Clair Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 This topic is like a week late to the party... I was wondering when it would pop up! I think this shooting created a ton of buzz not because of the death of Trayvon himself, but of the existence of unjust racial crime in this land where "all men are created equal". This case was the straw that broke the camel's back, imo. I believe that Zimmerman shot Trayvon without self-defense being a factor. They say that Zimmerman was yelling "help" when the 911 call was taking place. The thought that Trayvon might have been the one yelling "help" instead breaks my heart. =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote name='Clair' timestamp='1333141107' post='5895212'] This topic is like a week late to the party... I was wondering when it would pop up! I think this shooting created a ton of buzz not because of the death of Trayvon himself, but of the existence of unjust racial crime in this land where "all men are created equal". This case was the straw that broke the camel's back, imo. I believe that Zimmerman shot Trayvon without self-defense being a factor. They say that Zimmerman was yelling "help" when the 911 call was taking place. The thought that Trayvon might have been the one yelling "help" instead breaks my heart. =/ [/quote]I have tears in my eyes at that last part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Let's get some of the facts straight, guys. Yes, the media likes to sensationalize everything - we explicitly saw this in the Dharun Ravi case. But you can't ride on that thought alone to support an entire argument. "Oh, the media blows everything out of proportion, and therefore we should let Zimmerman go for now." No, the law doesn't work that way. Here are the facts: When Zimmerman called the police, he stated [i]himself[/i] that he was inside of his car, watching Trayvon being "up to no good". He then said that Trayvon was walking towards him. During the 911 call that was released, there was no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman's call with the police was interrupted in any way by being punched in the nose. In fact, Zimmerman is now stating that Trayvon punched him from behind. So, between sitting in his car stalking Trayvon and running after Trayvon, where was the punch thrown? And if a punch was thrown, why didn't he tell the 911 dispatcher? It seems like something you, I don't know, might want to mention. But, forget about that. Let's assume that Trayvon really did punch him in the nose (which hasn't been evidenced yet, even though his brother says that in the fuzzy police tapes you can see evidence of Zimmerman's nose being... I don't know, messed up). Florida state law, unlike most other state laws, says that you are allowed to stand your ground when confronted and can retaliate in self-defense. It also explicitly states that a retaliation must be equal to the amount of threat posed - if you are in a life-threatening situation, you are given full reign to use lethal force. So, if everything Zimmerman says is true, he thought that an unarmed seventeen-year-old punching him in the nose was a life-threatening situation. But, not only that, he ran after Zimmerman. Florida state law doesn't say you can [i]put[/i] yourself in a situation of distress, but says that if you already are in the situation you may retaliate. The fact that he ran after Trayvon lends credibility to the thought that Zimmerman just wanted to pick a fight; not to mention that he completely ignored the 911 dispatcher when he said that the cops are coming and he had no reason to chase after Trayvon. Some reports say that Trayvon reached for Zimmerman's gun. Regardless of whether or not that is true, how is that Trayvon's fault? If an armed man is running after me for no apparent reason, even if I did punch his nose, I am going to go with my gut instinct and try to take away the weapon with which he can kill me. It makes [i]logical[/i] sense. Other reports cite Trayvon's suspension from school. That's fine, I still don't see how a tiny kid (who weighs one hundred pounds less than his aggressor) could pose any threat to big Zimmerman. What these reports don't cite is that Zimmerman was arrested for some form of aggression a few years back (I believe in 2005, but I'm not quite sure) and that he was also charged with refusal of arrest. You know what else these reports don't cite? That, if you listen to the 911 dispatch call, it almost sounds like Zimmerman is inebriated. On that note, the Florida police were supposed to administer a toxicology test to Zimmerman, since he had shot someone. Instead, they gave a toxicology test to the then-dead Trayvon. The police should have brought him in for questioning immediately. The worst part is Zimmerman's self-defense claim, as corroborated by the Florida police chief. Self-defense is an affirmative stance to take in a legal debate, and an affirmative stance always holds the burden of proof. I can't go to Florida, shoot someone, and claim self-defense. You know why? Because the person I shot [i]is dead[/i]. They can't defend themselves or testify in a court of law against me. I need to proof that I really did act in self-defense, lest I be charged with second-degree murder. Here's my take on this debacle, as shared by many others: the first police officer to arrive on the scene was biased (maybe racially, maybe not) towards Zimmerman, and assumed that Trayvon was the aggressor and Zimmerman was simply doing his civic duty. So, he let Zimmerman off the hook, without complying with Florida police procedures. Afterward, when the case started to become well-known, the Florida police needed to save their own asses and strung this whole story about self-defense, even though it's a poorly-webbed lie with a ton of visible loopholes. Now that the