Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Conceal Carry, the 2nd Amendment, & Vigilantism

Conceal Carry, the 2nd Amendment, & Vigilantism (Page 9)
Thread Tools
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:10 AM
 
I'd be willing to bet the vast majority aren't.

I'd be willing to bet more if this particular dispatcher was we would have heard about it.

C'mon, $10,000.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Here's all I really need to know.

1. I don't believe he had any evidence of a crime.
2. He wasn't a law enforcement officer.
3. He was told not to follow Martin by someone in law enforcement.
4. He went after him.
5. After being pursued, Martin was giving him a beat down, but did not use a weapon.
6. He killed Martin with his gun.

Zimmerman took action despite being told by law enforcement not to. He acted not in self DEFENSE, he acted in OFFENSE not on his own personal property.

At best, this is manslaughter. I don't think that "race" or any gun laws have anything to do with this. Similar circumstances could have happened with a knife and a white teen similarly dressed would likely have garnered the same attention.

What more is there to say really? How does ZImmerman's lawyers explain away that it was Martin who was being pursued and harassed despite there being no criminal activity on his part? Zimmerman put himself in a situation where there was going to be a conflict, then acted with lethal force when that conflict didn't go his way. That is NOT self defense and it matters not a wit what Martin's race was, especially since Zimmerman too was a racial minority.
There have been so many surprising posts in this thread, including this one. It makes me so happy.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:36 AM
 
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'd be willing to bet the vast majority aren't.

I'd be willing to bet more if this particular dispatcher was we would have heard about it.

C'mon, $10,000.
Pfftt, I don't even place bets on football anymore. Besides, I have Emma's law school to pay for. There's no telling what Yale will cost by the time she's 17.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:58 AM
 
Almost nothing if you send her to study in Europe. It's a win-win.

-t
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 12:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Pfftt, I don't even place bets on football anymore. Besides, I have Emma's law school to pay for. There's no telling what Yale will cost by the time she's 17.
Probably for the best. Sure bets are a sin anyways.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 03:30 PM
 
Good news, they found the Skittles candies and Arizona iced tea so that part of the narrative holds up: At the time of the shooting, Trayvon Martin was not carrying identification - only $22, a cellphone, and the now familiar bag of candy and can of iced tea. His body, taken to the Volusia County Medical Examiner's office, was tagged as a John Doe.

Per CNN's audio expert (I know, that bastion of right wing extremism, but bear with me), Zimmerman said "f*cking cold" not a racial epithet. As reported by NBC, the only time Zimmerman mentioned anything racial is when he was asked directly about it by the 911 operator.

It sounds like there were two confrontations between Zimmerman and Martin which helps explain why some people found DeeDee's claims confusing (she was talking about multiple events). Martin 30 seconds from Brandy Green's townhouse when he was shot.

Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Dont forget he said in the 911 calls these bastards always get away or something like that. (Of course no idea if any NEWS editing changed the context of this statement either)
I wonder if the motivation for his numerous calls and the "get away" comment were related to Sanford's recent crime wave?

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee confirmed that crime is up as the economy continues to sputter. From April through June, more than 300 burglaries and 400 thefts have been reported in the city. “We’ve got a significant problem with burglaries and thefts,” Lee stated. And no one is immune, he said, adding that he himself has been a victim of crime.

Sanford Police Sgt. David Morgenstern gave the following advice: The public needs to call us if they see anything suspicious. When you see something that doesn’t look right, call us out there.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Good news, they found the Skittles candies and Arizona iced tea so that part of the narrative holds up: At the time of the shooting, Trayvon Martin was not carrying identification - only $22, a cellphone, and the now familiar bag of candy and can of iced tea. His body, taken to the Volusia County Medical Examiner's office, was tagged as a John Doe.
Was this ever in doubt? It has been consistently reported that this is what he had on his person since Day 1. Hence, the controversy over him being unarmed.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Per CNN's audio expert (I know, that bastion of right wing extremism, but bear with me), Zimmerman said "f*cking cold" not a racial epithet. As reported by NBC, the only time Zimmerman mentioned anything racial is when he was asked directly about it by the 911 operator.
Your link is broken.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
It sounds like there were two confrontations between Zimmerman and Martin which helps explain why some people found DeeDee's claims confusing (she was talking about multiple events). Martin 30 seconds from Brandy Green's townhouse when he was shot.
Per the link I included in my last post, that is but ONE story coming from the Zimmerman camp. Among several. It just doesn't jive with the objective evidence though. Go all the way back to the 911 audio I included in my OP. Listen to it. You will see that at no point did the kid approach Mr. Zimmerman's car and engage him in any kind of conversation. He tells the dispatcher "Sh*t he's running!" and never says a word about Trayvon Martin being next to the car.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I wonder if the motivation for his numerous calls and the "get away" comment were related to Sanford's recent crime wave?

