StrangeSox

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:25 AM) Again, yes, there is. If there is an outstanding neighborhood notice that a random black male has been spotted in an all white area, and you just happened to see a random black male moments after hearing such news, I think you might be justified in jumping to such a conclusion, even if it ends up being wrong, merely because of how coincidental the news is and how out of the ordinary the person is. Tangential but again highlights exactly the sort of problems that segregation, whether de facto or de jure, creates.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:21 AM) To be fair, I'm not sure he meant in this specific scenario, but scenarios like it with proper context. I'm not sure the context fits in THIS specific case, however, because as you've said, this was a pretty mixed race community...so seeing someone of a different race in the area isn't much justification of suspicion. Where we disconnect is when you say there is NEVER such justification. And I disagree with that, wholeheartedly. Let me clarify here, because I think there's some miscommunication: There's no context that justifies assuming any unknown black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal solely because they're an unknown black male.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:18 AM) I'm not applying what I said to what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. I'm merely saying that such context CAN exist, whereas you said it could NEVER exist, under ANY circumstance. And I disagree. There's no context that justifies assuming any unknown black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal because they're an unknown black male. Period. At least outside of Jim Crow and Black Codes.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:10 AM) But he was eating skittles! Only saintly kids eat skittles... He was eating skittles and drinking iced tea. He was walking home from the store. Because he happened to be black while doing so, someone else assumed that he was probably a criminal and called the police. That same person decided to get out of his car with a gun and follow him. He ended up dead because of this. And yet you're "happily a racist" in this scenario.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:08 AM) While Zimmerman is a mixed race, I think calling this guy white is a stretch of immense proportions. He doesn't look white. At all. So that segregationist gated community must also be ok with Hispanics. There's also black families that live there, too. Hope they don't ever have some black friends over, though, lest they get the police called on them for walking down the sidewalk. Or worse. that was more a tangential shot at the whole gated community concept

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:05 AM) This couldn't be more wrong. There is plenty of context to justify this. To name a few really REALLY simple ones: 1) An amber alert is issued in your area, a child is missing, last seen being taken by a random black male walking down the sidewalk. You see a random black male walking down the sidewalk with a kid. Is it the person you're looking for? Maybe not. But would it be unjustified to think so? Nope. I'd argue that yeah, it would be a poor assumption. Somebody who had abducted a child would not likely be strolling down the street with that child. You're inserting context that doesn't exist in the real-life case. Martin wasn't loitering around in an alley, he was walking down the main sidewalk. He wasn't doing anything suspicious. My statement was that here's no context that justifies assuming any unknown black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal because they're an unknown black male. Martin was judged to be a likely criminal because he was a young black male, not because of any behavioral context. There's no context where assuming that a young black male strolling down the sidewalk in the evening is probably a criminal because there's been some break-ins in the past few months isn't racist. I'm not really 'trying' to sound like I'm not racist. I'm pointing out that anyone who justifies and agrees with Zimmerman's assumption that this unknown young black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal is engaged in racially motivated bigotry, or, more bluntly, racism. It doesn't take effort to not be racist here.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:06 AM) ...in the same age group as other black teens that have been committing crimes in a GATED neighborhood. Good argument for abolishing all white segregationist gated communities that view any black people as suspicious and likely criminals.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 09:55 AM) I can't speak for anyone else, but when I see *ANYONE* I don't recognize roaming around where I live, I'm suspicious of them. But when I see someone that's COMPLETELY out of the ordinary for the area, if being extra suspicious makes me a racist, then fine, I'm a racist. I think this is a weak argument, however, and has nothing to do with racism so much as it has to do with observation. I'd feel the same as people observing me if I was roaming around Englewood for some reason. Would they be racists for saying, "WTF is there a crazy ass white guy walking around here for?!" IMO, no. They'd simply be observing a crazy ass white guy was roaming in a place totally out of the ordinary for him. Black people live in this community/development/whatever you want to call it. Immediately viewing anyone who's black as out-of-place and suspicious is racist.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 09:48 AM) You can keep ignoring the context to make your point but I won't. There's no context that justifies assuming any unknown black male walking down the sidewalk is probably a criminal because they're an unknown black male.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 09:29 AM) I'm happily a racist in that scenario. IIRC, the neighborhood didn't have many blacks in it and Zimmerman had never seen Martin before. You just need to get over your white guilt. You're trying to justify assuming a random young black male is likely to be a criminal because they're a random young black male. I'd say you need to get over your explicit racism more than I need to get over "white guilt," which is just a dumb concept racists use as a shield when they're called out for being racist. I mean, you're basically telling me that I should "get over my white guilt" so that I can comfortably be racist. Now consider how many people share your views and then tell me that systemic racism isn't a real force in this country. That Henry Louis Gates didn't suffer from the exact same form of racism when it was assumed he was a criminal because he was trying to get into his own home. That millions of other young black men don't suffer from the same prejudices and bigotry.