case has gone to the federal level, there will be a proper investigation and perhaps Trayvon will get justice, as I think he should. One thing that I don't understand is why people are citing this to be a case of racism. There is little evidence to say that Zimmerman killed Trayvon because of his race, or because of any racial profiling. If we truly believe (which, at the very least, I don't) that Zimmerman thought Trayvon was a suspicious character, he based his assumption off of Trayvon's clothing and the situation. Not many seventeen-year-olds walk through a gated community in the rain at night. Regardless of Trayvon's ethnicity, I honestly think Zimmerman would have pursued him. In any case, I still think Zimmerman just wanted to pick a fight or was drunk or something to that effect, and I don't see the racial undertones of this case. So, no, I don't think people are wrong to say that Zimmerman should be charged with second-degree murder. I don't think people are wrong to say that Zimmerman should be detained for the time being until this mess is sorted out. I do, however, think that people are wrong to say that we're drawing conclusions based on little evidence. I've given you all the facts. If you honestly believe that Zimmerman should be let off of the hook, you're entitled to your own opinion. But don't think for a minute that those who think otherwise aren't rooting their opinions in logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDDRodrigo Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 >Huge-ass wall of text >Checks poster >Dark >Automatically gives a rep and supports everything he said as true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 [quote name='CDDRodrigo' timestamp='1333156144' post='5895507'] >Huge-ass wall of text >Checks poster >Dark >Automatically gives a rep and supports everything he said as true [/quote] If you actually read through it you would find some intellectual information :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDDRodrigo Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 [quote name='Tsukasa Hiiragi' timestamp='1333158442' post='5895553'] If you actually read through it you would find some intellectual information :/ [/quote] It was a sarcasm that wasn't a sarcasm. I read it, though. A lot of the factors he posted are indeed likely to be true. Especially the 3rd paragraph about how the guy WANTED the kid to hit him if that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vairocana Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 >Post by Dark So we can just close this thread and go home now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John A. Zoidberg Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Go on Facebook. Find any status or picture on the page of a popular mainstream media figure (basically most rappers). Read the comments. You will see the following: "DAMN RACISTS! THAT GUY SHOULD BE TIED DOWN AND SHOT IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD!" "SEND HIM TO THE CHAIR!" "HE SHOULD BE BEATEN TO DEATH!" Now let me ask you something, how the hell does violence justify violence, when there's not even proof of whether or not it was provoked? The answer is rather clear. People jump to conclusions whenever they feel they can make a point out of it. A black kid is killed, black people will say, "Oh, he was just out buying skittles, he didn't do anything, the other guy is totes guilty. It's obviously a hate crime." However, do they have proof of this? No! None at all! It's the same with anything. If a homosexual is killed, the homosexual community (which, don't get me wrong, I am a complete supporter of), will come out and say it was a hate crime before there's even proof that it was. People will always find ways to make vaguely explained crimes their personal political bullhorns. That being said, if proof arose that Trayvon's death was the result of a hate crime, I will no longer support the side of "there's no proof," (obviously). As a strict pacifist, however, I still wouldn't wish death on the killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enrise Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 [quote name='~~Xiahou Dun~~' timestamp='1333123265' post='5894954'] Can I marry you? [/quote] Depends on the relationship we'll be maintaining should a hypothetical marriage be conducted. [quote name='CDDRodrigo' timestamp='1333127466' post='5894993'] While you're worried about a misshot Millions of people are starving, others are homeless, and others are helpless. The Press is one of the world's worst evils. [/quote] And so is humanity. A lot of people don't do anything about it. So really, the world is full of standard immoralities. [quote name='Dark' timestamp='1333156026' post='5895505'] [spoiler=Long post]Let's get some of the facts straight, guys. Yes, the media likes to sensationalize everything - we explicitly saw this in the Dharun Ravi case. But you can't ride on that thought alone to support an entire argument. "Oh, the media blows everything out of proportion, and therefore we should let Zimmerman go for now." No, the law doesn't work that way. Here are the facts: When Zimmerman called the police, he stated [i]himself[/i] that he was inside of his car, watching Trayvon being "up to no good". He then said that Trayvon was walking towards him. During the 911 call that was released, there was no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman's call with the police was interrupted in any way by being punched in the nose. In fact, Zimmerman is now stating that Trayvon punched him from behind. So, between sitting in his car stalking Trayvon and running after Trayvon, where was the punch thrown? And if a punch was thrown, why didn't he tell the 911 dispatcher? It seems like something you, I don't know, might want to