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee confirmed that crime is up as the economy continues to sputter. From April through June, more than 300 burglaries and 400 thefts have been reported in the city. “We’ve got a significant problem with burglaries and thefts,” Lee stated. And no one is immune, he said, adding that he himself has been a victim of crime.

Sanford Police Sgt. David Morgenstern gave the following advice: The public needs to call us if they see anything suspicious. When you see something that doesn’t look right, call us out there.
It's possible. But that begs the question. How does a rash of burglaries city-wide get translated into Mr. Zimmerman's suspicions of this particular kid at The Retreat At Twin Lakes? When Mr. Zimmerman says "These assholes ... they always get away" ... and then proceeds to follow Trayvon Martin against the instructions of the 911 dispatcher to make sure that he didn't "get away" via a bullet to his chest ... well what exactly was Trayvon Martin doing to be included in that group of "these assholes" in the mind of Mr. Zimmerman? At no point does Mr. Zimmerman tell the dispatcher that this kid was peeping in windows or trying to break into someone's home. At no point does he say that this kid was "casing the neighborhood" or anything to that effect. We know from the 911 tape that the kid was just walking back with his hoodie on because it was raining outside ... out of Mr. Zimmerman's on mouth. Yet we hear Mr. Zimmerman tell the dispatcher "There's something wrong with him." and "He looks like he might be on drugs or something." Again ... on what basis did he come to these conclusions?

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 04:05 PM
 
Your CNN link doesn't work.

When I first heard that 911 call, I thought it sounded like "fncking cold" too, and the wind sound seems to reinforce that. After Zimmerman's attorney suggested it was "goon," I couldn't understand how anyone could think that c sound was a g sound, since the c was so clear to me.

So now we have cold, coon, and goon, but whatever it is, it's not goon. And no one said it was until Zimmerman's attorney said it might be, and then people started saying "yeah I hear goon too!!"

Regarding the two encounters, I remember Martin's parent's were reported saying that last week or so. And as far as I can tell, only Martin's parents have said that. Official police comment has never stated that, which I find very strange. But if true, it confirms that Zimmerman chased after Martin not just once, but twice.

Finally, your first link says Martin's parents instantly recognize their son screaming in the 911 recording, and the mayor was present for that event. A mother knows the sound of her child screaming.

It certainly doesn't sound like a man getting his head pounded into the pavement.

It also doesn't sound like a man whose assailant is "top of him, takes his left hand and covers Zimmerman's mouth and tells him to shut the F up and continues to pound on him" like your first link says.

EDIT: BTW, the link to Wagist is a waste of time. That guy fills his "analysis" will a bunch of drivel like ...
Rather than simply going inside Brandy Green’s townhouse, talking to DeeDee seems to have given Trayvon some motivation to double back and confront George Zimmerman.

We’ve seen several pictures now of Trayvon on social media that would lead us to believe he wanted to look tough. It may not be much of a stretch to think he wanted to look tough for his girlfriend as well.
... and a whole bunch of other made-up bullsh!t assumptions.

