The Glade 4.0

I'm not sure how you get the idea that Zimmerman is still "clearly in the wrong". He was foolish and stupid and wrong in the sense that following Martin was unnecessary, unwise, and was the root cause of the chain of events leading to the shooting. Legally, however, there's practically nothing other than lingering doubt about the exact course of the altercation itself indicating he violated the law in any way, and that lingering doubt is far from enough to convict him. He was within his legal rights to follow Martin, even after the dispatcher asked him not to; the police do not have the authority to tell you not to follow someone unless doing so would violate some other law like trespassing or stalking.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It's a media circus to be sure. Yes, it's liberal jew run media bias running rampant. There's also a white sheet-wearing media bias running rampant, we just ignore that part because it's makes all the white people uncomfortable. (Sort of like how the liberal jews ignore the rampant liberal jew bias because it's uncomfortable). The problem is that the race angle works both ways. For example, had Trayvon Martin been white, we wouldn't have had knucklehead crackers saying **** like this:


Because clearly, anyone who gets involved in an altercation with a strange man following them in the middle of the night is a nigger trying to keep it real. I especially like how the kid's automatically suspicious. How'd we come to that conclusion? (Hint: It's because he's black). I mean, if a strange man were following either one of those guys around in the middle of the night, they both would have stopped immediately to give their name and address, right?

Yeah, that's why police officers wear uniforms and identify themselves as police - it's so you know they're the police, and not some crazy whackjob. Since Zimmerman isn't a police officer, he did neither. Martin did what any reasonable person would do - try to get away from the strange person that was following him. If he'd been white, everyone would be wondering just why, exactly, Zimmerman was so afraid for his life. If he'd been white, the general perception would have been that Zimmerman provoked Martin to attack by stalking him. Because he's black, and not white, the general attitude is that Zimmerman got jumped by a nigger thug. Nevermind any of Zimmerman's dubious activity leading up to the incident.

Now, if Trayvon Martin were a white female, maybe Tracy Martin, George Zimmerman would be in jail right now, and there would be a date set for his murder trial. There wouldn't be any talk about how there isn't enough evidence to convict him, because his guilt would be assured barring the intervention of someone like Johnny Cochran.

So yes, race is the reason this got all the media attention. His race is also the reason why all of our crackers want to ignore it. They want it to be about a nigger who deserved to get shot in the first place.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

I like how all of the sudden I'm a cracker. There goes the affirmative action bonus

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

No Hannibal, you aren't just a cracker. You are a knucklehead cracker according to Corolinth. Depends on how much validity you give his opinion I suppose.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

The reason we came to the conclusion he was suspicious is because he was suspicious to George Zimmerman. That's the guy who was there. He was suspicious for whatever reason Zimmerman thought he was suspicious, and we don't know if that was because he was black or not; it seems more likely that it's because Zimmerman was paranoid.



Which is a load of horseshit. Zimmerman was not afraid for his life until Martin was already on top of him and hitting him. Martin did wahat any reasonable person would do right up to the point he decided "**** this getting away ****, I'm going to jump this guy."

Furthermore, the general perception already IS that Zimmerman provoked Martin to attack by following him. (He did not stalk him; no stalking occured at any point in this incident). That's why people are saying that Zimmerman is a fool, whether he's innocent or guilty. The only thing different if he were white is that we would not have had people making the idiotic assumption that Zimmerman followed him with the intent to attack him, but for some reason decided to call the cops first.



Horseshit. If he were a female of either color, he probably wouldn't have had nearly as much success attacking Zimmerman in the first place, which would in turn make Zimmerman's injuries go away and his story far weaker. That's why he'd be in jail, not just "hurf durf, white females". If Zimmerman did have the exact same injuries, his story would be just as strong and quite frankly the only way he'd get convicted is if Johnny Cochrane were the prosecutor. Physical evidence is overwhelmingly powerful to juries, especially with shows on TV glamorizing forensics.



No, you want it to be about a nigger who deserved to get shot to them so that you can deliver yet another pompous lecture to everyone, telling them what a hypocrite they are. The outrage against Martin has not been because he is black; it has been because people have assumed he was a victim of a racist murder simply because he was black, and the polishing of his image to support that.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

All I know is I wasn't there, and it seems like people are bending over backwards to make this a racial thing, to the point of falsifying evidence.

Zimmerman could be in the wrong, but he seems to have been given a bad shake by people who want to put this tragedy into their agenda.