The entire scandal narrative was an illusion.

Wouldn't Martin have been justified in drawing down on this weird man following him through the neighborhood and standing his ground?

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:42 PM) I was at a wedding where an hour into the reception a bridesmaid announced to her husband that she wanted a divorce. Two hours in she announced she was moving in with a close female friend and they were in love. Three hours in the bride started throwing punches at her for ruining the wedding and taking center stage. Best damn wedding I have ever been to.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 06:43 PM) His own recordings to the dispatcher shows he didnt know if the guy was black or not. People keep throwing around the racist term but right now the only person showing to have issues about someone's race is Martin. The state should contact some people in this thread because it appears they know exactly how everything went down that night. http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326...-zimmerman.html "Zimmerman: He looks black" http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/tray...mp;spr_id=18880

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 07:52 PM) I'm not a legal expert, so I don't know what the law states in Florida about such an altercation. I would need to get instructions about the law from the judge or something. But I would have a hard time letting Zimmerman off the hook on this one with an innocent verdict. Seems like manslaughter to me. If Zimmerman throws the first punch that changes things a lot to me. I would convict him of murder. same.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 06:56 PM) no one really knows what happened, but after many requests for my opinion I will now speculate on how the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin went down: Zimmerman sees Martin, Zimmerman believes Martin is some sort of criminal due to the fact that Marin is black and he is dressed up in one of his "gangster rapper" type outfits. There have been a lot of crimes in the neighborhood lately and Zimmerman is paranoid. Zimmerman begins noticeably and aggressively following Martin. Martin confronts Zimmerman. After a verbal altercation and Zimmerman's refusal to stop following him, Martin starts kicking Zimmerman's ass (that girly high pitched screaming heard on those tapes is Zimmerman). Zimmerman shoots Martin during the fight. That's a very plausible scenario. The only thing is we don't know who got physical first, and that's pretty important.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 12:05 AM) It's not exactly prejudiced if the crimes committed in that neighborhood were mostly done by people fitting his general description. So all black males in the neighborhood are now rightfully viewed as suspicious?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 05:12 PM) Well i'm a big ol' racist because I would have done the exact same thing if this happened in my neighborhood and crime wasn't being addressed. Yes, this is. Full stop. Assuming that any random young black male is probably a criminal because there was a couple of break-ins over the past year is blatantly racist.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) Yeah, pretty terrible to assume that young black male is likely to be a criminal, call the police on him, pursue him on foot, and end up killing him because you made one colossal error in judgement after another. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 05:00 PM) Yeah I still don't see anything wrong with any of that. Not smart, but not wrong either. Assuming a random young black male is probably a criminal is straight-up racist and wrong. Calling the police because you see a young black male is racist and wrong. Getting out of your car with a gun and chasing down a young black male because you think he's probably a criminal, though you've seen him do nothing wrong at all, is racist and wrong.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:55 PM) Even if he was the one that created the danger? Martin was walking home minding his own business. This situation doesn't exist if Zimmerman doesn't prejudicially assume that this young black male is just another one of those "assholes" who "always get away" and is likely a criminal. This situation doesn't exist if Zimmerman, after calling the police, remains in his car. This situation doesn't exist if Zimmerman, after exiting his car with his gun, realizes that this situation is quickly escalating beyond what it needs to and gets back in his car. Even if Martin jumped the guy that had been stalking him through the neighborhood, Zimmerman still made many errors in judgement to get them both to that point.