EDIT: And as far as I know, Wagist has also places the location of Zimmerman's truck in the wrong place, when it should be north and west of the clubhouse, not to the east of it, which certainly affects his "timeline."
( Last edited by lpkmckenna; Apr 5, 2012 at 04:17 PM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 04:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Per the link I included in my last post, that is but ONE story coming from the Zimmerman camp. Among several. It just doesn't jive with the objective evidence though. Go all the way back to the 911 audio I included in my OP. Listen to it. You will see that at no point did the kid approach Mr. Zimmerman's car and engage him in any kind of conversation. He tells the dispatcher "Sh*t he's running!" and never says a word about Trayvon Martin being next to the car.
It's not the Zimmerman family but the Martin family saying this, that the police told them there were two encounters.

It only really makes sense if Zimmerman called 911 after the first encounter, and for some reason chooses not to mention it to the listener.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Good news, they found the Skittles candies and Arizona iced tea so that part of the narrative holds up: At the time of the shooting, Trayvon Martin was not carrying identification - only $22, a cellphone, and the now familiar bag of candy and can of iced tea. His body, taken to the Volusia County Medical Examiner's office, was tagged as a John Doe.
Only you and crazy right wing blogs question if there were skittles and ice tea involved.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 04:51 PM
 
F*cking Cold? With an 'S' at the end? F*cking colds?

It was 63 degrees that night. I'm from California and I don't even think 63 is cold.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Was this ever in doubt? It has been consistently reported that this is what he had on his person since Day 1. Hence, the controversy over him being unarmed.
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Only you and crazy right wing blogs question if there were skittles and ice tea involved.
It was a curious omission from the initial police report, given what a prominent part of the narrative it was. I was also unaware he was not carrying ID resulting in his treatment as a John Doe delaying the return of the body to the family.

Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Your link is broken.
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Your CNN link doesn't work.
Forum won't allow the link. I think you can make the obvious fix.

Originally Posted by OAW View Post
It's possible. But that begs the question. How does a rash of burglaries city-wide get translated into Mr. Zimmerman's suspicions of this particular kid at The Retreat At Twin Lakes? When Mr. Zimmerman says "These assholes ... they always get away" ... and then proceeds to follow Trayvon Martin against the instructions of the 911 dispatcher to make sure that he didn't "get away" via a bullet to his chest ... well what exactly was Trayvon Martin doing to be included in that group of "these assholes" in the mind of Mr. Zimmerman? At no point does Mr. Zimmerman tell the dispatcher that this kid was peeping in windows or trying to break into someone's home. At no point does he say that this kid was "casing the neighborhood" or anything to that effect. We know from the 911 tape that the kid was just walking back with his hoodie on because it was raining outside ... out of Mr. Zimmerman's on mouth. Yet we hear Mr. Zimmerman tell the dispatcher "There's something wrong with him." and "He looks like he might be on drugs or something." Again ... on what basis did he come to these conclusions?
Loitering outside (note how close he was to his destination for minutes) in the rain/wind/cold seems unusual to me.

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Finally, your first link says Martin's parents instantly recognize their son screaming in the 911 recording, and the mayor was present for that event. A mother knows the sound of her child screaming.
I'm unable to find any research to support this claim on Google Scholar. Sounds more like an emotional wives tale "but of course a mother can recognize her offspring crying!"

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
EDIT: BTW, the link to Wagist is a waste of time. That guy fills his "analysis" will a bunch of drivel like ...
... and a whole bunch of other made-up bullsh!t assumptions.
Yes, there's a lot of useless BS, but it's the most comprehensive timeline I've seen.

Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
F*cking Cold? With an 'S' at the end? F*cking colds?

It was 63 degrees that night. I'm from California and I don't even think 63 is cold.
63F + raining + windy is pretty cold by central Florida standards.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
It's not the Zimmerman family but the Martin family saying this, that the police told them there were two encounters.

It only really makes sense if Zimmerman called 911 after the first encounter, and for some reason chooses not to mention it to the listener.
Just so we are all on the same page, please note above that I said the Zimmerman "camp" ... not "family". And it is just one of the various stories that originated there. As shown in the link I posted earlier:

In an April 3rd Reuters story, Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, recalls what he says the lead homicide detective in the case, Investigator Chris Serino, told him about the shooting (emphasis added):

"He told me Zimmerman's story was that Zimmerman was of course following him and that Trayvon approached his vehicle, walked up to the car and asked Zimmerman, 'Why are your following me?' Zimmerman then rolls his car windows down, tells Trayvon 'I'm not following you.' He rolls his car windows up.

