In Sanford, Florida, murder is not a crime as long as the victim is African American - Page 4

One more thing about Hoodies: for ten+ years they've been associated with everything from urban crime to the Anarchist riots that take place whenever the WTO is in town. I think police in general now have an almost Pavlovian response when they see anyone wearing a Hoodie. And if they also have their head hung low as if avoiding being seen (or have bad posture) then watch out!

I usually try to advocate reasonable discourse and don't condone violence in anyway. 

But when I see things like this...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/25/1077684/-Racist-False-Travon-Facebook-picture-being-circulated

It makes me want to hunt down whoever is behind this and carve them up with a machete. If anything, I'd say the people trying to paint Martin as some kind of "thug" who deserved to be shot because he was suspended for weed (which might be yet ANOTHER lie) are worse than Zimmerman himself. Actually, no, I take that back. What we're seeing now is all sort of Zimmerman's coming out of the woodwork here.

This story is making me more and more enraged the uglier it gets...

I'm trying to figure out if Zimmerman is actually going to be arrested.  I mean it seems the obvious strategy for the police department to at least take the pressure off themselves.  Zimmerman isn't a cop, he's a civilian who killed somebody and arrest is standard procedure unless I'm missing something.

"Have to do somethin' about those bloody 'oodies!"

I just can't wrap my head around the profound societal sickness that this case is exposing. I feel like this is a breaking point for me. How can people be so damn ignorant and evil in this day and age? Is this the value of Western society - that a man may shoot an unarmed teenager dead, claim self-defence, and half the country rushes to defend him, no questions asked? God, just burn the country down.

You folks are all smarter than I am so I'm going to ask this. This "Stand your ground" law that people keep talking about seems really, really stupid to me. I don't understand how a person can claim self defense when he clearly decided to confront the person who had broken no law. Shouldn't Zimmerman admitting to following Martin be enough to argue that Martin was justified in defending himself? Am I wrong in thinking this law makes it out to be whoever ends up alive wins?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Baker 

You folks are all smarter than I am so I'm going to ask this. This "Stand your ground" law that people keep talking about seems really, really stupid to me. I don't understand how a person can claim self defense when he clearly decided to confront the person who had broken no law. Shouldn't Zimmerman admitting to following Martin be enough to argue that Martin was justified in defending himself? Am I wrong in thinking this law makes it out to be whoever ends up alive wins?

I am not a lawyer but this is how I read this too. I mean you shooting a stranger in your own house is pretty easy to prove as self defense. But this? I have no idea what kinds of procedure would be followed.

It seems to be about 50/50.  Half think "well what choice did Zimmerman have?  The kid was pounding his head into the pavement!"  "The 911 operator is not a cop!  Zimmerman didn't have an obligation to listen to her!"  "It was his neighborhood and he was concerned about the rash of burglaries in the area!" "Treyvon was just another gold teeth having, drug dealing, violent thug!  He was suspended for violence!".  These people also must think babies are delivered by a stork...they seem to have no ability to trace C and B back to A, or even believe A exists.  The other half realize Zimmerman's actions started the chain of events that got the kid killed, who still has not been proven to be breaking any laws, and even fighting is not an indication of Martin being the aggressor...the ordinary gun wielding stranger who followed him is the liable party here...an adult man following a teenager.  Zimmerman's own friend and lawyer can't even defend Zimmerman following Martin in the fist place.

I don't know about 50/50. There has been plenty of bullshit coming from the uber-conservative media (case in point) and jackasses at Fox News like Heraldo (does anyone take him seriously)? But I've seen plenty of republicans and conservatives side with the victims on this matter, on Sunday shows and elsewhere. The fact that anyone is kind of bucking the obvious is disgusting, but at least people seem to understand that what happened here was a tragedy and a huge breach of justice. Now if only something actually gets done about it.