If you want to talk about people who should he arrested how about those who appear to be guilty of solicitation of murder and/or kidnapping?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Just to focus in on this I think if Trayvon were female (s)he'd be alive right now, I simply doubt Zimmerman would chase a "her". Personally I believe the profile to be young males, and in this case being black probably didnt help but wasnt the sole reason. I feel like if Trayvon were white, hispanic or asian he'd still call 911. If you're out at night going to rob a house you're probably a young male, and I think that as human animals we are predisposed to categorize young males as potential threats. So the bar for "suspicious" is much lower.

As for the rest of it, yeah if I'm minding my own business and some strange guy is following me in an SUV and then gets out to chase me I'm not going to take that very well. Doesnt mean you can jump the guy, but we dont know what happened yet.

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

I think his demographic data is faulty.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

He killed someone that did not need killing. Giving him all of the benefit of the doubt, he **** up.

If Martin was on top of him and beating him, then Martin certainly did need killing at the moment he got killed.

Where he **** up was in following Martin, which was unnecessary. It's still not illegal.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Surely Martin has a right to self defense as well. Zimmerman is armed and seemingly the aggressor. He chased Martin at least initially.

We dont know the full details but what if Zimmerman chased Martin and tackled him trying to hold him for the police or something? If Martin fights back he should be shot?

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

Had Zimmerman not created the situation, NO HARM would have befallen anyone. Therefore, the kid did not need to die. Therefore, Zimmerman **** up. Therefore, Zimmerman was clearly in the wrong. No, that does not mean he broke the law.

I have no doubt that even Zimmerman would argue that the entire situation was a mistake.

He followed Martin. We don't know that he chased him, and "self defense" does not extend to starting a physical confrontation with someone merely because they are following you. If Zimmerman did something else on top of simply following Martin that would appear to a reasonable person to be an attack or an imminent threat of one, he could defend himself under Stand Your Ground, butonce he moved to being on top of Zimmerman and beating him, he moved out of the realm of self-defense.

If that were the case, it might be possible to convict Zimmerman of manslaughter, but right now there's no evidence Zimmerman did anything but follow Martin. Following isn't enough to defend yourself; if it were, the paranoid could "defend" themself against anyone happening to be going the same direction as they.



If he fights back, no. However, once you're on top of someone and beating them while they're on their back, you're well beyond deadly force and are in position to beat them to death. This is an exceedingly dangerous position to be in, even for a skilled ground fighter.

Furthermore, while we don't know the full details, there are NO details that we do know indicating Zimmerman actually did attempt to physically assault or restrain Martin in any way. Zimmerman is not obligated to disprove every speculation that comes up simply because the details are unclear.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

My opinion based on what I have read and heard so far:

I believe Zimmerman was a likely paranoid due to other robberies in the area and genuinely thought Trayvon was "suspicious". This was not due to race, but rather circumstance. (it was late, it was dark, a hooded individual in an area that has had several burglaries) He followed until it was suggested to him by the dispatcher that he needn't do that. All the while, Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend telling her that he was being followed.

Martin "gave up the chase", so to speak and headed back to his vehicle after he got off the 911 call. Martin decided that he was not going to let this guy follow him and run without a challenge. Martin came back and confronted Zimmerman and words were exchanged.

Who hit who first in this exchange is the only thing that I can't be sure of. I believe Zimmerman's account of the fight is true. What I don't know is who started it. If Zimmerman laid a hand on Trayvon first, then the self-defense claim falls apart as he is who started the fight. If Trayvon landed the first punch and Zimmerman was being beaten to death, then lethal force was justified.

Zimmerman was likely overzealous about suspicious persons in the area, but following Trayvon was in no way illegal. It has to hinge on who was first to strike the other as this will determine if Zimmerman's claim of self defense is valid. (ie. He can't have started the fight and then claimed the need to defend himself with deadly force)

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

While this is true, it is hardly reasonable to expect him to predict that following the kid would lead to shooting him. Furthermore, whether the kid "needed to die" is irrelevant. What he needed to do was stop assaulting Zimmerman. If Zimmerman had only wounded him, he wouldn't be dead.



Then who cares is he's "in the wrong"? No one is claiming it was a good idea for him to follow the kid.



He already has.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

This isn't completely true. If Zimmerman started the fight, but then Martin got the upper hand to the point where he was in a position to beat Zimmerman to death (as in, continuing to hit him, not merely sitting on him) then Zimmerman could still use a self-defense argument because Martin had gone beyond defense and into assault. However, since he started the altercation, there would be a strong case for manslaughter.

As a practical matter, however, some positive evidence that Zimmerman started the fight would be needed.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I also think it is sad that no one responded to the calls for help, whether they were from Martin or Zimmerman, with either a physical presence, a switching on of a light, or maybe a shout out their window.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Holy shitsnacks.... I think it is time for a killing spree. Using that as my excuse...