"Trayvon walks off. Zimmerman said he started running between the buildings. Zimmerman gets out of his car. He comes around the building. Trayvon is hiding behind the building, waiting on him. Trayvon approaches him and says, 'What's your problem, homes?' Zimmerman says 'I don't have a problem.'

"Zimmerman starts to reach into his pocket to get his cellphone, and at that point Trayvon attacked him. He says Trayvon hits him. He falls on the ground. Trayvon jumps on top of him, takes his left hand and covers Zimmerman's mouth and tells him to shut the F up and continues to pound on him.

"At that point Zimmerman is able to unholster his weapon and fire a shot, striking Trayvon in the chest. Trayvon falls on his back and says, 'You got me.'"
Trayvon Martin case: George Zimmerman's evolving narrative

So to be clear ... we are both basically saying the same thing while focusing on different factors in the telling. Indeed it was Trayvon's father who is being quoted above. Having said that, he is relaying what the lead investigator said was "Zimmerman's story". The "story" that law enforcement to date has chosen to roll with seeing as how he has still not been arrested. So this came from the Zimmerman camp as I stated since it presumably came from the man itself. Now while this is by definition a third-hand telling of the "story" ... thus far I haven't heard anyone from the Zimmerman camp or the Sanford PD challenge Mr. Martin's or Mr. Serino's account. But again, this simply doesn't jive with the 911 audio tapes. So it's interesting to note that the "evolving story" from the Zimmerman family makes no mention of this supposed second encounter.

OAW
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
It was a curious omission from the initial police report, given what a prominent part of the narrative it was. I was also unaware he was not carrying ID resulting in his treatment as a John Doe delaying the return of the body to the family.
Well again ... notice that PDF of the initial police report you posted. And also notice that it had Trayvon's name in it. So while he might have initially been a John Doe ... which isn't unusual since he was young enough where he may not have had a driver's license ... at some point the SFD determined who he was. Yet his body remained in the morgue for days as "John Doe". Mr. Martin never did ID the body at the morgue ... but by a photo of him at the scene where he was killed. IIRC, the family never saw Trayvon's body until after it had been prepared for funeral by the mortician and shipped back to Miami. Which is curious to say the least seeing as how the SFD managed to determine his identify well before his body left the morgue.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I
Forum won't allow the link. I think you can make the obvious fix.
You mentioned CNN and audio experts. Would a link to the original article been too much trouble?

Listening to it myself it could very well be that Mr. Zimmerman was referencing the "weather". But if that's the case, then WTF is Mr. Zimmerman and his lawyers doing floating a different explanation?

George Zimmerman told his lawyers that he whispered "punks," not a racial slur, in the moments before he shot Trayvon Martin, his attorneys told CNN on Thursday.

Some people interpreted the police recording of Zimmerman's call to 911 as evidence the fatal shooting was racially motivated.
Zimmerman attorneys Hal Ulrig and Craig Sonner told CNN their client told them that he said, "F---ing punks."

Forensic audio expert Tom Owen, who analyzed 911 recordings, agreed the garbled word that raised controversy was "punks," not the racial slur some people said they heard.
Lawyers: Zimmerman whispered 'punks' before shooting Trayvon Martin - CNN.com

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I
Loitering outside (note how close he was to his destination for minutes) in the rain/wind/cold seems unusual to me.
Loitering? Seriously?