What bugs me more than anything is politicians denying the race factor, and that's actually been on both sides of the isle. Obama did say that if he had a son he'd look like Trayvon, and that's powerful, but when pushed to answer whether he thought the whole thing was race related, he sidesteps the issue, and so does everyone else in the administration. They want to tiptoe around the obvious question of race because (unfortunately) they worry that playing too big of a deal about it will alienate voters who aren't going to vote Obama anyway.

That opens the door for a creep like Gingrich to say that the whole thing isn't about race at all, which makes me want to smack him across the face with a giant salmon. Repeatedly. Obama isn't saying anything that stupid or bold, but I wish they'd stop pretending the obvious isn't true here. Have some balls and speak to the heart of the matter. 

Well, to be fair, any response from Obama regarding race was going to inflame the rhetoric of guys like Gingrich. I think by sidestepping the obvious, Obama chose the lesser of two evils there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

I don't know about 50/50. There has been plenty of bullshit coming from the uber-conservative media (case in point) and jackasses at Fox News like Heraldo (does anyone take him seriously)? But I've seen plenty of republicans and conservatives side with the victims on this matter, on Sunday shows and elsewhere. The fact that anyone is kind of bucking the obvious is disgusting, but at least people seem to understand that what happened here was a tragedy and a huge breach of justice. Now if only something actually gets done about it.

 

What bugs me more than anything is politicians denying the race factor, and that's actually been on both sides of the isle. Obama did say that if he had a son he'd look like Trayvon, and that's powerful, but when pushed to answer whether he thought the whole thing was race related, he sidesteps the issue, and so does everyone else in the administration. They want to tiptoe around the obvious question of race because (unfortunately) they worry that playing too big of a deal about it will alienate voters who aren't going to vote Obama anyway.

That opens the door for a creep like Gingrich to say that the whole thing isn't about race at all, which makes me want to smack him across the face with a giant salmon. Repeatedly. Obama isn't saying anything that stupid or bold, but I wish they'd stop pretending the obvious isn't true here. Have some balls and speak to the heart of the matter. 

The evidence is on the 911 call Zimmerman made where he says "fucking coon".  His friend tried to reason that Zimmerman said "goon"...what is this, a 1940s James Cagney flick?  I used to live in Florida and I've never heard anyone call someone a "goon", anywhere for that matter, but I have heard "coon" plenty down there.  It's a racially motivated hate crime.

The first time I heard the clip, it sounded really obvious that he said 'coon'  The clips I can find now all sound like he says 'punks' with a definite 'P' sound.

I'm confused, because the two words sound nothing alike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber 

IThe first time, I heard the clip, it sounded really obvious that he said 'coon'  The clips I can find now all sound like he says 'punks' with a definite 'P' sound.

 

I'm confused, because the two words sound nothing alike.

 

 

the first time I heard the audio, it definitely sounded like 'coons'. I wonder if there are 'edited' versions of the audio making the rounds on the net?

There's a meme starting on right-leaning commentary sites that Trayvon was a 7 foot tall gangbanging, drug-dealing, monster that has a record of assaults a mile wide, and was also responsible for every crime committed in Sanford for the last five years.

I wish I were exaggerating:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/03/26/452310/what-everyone-needs-to-know-about-the-smear-campaign-against-trayvon-martin-1995-2012/

Still, where's Trayvon's cellphone?  Where are the crime scene pictures? Where's the ballistics report on the positioning of the shot?

Yeah, I'm not 100% sold on the "fucking coon" thing. Although even if he didn't say it, you still can't deny that his actions were racially motivated. 

What's even worse is that even IF all these fabricated lies about Trayvon were true, is that suppose to be some kind of justification for his shooting? Is that fake photo of him giving the middle finger suppose to make people think "Oh! Ok. He had it coming." I mean WTF?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

Yeah, I'm not 100% sold on the "fucking coon" thing.

He either said goon or coon.  Which is more likely?

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

What's even worse is that even IF all these fabricated lies about Trayvon were true, is that suppose to be some kind of justification for his shooting? Is that fake photo of him giving the middle finger suppose to make people think "Oh! Ok. He had it coming." I mean WTF?

