George Zimmerman Arrested -- Finally!!

"A raccoon near by", unworthy of you Ralphey, if some one used a racial epithet around you I don't believe you would be so cavalier, I know I wouldn't.

People tend to have friends who are more like themselves and only true bigots judge and convict by color only, Zimmerman's fault was to make an assumption by stereotyping, going outside the bounds of neighborhood watch guidelines and ignoring a 911 response. An innocent man is dead. He should bear the responsibility of his actions. Originally Posted by Sabor

first if all lighten up Francis!! I am making a joke..

second, you know Mr Zimmerman personally??, how do you know he made an assumption? and are you saying Mr Zimmerman's black friend is a bigot too?

third, I hear racial remarks all the time, by all races!!!!!!!!!!!
all RACES are guilty of being racists at some point..

like I said before NONE of us were there so I suggest quit 'assuming' things to fit your own agenda. as already been proven the Media lies!!!!!!! and skews for their own agenda


and lastly, until all facts are out and verdict is reached again quit convicting this man or anyone like the media does...
two words Duke Lacrosse

I am not condoning Mr Zimmerman's actions, I think it was a situation gone bad but Mr Martin was no Choir Boy either..

if Zimmerman is such a racist why is is best friend a Black man?

the media fuked this up so bad with their rush to convict who knows what will come of it all...because Producers always get fired ...

were any of you there watching.. NO, so quit playing he said she said until
all the facts are out I will sustain from any judgements, as I suggest yall do too

and if he did say 'fucking coon', perhaps there was a raccoon near by Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

<shaking head>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

Ralphey, racism doesn't necessarily mean you must possess hatred for another race. Just because Zimmerman may or may not have a friend that is black does not mean that he doesn't carry certain prejudices against him for being black or consider him inferior (or in this case, "suspicious"). The very fact that Zimmerman described Martin, who was walking down the street minding his own business as "suspicious" based on nothing more than the fact the he was a black kid wearing a hoodie is proof enough that he is a racist. He wouldn't have looked twice if it was a white kid dressed like Justin Bieber now would he?

I am not condoning Mr Zimmerman's actions, I think it was a situation gone bad but Mr Martin was no Choir Boy either.. Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

This is how you personally "quit assuming things to fit your own agenda"? How do you know what Martin was, besides what the media has reported?

Hypocrite.

This is how you personally "quit assuming things to fit your own agenda"? How do you know what Martin was, besides what the media has reported?

Hypocrite. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

the media did not mention he was a Choir Boy so I am assuming he was not a member of the church choir..


if I am such the hypocrite why didn't mention Mr. Zimmeran in your response to me?? I made an assumption there too..

oh thats right you already convicted him based on YOUR assumptions....

<shaking head>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

Ralphey, racism doesn't necessarily mean you must possess hatred for another race. Just because Zimmerman may or may not have a friend that is black does not mean that he doesn't carry certain prejudices against him for being black or consider him inferior (or in this case, "suspicious"). The very fact that Zimmerman described Martin, who was walking down the street minding his own business as "suspicious" based on nothing more than the fact the he was a black kid wearing a hoodie is proof enough that he is a racist. He wouldn't have looked twice if it was a white kid dressed like Justin Bieber now would he? Originally Posted by F-Sharp

there you go again making assumptions that Mr Zimmerman and his friends are closet rascists ....

I admit I made an assumption not based on fact, however you are right there with me!!!

how do you know he would not have 'looked twice' if a white kid was walking down the street,, YOU DONT!!

the media did not mention he was a Choir Boy so I am assuming he was not a member of the church choir...

if I am such the hypocrite why didn't mention Mr. Zimmeran in your response to me?? I made an assumption there too..

oh thats right you already convicted him based on YOUR assumptions.... Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

That's where you're wrong. I've already convicted him in my mind based on facts no one is disputing. Zimmerman was carrying a weapon in violation of Neighborhood Watch rules, Zimmerman followed and approached Martin, again in violation of Neighborhood Watch rules, and in spite of what law enforcement told him to do. Zimmerman stalked and harassed a private citizen who was doing nothing more than walking down the street minding his own business.

Based on these undisputed facts, Zimmerman is GUILTY! Even if Martin punched him or banged his head on the sidewalk as everyone is claiming, Zimmerman is still at fault, as it was Martin who felt his life was in peril by the stalker carrying the gun, not the other way around. By stalking, approaching and harassing Martin, Zimmerman forfeited any claim he might have had to self-defense. This is the law, and it's indisputable in this case as far as I can see. No one in their right mind can tell me Martin simply started chasing and wailing on Zimmerman for absolutely no reason. Some way, some how, he was provoked by Zimmerman. Apparently, the D.A. agrees or they wouldn't have filed 2nd Degree Murder charges.

Am I missing something?

Actually, F-Sharp, your view that Zimmerman lost his right to claim self-defense by following Martin and disregarding the dispatcher's directions is also held by the author of Florida's "Stand Your GroundLaw", former Florida state senator, Durell Peaden.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...rayvon-martin/

Actually, F-Sharp, your view that Zimmerman lost his right to claim self-defense by following Martin and disregarding the dispatcher's directions is also held by the author of Florida's "Stand Your GroundLaw", former Florida state senator, Durell Peaden.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...rayvon-martin/ Originally Posted by Carl

Sen. Peaden and Rep. Baxley are absolutely correct. "... the law does not license neighborhood watch or others who feel "like they have the authority to pursue and confront people. That is aggravating an incident right there.".