This simply is NOT corroborated by Zimmerman's own account on the 911 audio. See the OP. Better yet .... I'll do it.:

Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about.
Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
Yeah a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. And either jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes.
Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
He's just staring, looking at all the houses. Now he's just staring at me.
Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
Now he's coming toward me. He's got his hand in his waistband.
Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
Something's wrong with him. Yep, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is. Can you please get an officer over here?
Originally Posted by George Zimmerman
You go in straight through the entrance and then you make a left. Uh ... you go straight in don't turn and make a left. Shit he's running.
Now those are Mr. Zimmerman's words from the call in sequence. I've omitted some comments since they were answering questions from the 911 dispatcher about his location and aren't relevant to the point I'm making. But again, I linked to the 911 audio in the OP so you can see for yourself that I'm not misrepresenting the situation here. In any event, my point is that Mr. Zimmerman's own words don't describe someone who was loitering. The very first thing out of his mouth to the 911 dispatcher was that he thought Trayvon Martin was "up to no good" and "on drugs or something" because he was walking in the rain and looking around.

So I'll ask the question again. On what basis did he come to these conclusions?

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Apr 5, 2012 at 06:53 PM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Please tell me you're kidding.
Hey I am a minority in my home city, I'm not kidding. Gotta fight to protect rights and freedoms and equal treatment. Whites are no more immune to discrimination then any other group.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post

63F + raining + windy is pretty cold by central Florida standards.
But wearing a hoodie when it's chilly, raining, and windy makes you suspicious and up to no good according to Zimmerman.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
But wearing a hoodie when it's chilly, raining, and windy makes you suspicious and up to no good according to Zimmerman.
How ironic!

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
F*cking Cold? With an 'S' at the end? F*cking colds?

It was 63 degrees that night. I'm from California and I don't even think 63 is cold.
I'm not sure what this is in reference to. I've now seen a few posts about. But I can't seem to figure out where the original of this is. What does this have to do with the audio tapes, if it was not F'ing cold what is being said it sounded like, the alternative to cold
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Depends on jurisdiction, perhaps. The dispatchers at our Sheriff's dept are actual deputies. They typically aren't armed, and I think they're there because they now have physical limitations (one lost his leg in Afghanistan as a member of the Guard) but they do have the authority to serve as peace officers.
Yeah. Locally they are considered part of "law enforcement" and are "officers." Regardless, when he reported the incident to the "authorities," he was told to stand down and did not. At that point, he was no longer acting in "self defense," but instead was taking it upon himself to act as a law enforcement officer without a badge.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 06:55 PM
 
Is it safe to assume because he was a member of the watch program he would know every one that lives in the community and that he didn't know this "Black Kid in a hoodie the stereo typical gansta outfit by himself unattended by any one of the community" as the real cause of the confrontation. Not really race but more just ignorance? No matter which way its spun Mr Zimmerman was in the wrong. Perhaps it was racial profiling that prompted the 911 call, or the ignorance of some one unknown to him staying in the community. But he was in the right up to the non emergency call to police. He became in the wrong as soon as he decided to investigate against the advice of some one trained to offer advice (since we dont know if the dispatcher was a cop or not) and basically created a situation himself of confrontation, chaise, confinement.

Here is the thing I ask every one to think about closely. Even if it is discovered the Teen assaulted Zimmerman first, it is reasonably to say it was in self defense protecting him from a aggressor who clearly was following and perusing him with unknown intentions. Anything Trayvon did after he became followed would be self defense would it not. This would still leave Mr Zimmerman in the wrong. The only person that had a right to kill any one was Trayvon in a self defensive role. Sadly he was not the better equipped that night to protect himself.


In this situation I only see one person with any right to claim self defense, and that person is dead.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 07:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Is it safe to assume because he was a member of the watch program he would know every one that lives in the community and that he didn't know this "Black Kid in a hoodie the stereo typical gansta outfit by himself unattended by any one of the community" as the real cause of the confrontation. Not really race but more just ignorance?
You've touched upon a few points here so I'll address each one individually.

1. It is doubtful that Mr. Zimmerman would know everyone in the community given the neighborhood instability caused by the housing crisis in Florida.

The transcripts of Zimmerman's 911 calls during the more than two years he lived on Retreat View Circle fill 28 pages. His concerns include everything from the driver of a pickup cutting off people to a neighbor leaving his garage door open.

He kept a close watch for outsiders, but it couldn't have been easy to tell who belonged and who didn't. When the housing market crashed, many townhomes were foreclosed on and the owners evicted. Dozens of investors, unable to unload the two- and three-bedroom properties, rented them to cover their upside-down mortgages.