That's what absolutely kills me...it's this disturbing bias that is coming out of people.  

I think it was in direct reaction to the baby faced pictures of Trayvon and the miserable picture of Zimmer the media first released...perpetuated (as usual) by the media to grab headlines.  It still doesn't excuse trying to find reasons to justify the shooting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

He either said goon or coon.  Which is more likely?

Of those two choices, the later. But, no offense Ambler, I'm not sure you're qualified to know with certainty he said either of those two things. He could be fucking coughing for all I know. It doesn't sound like anything to me. If you're convinced he's saying "fucking coon," then nothing I say is going to change your mind. I've listened to it a thousand times. I listened to the CNN audio lab version of it. Twice (once on the air, and again on Jon Stewart last night). They play the damn clip over and over again. I think it's like The Conversation or Blow Out. If you're convinced you've heard that, then that's what you're going to hear. I'm not going to get too bent out of shape about something that we're not able to prove, especially since it's besides the point. Using a racial slur would make Zimmerman appear more guilty, yes, but it'd be icing on the cake. He's guilty and racist, with or without the "coon."

I think now that the media is covering this more, folks have to be a little careful about jumping to conclusions. Yes, the Sandford police department fucked up royally. Yes, the evidence seems clear to us. Yes, I think Zimmerman is guilty. But we're not investigators, and just because someone is obviously guilty doesn't mean we should feel entitled enough to make conclusions concerning things that aren't in our realm of expertise. I felt the same way after the Casey Anthony trial, when everybody and their brother was posting on Facebook that it was such an atrocity that she "got off." Watching shit on TV isn't the same as being involved with a trial. I know our justice system is flawed. Both of these cases might be examples of that (especially, in my opinion, this one). But if we start throwing the system out, then we're starting down the road of guys like Zimmerman himself (and the Black Panthers who put a bounty on his head).

Quote:

Originally Posted by yt 

And Parker, one thing white people get emotional about is being called racist.  It's obvious that racial prejudice played a major role in this tragedy, but for Obama in particular to call it out would be essentially putting a third to a half of the country on the defensive.  And what people do when they are overly defensive is to channel that into hostility and aggression, and Obama's got enough of that coming at him as it is.  That's my thinking, anyway.

 

Are people that insecure about race and racism really going to vote for Obama in the first place?  And where did I say that Obama had to call white people racists? Zimmerman isn't white. It's one thing to say this is racially related, because it obviously is. It's another thing to say "this happened because white people are racist," which, agreed, would be stupid in more ways than one. While several of the responses to the tragedy suggests that a good number of white folks still are racist, that statement is irrelevant to the genesis of the issue; Zimmerman shooting Martin. 

I wouldn't agree it's besides the point.  If he did say fucking coons, it's evidence that it was a racially motivated hate crime, and not just Zimmerman being concerned for his neighbors like he claims.  Obviously there's no way to prove he did say fucking coons unless he admits it, but I am particularly sensitive about it as a black male who has been the target of racial hatred.  So excuse me for being dickish about the whole thing.

I do agree though there is an awful lot of arm chair lawyering going on that needs to calm down.

A couple of things:

1) I could see Zimmerman successfully using the insanity defense and getting off. The guy called 911 dozens of times, apparently to tell the police that he saw a Black guy. On that 911 recording it kind of sounds like the dispatcher was weary of hearing from Zimmerman yet again, regarded him as an amateur, but essentially harmless. I wonder if the police were even aware he owned a gun.

2) I could also see a case being made where a series of misunderstandings escalated into a struggle of some kind then the shooting. That neighborhood had been robbed before, Zimmerman felt that someone was "getting away with it" ("they were 'always' getting away with it I think he said), he spots Martin, who spots him, both see each other as suspicious, and act to avoid (Martin) and confront (Zimmerman), then things got out of hand.