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Just because you're not white means you're exempt from being a cracker? What kind of racist bullshit is that?

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Ok, so he didn't realize ahead of time that he was **** up.



You do? I'm responding to your quote, where you said:


That is how we get the idea that Zimmerman is clearly in the wrong....

I'm of the mind now that Martin is the one that escalated things. Zim followed him, then stopped. Martin was gone. He could have hid, could have gone somewhere else...but he came back. That's when the physical stuff started. Had Martin just taken off, he would probably still be alive.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

No he didn't, but that's not the point. The point is that you can't use what eventually happened to work backwards and say that he **** up in the initial event, unless what eventually happened was something that could be easily forseen as a consequence. There's not really any reason Zimmerman should have thought ahead of time "Hey, if I follow this kid I'm likely to end up shooting him". Now, let's presume for a oment Zimmerman started the confrontation (which he might have, but we don't know). That's an action that anyone can see has a much higher likelyhood of leading to violence, so it would be much more fair to use the eventual shooting to claim Zimmerman **** up in starting the confrontation, if, indeed, he did so.

As far as following Martin goes, it's much more fair to say he **** up based on what he knew at the time. Ok, there's a teenager, it's late at night, he's wearing a hoodie, and there have been burglaries in the area. Suspicious? Yes, a little. Suspicious enough to call the police? Possibly. Suspicious enough to follow the kid? I don't think so. What facts did he have that made it essential the police find this particular kid? I don't think any. He certainly didn't have enough for the police to pin anything on the kid; they'd have questioned him briefly and let him go unless he confessed to something.



I've been talking about whether he was legally in the right or the wrong the entire time. I thought that was quite clear. My big objection in this case has been to the attempts to try him in the press based on nothing more than that Martin was black and had good grades in school. If Zimmerman is guilty of murder, fine, send his *** to prison. If he's guilty of manslaughter, send him to prison for a short time and then release him on probation or parole. But it better be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, not based on the Jesse Jackson Standard Of Proof When The Victim Is Black.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes - yes you can. I do this all the time. "Well, that was a mistake." I just tried to rewire my surround sound, cut out a piece of drywall only to realize there's no room to run the wire. Now I have a big hole I have to patch for no reason. "Well, I **** that up."



So? That doesn't change the fact that it was a mistake.



It doesn't matter if he made the obvious decision that everyone on the planet would have made. It was the wrong decision.



Yes, I'm trying to clarify where others are coming from. He may or may not be legally in the wrong, we'll probably never know for sure. But he clearly **** up. It was the wrong move.

That's because you can directly trace backwards from one event to another there. This is generally true with circumstances that revolve entirely around objects. Similarly, if you fail to put fuel in your vehicle tank, your engine will stop, your car will then stop and you'll be stranded. You **** up, and it's easy to chain the events together because one event necessarily causes the next. We're not talking about an engineering-type problem, however. In fact, even in your example, you didn't **** up because you cut drywall. You **** up because you didn't determine whether the wire could be run before firing up the power tools. Let's suppose you COULD run the wire. You would not have **** up any less; you'd just have gotten lucky.

That is not true with incidents like the Trayvon Martin case. There were a lot of possible events that could come from following Martin, and Zimmerman could only make the most vague predictions as to which were more or less likely



No one is disagreeing that it's a mistake and I already explained so what. If your basis for saying that it was a mistake is that the kid died (which you did) then you're only calling it a mistake because of the eventual result that did occur out of all possible results. Suppose Zimmerman had tried to follow Martin, failed, and eventually gave up trying to locate him? The kid would not then have died, so by your reasoning, Zimmerman would not have **** up. That makes no sense. Following him was a stupid thing to do regardless of the result. Let's say Martin had succeeded in beating him to death. Would you be saying that Zimmerman DID need to die, and he died because he **** up so it's all good?



That isn't what I said. I said he made a decision based on what he knew at the time. It was still a bad decision. However, the fact that it was a bad decision must be determined based on facts as they stood when he made the decision, not based on hindsight.



You're certainly entitled to that opinion, and I agree with it. However, I don't see that us agreeing that he **** up in the moral or practical sense is really the important issue. It certainly will not bring Martin back to life. What's important now is seeing that it's handled fairly, not by a lynch mob.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yeah it was a bad decision. The questions are how and to what degree does that decision tie into Martins death and was the decision so bad it was criminal. That's the proverbial rub. Not all bad decisions that result in death are murder/manslaughter. There is supposed to be (as I understand it) a higher burden associated with these statutes.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"