya got me" almost seemed like a bunch of made up bullshit to get out of a murder charge. Yeah it almost certainly was, but a jury devoid of a single black person decided that it wasn't quite enough to meet the standard. It's undoubtedly a travesty, but when half the story is dead and can't testify that's how it goes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/14/politics/obama-zimmerman/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Glad to see Obama is using this as an opportunity to prop up his doomed gun control campaign. Really thinking outside the box.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:So it's not the business of someone in the neighborhood watch to report someone who is on someone's private property? No, the neighborhood watch is supposed to observe and report -- exactly that. Not pursue. So the moment he called the police and reported Martin's location and behavior his job was done. We can debate til we're blue in the face about whether he was reporting based on some bias, but if he had stopped at that point noone would give a flying poo poo. However, Zimmerman proceeded to follow Martin at that point, despite being warned against it, because "those loving punks always get away." So we can sit here and debate what constitutes the reasonable duty of a neighborhood watchman, but those of us who think the shooting was unjustified tend to put a pin in Zimmerman's wrong behavior at right about the point he decided to take it upon himself to, diplomatically stated, "continue to monitor Martin's whereabouts" rather than go about his own business having observed and reported. Best-case scenario, you believe Zimmerman followed Martin in his vehicle and got out in a neighborhood he was intimately familiar with to check a loving street sign because he didn't know where he was, and was assaulted. That doesn't make any loving sense. It's probably also not damning enough evidence for a murder conviction given the standard, but if you can't at least understand the outrage then I genuinely don't know what to tell you aside from "gently caress right off."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:The police never told him not to follow him. The dispatcher said 'We don't need you to do that' and took the stand to specify that he never told him not to follow Martin, rather it was a neutral statement because they can't give orders legally such as 'Follow him' or 'Don't follow him'. It's been repeated over and over again, but it never stopped being pedantic bullshit. Just because it wasn't a legally binding order doesn't mean that it wasn't sound loving advice which any sane person would have taken in a moment's notice.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:'We don't need you to do that' could mean 'So just go back to your car' just as much as 'But it's very helpful, please keep on updating us'. Depends on how you take it. No it really doesn't depend on how you take it, are you loving dense? Take a step back for half an hour, reread what you just wrote and try to reinterpret it through the lens of a normal loving human being hearing those words. What the gently caress is even wrong with you? I have to agree with the other poster who said that his balls hurt every time you post.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
Cocksmith posted:Exactly. The guy's not even white and people are still trying make this into a black vs white thing. He identifies as white, at least on census, which may or may not be meaningful but is what people are referring to.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
Devour posted:That doesn't mean or even remotely prove that he had the intent on murdering Trayvon that night. I could just say that Trayvon should've just stayed in his house instead of coming back out after he got home too. Like many of us, I'm pretty resigned to the fact that the evidence wasn't there for the standard to put Zimmerman away for Murder 2 in Florida, but that doesn't mean what he did was right and I'm pretty sure making the decision to follow Trayvon while armed was an inappropriate escalation at the very least and shouldn't be legal.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Trainmonk posted:Now who's being willfully ignorant? The issue is that Zimmerman sought out a confrontation regardless of intention, and the difference with Trayvon coming back out is that he didn't bring a gun with him. Both of them confronted, only one of them mentally prepared to kill someone. Well no because you see Trayvon menaced "you're going to die tonight!" which proves his intent to kill via high-caliber sidewalk. Also, that's totally something he actually said and is plausible.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
Devour posted:Show me the evidence that concludes Zimmerman had the intent on murdering Trayvon, please. This is why he was acquitted. Thanks for the non sequitur I guess, but I think I've made it pretty clear my point is that Zimmerman's story sounds like it's full of poo poo and his actions are those of a crazy person. If those actions don't meet the legal standard in Florida for any sort of greater or lesser charge that was in dispute then the jury was right to acquit, but that doesn't make Zimmerman's actions less stupid or terrible. It just means either the prosecution hosed up the charges with overreach or the standard is hosed in Florida.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:The murder need not be his end goal. Lots of unintended deaths have come out of normal fights due to unknown health elements and strikes to critical or sensitive areas. Right, except Zimmerman claims that he leaped at him from the shadows screaming "You're gonna die tonight!" which sounds a lot like Trayvon intended to murder him. So, either murder was the end goal or Zimmerman at the very least was stretching the truth with various elements of his tale. The lies and inconsistencies don't introduce enough evidence to meet the standard to convict him here, but they're also pretty clearly bullshit. If you believe he really got out of his car in his own neighborhood to peer at a street sign and was attacked out of nowhere by Trayvon screaming "You're gonna die tonight!" then I don't know what to tell you, I guess, this story coming from the same guy who schemed with his wife during the pretrial for which she's now up on perjury charges? e: and let's not even start with "You got me!" because do we even need to go into it?