I think I'm going to stop following this story until an actual jury decides on the case. The Media and politicians have latched onto this and when that happens truth is the first casualty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

I wouldn't agree it's besides the point.  If he did say fucking coons, it's evidence that it was a racially motivated hate crime, and not just Zimmerman being concerned for his neighbors like he claims.  Obviously there's no way to prove he did say fucking coons unless he admits it, but I am particularly sensitive about it as a black male who has been the target of racial hatred.  So excuse me for being dickish about the whole thing.

 

I do agree though there is an awful lot of arm chair lawyering going on that needs to calm down.

I don't think you're being dickish, and it makes sense that you're sensitive about it, especially as a black man. And I don't mean to diminish the importance of a racial slur, I'm just not positive that one was used. If one was, of course it's relevant. Unfortunately, only one person truly knows and I get the feeling he's not going to be honest about it. 

The point remains: there is a murdered teenager and we know who shot him. It is not for the Sanford police to determine his guilt or innocence, it is for a jury of his peers. But that's not what happened and it may now be too late.

That's what I don't understand.  When you murder someone, you're booked no matter what right?  So you mean to tell me I can go shoot somebody, tell the cops I was afraid for my safety and that it was self defense and they just say "oh, well in that case..." and send me on my way without ever being arrested?  Is that how it works in that city?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

So you mean to tell me I can go shoot somebody, tell the cops I was afraid for my safety and that it was self defense and they just say "oh, well in that case..." and send me on my way without ever being arrested? 

No. Because you're black.

Reporting shit like this causes riots.  Riots sell commercials.

So what if both parties are "standing their ground"?  I'm armed and feel I'm being threatened; so are you.  Does this turn into the Wild West?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rando 

So what if both parties are "standing their ground"?  I'm armed and feel I'm being threatened; so are you.  Does this turn into the Wild West?

Yes:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-explained#selfdefense

Of course they were arrested, then acquitted.

Good (by that I mean infuriating), editorial here: 

http://gawker.com/5896490/your-guide-to-the-idiotic-racist-backlash-against-trayvon-martin

 Sunday night I accidently caught some of Bill Cunningham's show. His line of reasoning was that we don't have all the facts, there for nobody should pass judgement on Zimmerman. He then agreed with some meat head caller that what was Martin doing out at 3:00am. They also both agreed that Obama shouldn't have said anything. Right wingers getting pissed about Obama, I know, will wonders ever cease. These are the facts one person shot and killed an armed 17 year old and is still a free man. I have every right to be pissed. If Jeb Bush runs for President in 2016, the Stand your ground law that he signed should be brought up every time he opens his mouth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaz 

He then agreed with some meat head caller that what was Martin doing out at 3:00am. 

Yeah, those damn coons out at 3am just asking to be shot.  I bet they also think women who wear sexy clothing deserve to be raped.  "What was she DOING wearing that miniskirt!?" 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaz 

 Sunday night I accidently caught some of Bill Cunningham's show. His line of reasoning was that we don't have all the facts, there for nobody should pass judgement on Zimmerman. He then agreed with some meat head caller that what was Martin doing out at 3:00am. They also both agreed that Obama shouldn't have said anything. Right wingers getting pissed about Obama, I know, will wonders ever cease. These are the facts one person shot and killed an armed 17 year old and is still a free man. I have every right to be pissed. If Jeb Bush runs for President in 2016, the Stand your ground law that he signed should be brought up every time he opens his mouth.

"Hey man, let's not rush to any JUDGEMENTS. You're all JUDGING Zimmerman already like you're judge, jury and executioner, man. In your eyes he's already guilty, just because of what the MEDIA TELLS YOU, right? You guys don't have all the facts and yet you're all JUDGING!

On a completely unrelated note having nothing to do about judging people whatsoever and totally doesn't prove me to be a hypocrite, have you SEEN the pictures of Martin they don't want you to see? He looks like a thug to me! And he was suspended for weed man, so you know he was up to no good! They're trying to paint him as this angel when in fact in this one picture he's giving the finger! What a thug! 