The reality here is that Zimmerman murdered a teenager during an incident he did indeed aggravate, case closed. Is anyone disputing this? Not to my knowledge. Doesn't matter if Zimmerman was a racist (which he was), doesn't matter if Martin was not a choir boy (which he was not).

It would be interesting if both the shooter and the victim were both the same race..
Either one of those two guys could have walked away, both decided not to.. Was anyone shot in the back? nope.. What if the shooter was black and the victim was white? I don't know about you, but if I was facing a guy with a guy, I damn sure wouldn't be staying in that position long...

Either one of those two guys could have walked away, both decided not to. Originally Posted by nuglet

We don't know that. At what point did Zimmerman's weapon make an appearance? Martin could have very easily been attempting to walk away and was not allowed to, which may have been a valid reason for attacking Zimmerman. I know if it were me and some dude who was not identifying himself as any type of law enforcement approached me and started harassing me at night with or without a weapon, I would either deck him if I felt threatened, or would have simply done my best to get away from him. No matter how you look at this, Zimmerman was clearly in the wrong.

Well, Martin was trying to walk away, and that's when Zimmerman pursued, except Zimmerman felt he was gettting away.

If Zimmerman is claiming the right to "stand his ground" under the law (which even the law's authors don't believe he had in this instance), then what pre-empts Martin's right to "stand his ground" when he's being pursued by a stranger?

Under what set of circumstances does Martin's right to respond to a perceived threat become inferior to Zimmerman's right to respond to a perceived threat?

If Martin feared imminent harm due to being pursued by a stranger why is his right to defend himself with potentially deadly force (if you believe Zimmerman's claim that Martin was trying to kill him) inherently less valid than the use of deadly force by Zimmerman to end the struggle?

If both parties were of the same race, yes, the national media might not have paid much attention. But how can one assert with absolute certainty that the special prosecutor's decision to arrest and charge Zimmerman is solely due to media and public pressure?

Why is it impossible that she simply holds the same view of the statute that the very authors of the "Stand You Ground" law have: That George Zimmerman gave up his right to claim self-defense by following Martin and disregarding the dispatcher's directions.

One may find the race-baiting distasteful, but it is very likely that without the media attention, the basic legal issue of abusing the "Stand Your Ground" law to justify the use of deadly force (when the shooter has gone against the directions of an agent of public safety, as well as against prudent judgment) would have been ignored by the local authorities.

And the problem I have with the ignoring of the abuse of the statute by an aggressor is that it looks suspiciously (much more suspicious than Martin in a hoodie on a rainy day) like a willful, intentional ignorance by those local authorities to protect the son of a former colleague, a judge.

Do those responsibilities include harassing people walking down the street who are minding their own business? Do they also include shooting and and killing those people when they object to the harassment verbally, physically or otherwise? Zimmerman apparently felt this way didn't he? Remember, it was Martin who was being stalked here, not Zimmerman. Martin was the one who was fearful, not the guy with the concealed firearm who was acting completely inappropriate and not following the rules of Neighborhood Watch, or the advice of law enforcement. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

I never said what the responsibilities were, nor did I say who was right or who was wrong in this given situation. I stated that I did not know what had really happenned beyond what has been somewhat over sensationalized by the media. I would think that we can all agree that the media reports what gets them readers or viewership and in the interests of commerce and financial gain only reports what accomplishes those goals. There is certainly no conscience or honor when it comes to the media, only whatever it takes to sell their particular brand of snake oil.

But I never said who was or was not a racist or who was in the right or who was wrong, or who was or was not the agressor because I truthfully don't know the answers to those questions. I am also not quoting "facts" that have been derived from the news media, either. Truth is I don't have a dawg in this fight!

I would seem that some in this thread are frantically attempting to be right about their POV and to make sure that everyone else is in agreement. Personally I feel that you are entitled to your POV, but the others are also entitled to theirs as well. Remember, the "facts" that everyone are quoting here are comming from the news media!! HMMMMMMM!

Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

It is not easy to point a gun at someone period even an unloaded one.

The media likes to make things about race.

The news media always likes to make things a black and white issue. It's funny how little to no press was given with the 19 year old Texas State hispanic kid who got in an accident, had called for someone to pick him up and was on this overzealous guys lawn. The homeowner told him to freeze or he would shoot. The kid ran prompting the owner to shoot the kid in the back. Where was the media and the Al Sharpton's for that? This was recent too and in the Central Texas area.

Yes Martin is 17 but 19 years old is still a kid. I guess it's ok to shoot Latinos without a real reason but a national travesty if its an African American. I have nothing against blacks obviously just trying to make a point

sixx

A black man recently raped and killed an elderly couple and there was no press at all. The woman that he raped was 80 years old and her husband was a war veteran. Not a peep in the news about that one.