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:No one is saying that Martin wanted to kill Zimmerman Zimmerman said that. Attributing those words to Trayvon was part of his defense.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:I said he was a bumbling buffoon stumbling through life, not that he was not responsible for his poor decision making. Not only is that false, but I believe that both Martin and Zimmerman ended up in that situation that night because they both made terrible decisions. Zimmerman should have stayed in the car. Martin should have kept on running. They did neither, someone threw a punch, Martin ended up on top and was killed. Yeah, but the important thing is that the burden of good decision making on someone carrying a gun is much, much greater than on someone with skittles. Also someone of Zimmerman's age should be a fully-matured adult. A 17-year-old may not be a mewling baby, but they're still a teenager and will be making stupid teenage-brained decisions well into their early 20s and that is pretty normal. The gravity of Zimmerman's bad decisions outweigh in bad decisions Trayvon may have made by such a crushing fuckton that it's hard to even express properly. So yeah, to conflate the poor decisions of Trayvon with those of Zimmerman is just about the stupidest point you've made so far in this thread, and that's really saying something.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Evidently it was a particularly confusing suburb, too, as the neighbourhood watchman didn't know which of the three streets he was on at one point. That's a little bizarre, but some neighborhoods -- particularly gated communities -- are laid out with creepy Stepford-esque identical streets with identical houses, etc., so not entirely unbelievable. The weirder part is that he would need to get out of his car to look at a street sign. Street signs tend to be posted such that they are visible from cars at night from the road, or else they aren't much good.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
So this thread had finally reached its inevitable conclusion: back-to-back posts directly quoting another poster that can be summarized as "You're racist. Not me."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Bishop posted:Emphasis mine. If anything I think Zimmerman is probably guilty of something akin to negligent homicide. My best guess is that he started the confrontation and someone, probably him escalated it well beyond where it needed to go and a tragedy ensued. Jury also considered manslaughter, so I guess it didn't meet the standard there either.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:"Whitest kid anyone knows" and "academically accepted definition" means no one actually uses the definition in real life. But since this isn't "real life" you can probably take a minute to do a Google search and figure out if what you're saying is technically correct or not. Might as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Laserpig posted:My point is America determines EVERYTHING by race, absolutely everything. To be fair, if someone involved is famous that trumps race in America. Fame/wealth trumps all other classifications, even if it doesn't entirely obscure them. e: and yeah, what I've read with regards to the federal case is that it's a vague possibility, but since the standard for that is insanely strict, much stricter even than what the prosecution tried in Florida, it's almost certainly not going to happen unless the feds just find some ridiculously incriminating poo poo about Zimmerman that none of us know about.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Yeah I just looked at some local killings around Philly and they mostly don't mention race in headlines. It tends only to be a headline focus if there is some reason to focus on it, for instance a suspicion that the crime could be racially motivated. Correct. And the crimes that make it past local headlines into national have usually already passed that threshold and the racial elements of the crime are plain to see. So to say America views everything through the lens of race might be less correct, but those things which do fit into that category definitely get more attention, especially with Obama's presidency. The stupid idea that Obama is some sort of postracial hero has definitely brought racial issues more to the forefront of national interest than in previous, semi-adjacent years. It's interesting to consider whether the Trayvon Martin case would have received such national attention in an alternate universe where Obama had never been elected.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Laserpig posted:Turk is a nationality, not a race. If your plane had just landed in Texas and the first thing someone said to you was "never trust a Mexican," would you use the same pedantic logic to claim that the statement wasn't racially motivated?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:Goongratulations on going from "Neighborhood Watch Gone Wrong" to "Literally Hitler". Even funnier given that his name is Zimmerman.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
I was under the impression that the disproportionate cultural impact of slavery in America had a lot to do with the sheer number of slaves with respect to overall population, especially in the south. The volume of slaves relative to the population was never quite so large in Europe, was it?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
JosephStalin posted:No and no. Does it matter? He had text messages expressing interest in obtaining one, and a photo of himself holding one. Are these the actions of the "squeaky-clean, innocent young child" the media wants you to think Trayvon was? Character assassinating Trayvon based on cell phone pictures of guns is pretty ridiculous considering he was literally assassinated by someone who had an actual gun. But, at this point, whatever. I've seen it all.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
ascii genitals posted:You're either trolling or loving stupid. Is that you juror B37? Well if you take a look at his 2004 regdate and low alltime post count you can probably figure this puzzle out. If his really great opinions on the case weren't enough for you, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 05:23
|
|