The developers had envisioned a stable neighborhood with home­owners planting long-term roots, but now townhouses were turning over all the time. Insiders moved out. Outsiders moved in.

By the time Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, 40 properties inside the gate were empty and more than half of the residents were renters.

Including Brandy Green, who was dating Martin's dad. And Zimmerman himself.


Trayvon Martin lived with his dad, who resides in the Miami area, and had visited his dad's girlfriend at the Retreat several times before. The kids in the neighborhood always looked forward to playing football with him. But to George Zimmerman, he was a stranger.
Trayvon Martin's killing shatters safety within Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford - Tampa Bay Times

2. As for the "Black Kid in a hoodie the stereo typical gansta outfit" ... well therein lies the rub. I submit that if one sees this ....



... and immediately thinks "stereo typical gangsta outfit" .... yet if one sees this ....



... and does not? Well let's just say that the issue lies more with one's perceptions of the person wearing the hoodie than the hoodie itself. And such biases can run so deep that they are essentially subconscious.

3. As for whether this was " Not really race but more just ignorance."? Well I'll just reiterate what I said earlier. I see no clear evidence to view Mr. Zimmerman as "racist". I see no reason to think that he believes black people are inferior. I see no reason to think he's some sort of skinhead. And I wouldn't even bet $10 that he's ever burned a cross in some black person's yard. On the other hand, I see plenty of reason to think that Mr. Zimmerman "racially profiled" Trayvon Martin. And so the distinction you make there is one without a difference. Because racial profiling is fundamentally rooted in culturally ingrained ignorance and double standards.

Originally Posted by Athens View Post
No matter which way its spun Mr Zimmerman was in the wrong. Perhaps it was racial profiling that prompted the 911 call, or the ignorance of some one unknown to him staying in the community. But he was in the right up to the non emergency call to police. He became in the wrong as soon as he decided to investigate against the advice of some one trained to offer advice (since we dont know if the dispatcher was a cop or not) and basically created a situation himself of confrontation, chaise, confinement.

Here is the thing I ask every one to think about closely. Even if it is discovered the Teen assaulted Zimmerman first, it is reasonably to say it was in self defense protecting him from a aggressor who clearly was following and perusing him with unknown intentions. Anything Trayvon did after he became followed would be self defense would it not. This would still leave Mr Zimmerman in the wrong. The only person that had a right to kill any one was Trayvon in a self defensive role. Sadly he was not the better equipped that night to protect himself.

In this situation I only see one person with any right to claim self defense, and that person is dead.


OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Apr 5, 2012 at 07:34 PM. )
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 09:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
You mentioned CNN and audio experts. Would a link to the original article been too much trouble?
I don't like links directly to video content for news, so I chose to provide one that includes transcription of the key elements.

Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Loitering? Seriously?
I think loitering is a good way to describe "just walking around looking about" (your quote).

Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Yeah. Locally they are considered part of "law enforcement" and are "officers." Regardless, when he reported the incident to the "authorities," he was told to stand down and did not. At that point, he was no longer acting in "self defense," but instead was taking it upon himself to act as a law enforcement officer without a badge.
Acting in self defense has nothing to do with what the 911 operator told him. He was not operating in self defense when he was speaking to the 911 operator. If you're being beat up you can act in self defense regardless of what you've been told 5 minutes prior.

Originally Posted by OAW View Post
1. It is doubtful that Mr. Zimmerman would know everyone in the community given the neighborhood instability caused by the housing crisis in Florida.
Wasn't Zimmerman himself a renter? I didn't get the impression he was a long term resident.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 10:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'd be willing to bet the vast majority aren't.

I'd be willing to bet more if this particular dispatcher was we would have heard about it.