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:45 PM) Yeah, how terrible to be active about what's going on in your neighborhood instead of reactive. Yeah, pretty terrible to assume that young black male is likely to be a criminal, call the police on him, pursue him on foot, and end up killing him because you made one colossal error in judgement after another.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:28 PM) He wasn't doing anything wrong at the time, but how do you know he wasn't about to do something wrong? lol, this is exactly why Zimmerman is a s***head.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:17 PM) I get the outrage, but I'm not entirely unsympathetic to Zimmerman. This isn't a guy that shoots up a car full of black teens because of an irrational fear that they might do something. No that was that other dude in Florida a few months later. Zimmerman was somebody who thought himself an enforcer of the law and was sick of seeing these "assholes" get away. He said that three days later knowing that Trayvon wasn't doing anything wrong when Zimmerman decided to report him to the police and then arm himself to follow after him.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:05 PM) Re: Lincoln, here's a bunch of his writings from as early as aged 28 regarding his views of slavery: http://www.nps.gov/liho/historyculture/slavery.htm Yes, he was a "realist" and knew abolishing slavery outright wasn't feasible and he had to move politically over the years to get it done. But that's not the same as voting for an act legalizing slavery only to then praise that it was unconstitutional less then 2 decades later. That's what these guys are doing. Seriously, go read A Fiery Trial. Lincoln, like virtually every other human being, grew and changed his ideas as he gained more experience and knowledge and had more interactions with freedmen and slaves and abolitionists. He wasn't an abolitionist in his early years and didn't believe the federal government had any power to do so. He believed it was unconstitutional. And yet he later made unprecedented assertions of executive power and issued the Emancipation Proclamation. His views on slavery and racial equality and the role of the federal government changed significantly over the years. Many people underwent similar changes during that time period. btw in the Peoria speech Lincoln explicitly disavows racial equality and a society where whites and free blacks can live together. He supported voluntary deportation of them. He later changed his mind. I don't get why you can't possibly believe that someone can change their mind on something like marriage equality over the course of 17 years. I've already said that Reid's not being honest when he says he's always been against DOMA. I don't think he gave a s*** about marriage equality in 1996 one way or the other and didn't violate some deeply held principle. Shame on him for that. But developing a principle in favor of the unquestionably correct moral outcome over the course of 17 years is 1) pretty easily believable and 2) a good thing regardless of who does it. Yeah, they're not the leading representatives. Yeah, these comments right now are politically advantageous, but that doesn't mean they don't believe that striking down DOMA was the right move. And who is eating this up? I think everyone itt is reacting to your outrage over the idea that someone might change their mind and that this makes them awful, disgusting human beings while not saying a damn word about the conservatives who have said they will work to stop marriage equality where ever they can. They are the awful, disgusting piles of s*** in this case.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 03:29 PM) Eh this is unlike most murder cases. Generally you are trying to prove whether or not X person killed Y person. In this case we know X killed Y, its just whether or not X did it justifiably. You just cant predict what a jury will do. For all I know half of those people think that its always justified to shoot, thus the prosecution never had a shot. But that wasnt really the point. The point was that you had someone who admittedly killed another human, and the police didnt even charge him. I have no problem if Zimmerman wins because the evidence isnt beyond a reasonable doubt. I personally am not a fan of the law, I think that the burden should be on the defendant to prove that the death was justifiable, but thats just me. I still don't know why they went for a murder charge instead of manslaughter.