mention. But, forget about that. Let's assume that Trayvon really did punch him in the nose (which hasn't been evidenced yet, even though his brother says that in the fuzzy police tapes you can see evidence of Zimmerman's nose being... I don't know, messed up). Florida state law, unlike most other state laws, says that you are allowed to stand your ground when confronted and can retaliate in self-defense. It also explicitly states that a retaliation must be equal to the amount of threat posed - if you are in a life-threatening situation, you are given full reign to use lethal force. So, if everything Zimmerman says is true, he thought that an unarmed seventeen-year-old punching him in the nose was a life-threatening situation. But, not only that, he ran after Zimmerman. Florida state law doesn't say you can [i]put[/i] yourself in a situation of distress, but says that if you already are in the situation you may retaliate. The fact that he ran after Trayvon lends credibility to the thought that Zimmerman just wanted to pick a fight; not to mention that he completely ignored the 911 dispatcher when he said that the cops are coming and he had no reason to chase after Trayvon. Some reports say that Trayvon reached for Zimmerman's gun. Regardless of whether or not that is true, how is that Trayvon's fault? If an armed man is running after me for no apparent reason, even if I did punch his nose, I am going to go with my gut instinct and try to take away the weapon with which he can kill me. It makes [i]logical[/i] sense. Other reports cite Trayvon's suspension from school. That's fine, I still don't see how a tiny kid (who weighs one hundred pounds less than his aggressor) could pose any threat to big Zimmerman. What these reports don't cite is that Zimmerman was arrested for some form of aggression a few years back (I believe in 2005, but I'm not quite sure) and that he was also charged with refusal of arrest. You know what else these reports don't cite? That, if you listen to the 911 dispatch call, it almost sounds like Zimmerman is inebriated. On that note, the Florida police were supposed to administer a toxicology test to Zimmerman, since he had shot someone. Instead, they gave a toxicology test to the then-dead Trayvon. The police should have brought him in for questioning immediately. The worst part is Zimmerman's self-defense claim, as corroborated by the Florida police chief. Self-defense is an affirmative stance to take in a legal debate, and an affirmative stance always holds the burden of proof. I can't go to Florida, shoot someone, and claim self-defense. You know why? Because the person I shot [i]is dead[/i]. They can't defend themselves or testify in a court of law against me. I need to proof that I really did act in self-defense, lest I be charged with second-degree murder. Here's my take on this debacle, as shared by many others: the first police officer to arrive on the scene was biased (maybe racially, maybe not) towards Zimmerman, and assumed that Trayvon was the aggressor and Zimmerman was simply doing his civic duty. So, he let Zimmerman off the hook, without complying with Florida police procedures. Afterward, when the case started to become well-known, the Florida police needed to save their own asses and strung this whole story about self-defense, even though it's a poorly-webbed lie with a ton of visible loopholes. Now that the case has gone to the federal level, there will be a proper investigation and perhaps Trayvon will get justice, as I think he should. One thing that I don't understand is why people are citing this to be a case of racism. There is little evidence to say that Zimmerman killed Trayvon because of his race, or because of any racial profiling. If we truly believe (which, at the very least, I don't) that Zimmerman thought Trayvon was a suspicious character, he based his assumption off of Trayvon's clothing and the situation. Not many seventeen-year-olds walk through a gated community in the rain at night. Regardless of Trayvon's ethnicity, I honestly think Zimmerman would have pursued him. In any case, I still think Zimmerman just wanted to pick a fight or was drunk or something to that effect, and I don't see the racial undertones of this case. So, no, I don't think people are wrong to say that Zimmerman should be charged with second-degree murder. I don't think people are wrong to say that Zimmerman should be detained for the time being until this mess is sorted out. I do, however, think that people are wrong to say that we're drawing conclusions based on little evidence. I've given you all the facts. If you honestly believe that Zimmerman should be let off of the hook, you're entitled to your own opinion. But don't think for a minute that those who think otherwise aren't rooting their opinions in logic.[/spoiler] [/quote] I've been wondering when I would see you again... (It's Enrise) [quote name='John A. Zoidberg' timestamp='1333164297' post='5895653'] Now let me ask you something, how the hell does violence justify violence... [/quote] Only in a world revolved around violence it does, or in times of war. Since it's neither of those, it's never justifiable to any degree. And because the simple logic of indifference breeds violence, which breeds more violence, it's a never ending cycle until one of the sources of violence is removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted March 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 That post was sexy. Dark is pretty much right about everything. We can go home now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Crouton Posted April 1, 2012 Report Share Posted April 1, 2012 [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCYuHPZn-lg[/media] Go to the video for the sources in the video description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.