C'mon, $10,000.
And, now you're speculating to support your speculations. The end point: you don't know. This is why there needs to be an investigation. The biggest problem with this story seems to be that the police chose not to investigate.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 10:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Acting in self defense has nothing to do with what the 911 operator told him. He was not operating in self defense when he was speaking to the 911 operator. If you're being beat up you can act in self defense regardless of what you've been told 5 minutes prior.
At which point I ask: how did he get from being safe in his car to being outside his car getting beat up to the point where he felt he had to act in self defence?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2012, 11:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It's a small point, but this is untrue. Dispatchers are civilians.
Doesn't matter; Zimmerman had no authority to confront/challenge or otherwise involve himself with Martin. He took it upon himself to play cop, after he was told that the police were on their way. I really am having a hard time understanding how many different ways people are coming up with excuses and rationalizations for his actions, as Martin would not have been shot by Zimmerman if Zimmerman had simply done what he was supposed to, which is watch.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 12:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Acting in self defense has nothing to do with what the 911 operator told him. He was not operating in self defense when he was speaking to the 911 operator. If you're being beat up you can act in self defense regardless of what you've been told 5 minutes prior.
Being followed by what appears to be a hostile person is also grounds for self defense. Now which self defense is more valid, the guy who left the safety of his vehicle to "investigate" some one and follows them OR the person on foot minding there own business being followed by some one. Even if the teen through the first punch it easily fits in SELF DEFENSE unless you are saying that in any altercation that involves a Black person and a Non Black person, by default the Non Black person is always right the black person is always wrong? Because thats about the only way that Zimmerman "self defense" would be more valid then Trayvons.

Zimmerman "chased" what he thought was a suspect. Zimmerman created the entire situation. Had the two just crossed each other on the street with neither taking any interest in the other I would bet real money nothing would have happened.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 07:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Acting in self defense has nothing to do with what the 911 operator told him. He was not operating in self defense when he was speaking to the 911 operator. If you're being beat up you can act in self defense regardless of what you've been told 5 minutes prior.
You can't logically claim "self defense" if you are the instigator of the conflict, especially when you were warned NOT TO instigate it. Martin had committed no crimes and there was no evidence that he was threatening Zimmerman in any way at the time the conflict arose.

It's not unreasonable to suggest that a person who is being stalked by someone with a firearm has reason to fear for their lives as well and should be able to protect themselves from harm. If you are not a law enforcement officer and go stalking and chasing after someone while carrying a firearm, you can't logically claim "self defense" if you kill someone while they are defending themselves from the conflict you instigated. If you instigate a conflict without clear justification against an unarmed person that ends in your killing them, I don't see how you can rationalize that the one instigating and killing has no culpability in the death of the victim. Like I said, at the very least it's manslaughter.

Had Martin been trespassing on Zimmerman's one property, then "self defense" in a such a situation could be rationalized. Zimmerman instigated the conflict, and brought deadly force against someone who was guilty of no crime. While that might not be "murder," the idea that Zimmerman has no culpability makes no sense.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 08:08 AM
 
I do have an additional question that I don't remember seeing reported on, which just came upon me:

If this was a "gated community," were there any type of "no trespassing" signs in place? Did closed gates have to be crossed, or fences overcome? If so, I guess it is possible to rationalize that someone who did not live in that community and who was trespassing was there for no good, and a reasonable overall threat could be established for any resident of the community.

In such a case, it would seem to be that an equal threat was imposed by both Martin and Zimmerman prior to any physical act between them. We'd then just have to determine if Zimmerman had reasonable justification for deadly force given that both men might have reason to feel threatened by the other, and only one was armed with a deadly weapon. However, I would think that you would have to show that Zimmerman had no opportunity to flee the threat in question for him to justify deadly force, or be on his own personal property which he was defending. "Stand your ground" would not apply since Zimmerman went out of his way to create the conflict with the potential "threat" someone other than his own personal property, and there was no real reason that his own personal property was being threatened at that time since Martin was nowhere near it.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 10:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
In such a case, it would seem to be that an equal threat was imposed by both Martin and Zimmerman prior to any physical act between them. We'd then just have to determine if Zimmerman had reasonable justification for deadly force given that both men might have reason to feel threatened by the other, and only one was armed with a deadly weapon. However, I would think that you would have to show that Zimmerman had no opportunity to flee the threat in question for him to justify deadly force, or be on his own personal property which he was defending. "Stand your ground" would not apply since Zimmerman went out of his way to create the conflict with the potential "threat" someone other than his own personal property, and there was no real reason that his own personal property was being threatened at that time since Martin was nowhere near it.
Good point. At the absolute minimum, it shows that a police investigation is necessary. My biggest problem with this story is that the police initially chose not to investigate, and likely would never have is this story hadn't gotten so big.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 01:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
Doesn't matter
Hmmm. I'd say whether a statement is true or false does kinda matter, but suit yourself.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 01:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Hmmm. I'd say whether a statement is true or false does kinda matter, but suit yourself.
Dispatchers are civilians.
The sky is blue.