But seriously man, stop judging people."

Was that subtle enough? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Happenin 

A question: the new movie with Ben Stiller...do we really want to idolize anyone who belongs to a Neighborhood Watch at this point in our culture?

It was bound to happen.

What is it with Ben Stiller movies and national tragedies? First it's Zoolander & 9/11, now it's this.

Then there was Tower Heist coming out in the heat of the OWS protests.  Not a tragedy, but still...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

Yeah, I'm not 100% sold on the "fucking coon" thing. Although even if he didn't say it, you still can't deny that his actions were racially motivated. 

Pretty much this.  Even if Zimmerman isn't a complete racist--which is looking like the case now--he's still guilty in engaging with an individual primarily because he was a black youth wearing a hoodie.  Zimmerman may not have been burning crosses, but racial profiling doesn't exactly make him look like a hero.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

It was bound to happen.

"Slated for a July release, 'Neighborhood Watch' is a comedy starring Ben Stiller, Jonah Hill, Vince Vaughn and Billy Crudup as a quartet of volunteer watchmen who engage in hilarious hijinks as they cruise their suburban neighborhood seeking out troublemakers"

Hahaha!

Has new information been revealed? Was Zimmerman actually a registered neighborhood watch captain? Or just a self-appointed guardian of all he surveyed?

I heard Zimm wasn't affiliated with any neighborhood watch program, but the media keeps saying he was a captain.

So, stupid old me thought that I was probably mistaken regarding "stand your ground." I thought "Come on, this a country with laws and law enforcement agencies and civilization. Yeah, they seem to have really bought into their own hype but no one could possibly think laws like that are a good idea." What a silly person I am!

So now I eagerly await for the new GOP/NRA legislation initiative. It will be called "Take Back The Night" and it will allow you to actively seek out and kill lawbreakers. Later to be amended as "Take Back The Night With Benefits" which will reward you for each confirmed kill.

Jon Stewart played a clip last night from some NRA representative at CPAC recently, and the guy was literally saying Obama was behind a "vast conspiracy" to remove guns from private citizens, even though, after three years, there's been zero evidence of him even leaning in the direction of curbing current gun laws, and he's proposed no such legislation. But the reason for zero evidence is, of course, no one in the liberal media is covering it!

Ipso facto, you can shoot black kids in Florida. Case closed.

It was actually Colbert, not Stewart. "What other things that Obama's shown no sign of doing will he do next? Defund the military to give money to the new Black Panthers for their weed-growing operation? The total lack of evidence is all the evidence I need!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Singer 

Jon Stewart played a clip last night from some NRA representative at CPAC recently, and the guy was literally saying Obama was behind a "vast conspiracy" to remove guns from private citizens, even though, after three years, there's been zero evidence of him even leaning in the direction of curbing current gun laws, and he's proposed no such legislation. But the reason for zero evidence is, of course, no one in the liberal media is covering it!

 

Ipso facto, you can shoot black kids in Florida. Case closed.

somewhat on tangent....

The history of the NRA is quite interesting. There was a piece on NPR awhile back (after the Tucson shooting) that discussed the mutation of the NRA back in the 1970's. It went from being a 'sports' organization to a full blown political lobby fixated on the the deification of the gun.

So a grand jury is set to convene on April 10.  Hopefully they'll make the sensible decision to arrest Zimmerman and dump him on a South Central LA sidewalk.

...and give him the ol' Die Hard 3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

...and give him the ol' Die Hard 3.

I don't get it...

I think I'm interneting wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

I heard Zimm wasn't affiliated with any neighborhood watch program, but the media keeps saying he was a captain.

I think it's that neighborhood watch in this community isn't affiliated with the official Neighborhood Watch program.  Anybody can get a bunch of residents together and designate themselves a neighborhood watch, and anyone can be chosen as the captain, but those who want to be official have to follow the national program's guidelines.