The truth of both statements are equally relevant to ignoring advice to wait for the people trained to identify and deal with potentially dangerous situations.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 02:02 PM
 
However I'd say the first is enormously relevant to the claim "dispatchers are in law enforcement" which was what I was addressing.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Yeah. Locally they are considered part of "law enforcement" and are "officers."
Do they get guns?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 04:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
However I'd say the first is enormously relevant to the claim "dispatchers are in law enforcement" which was what I was addressing.
Dispatchers ARE in law enforcement. They may not all carry guns, or have the power to arrest, but they have jobs in the "law enforcement" field. They are the essentially the very first "first responder" when it comes to crime and emergency services. You call them when there is an emergency situation, and they are trained to give instructions to those calling the law enforcement agencies and give pertinent information to officers on the street so that they can continue the job.

It would be no different then arguing that those working a cash register in a McDonalds aren't in the restaurant business because they don't hold a spatula, no?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 05:20 PM
 
Here's what I'm saying.

If a cop, in pursuit of their normal duty, says "don't follow that person", you're breaking the law by following this person.

If a dispatcher does the same, you are not breaking the law by following that person.

Saying someone is "in law enforcement" implies the former.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 6, 2012, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I think loitering is a good way to describe "just walking around looking about" (your quote).
loiter - to stand or wait around idly or without apparent purpose.



OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 12:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Here's what I'm saying.

If a cop, in pursuit of their normal duty, says "don't follow that person", you're breaking the law by following this person.

If a dispatcher does the same, you are not breaking the law by following that person.

Saying someone is "in law enforcement" implies the former.
Calling 911 is calling a law enforcement agency. The person on the other end may not be a police officer, but is nonetheless an agent of the law, especially when it comes to giving instructions over the phone as to what to do/not to do. They receive training on how to properly respond and how to direct callers so the caller doesn't place himself in harm's way. The police are there to resolve situations and are properly trained; Neighborhood Watch people, whether part of the actual organization, or just individual citizens acting in that capacity, are not trained to handle such situations. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; Zimmerman had no reason to exit his vehicle and follow Martin; he knew the police were there, or on the way. He took it upon himself to play cop, and involve himself in a situation he wasn't properly trained, and more importantly, authorized, to be involved in. He was under no danger while in his vehicle; He did not stand his ground. He is a murderer.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 01:06 AM
 
Why did Zimmerman choose to ignore the advice of police dispatch? Was Martin in the act of committing a crime?
If Zimmerman had waited for the police and *didn't* get out of his car, what would have happened?
If it's so important to note that Dispatch are not law enforcement officers, it should also be noted the Zimmerman is also *not* a law enforcement officer.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 01:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
Calling 911 is calling a law enforcement agency. The person on the other end may not be a police officer, but is nonetheless an agent of the law, especially when it comes to giving instructions over the phone as to what to do/not to do. They receive training on how to properly respond and how to direct callers so the caller doesn't place himself in harm's way. The police are there to resolve situations and are properly trained; Neighborhood Watch people, whether part of the actual organization, or just individual citizens acting in that capacity, are not trained to handle such situations. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; Zimmerman had no reason to exit his vehicle and follow Martin; he knew the police were there, or on the way. He took it upon himself to play cop, and involve himself in a situation he wasn't properly trained, and more importantly, authorized, to be involved in. He was under no danger while in his vehicle; He did not stand his ground. He is a murderer.
+1

..but I'm willing to at least give the benefit of the doubt that he did not set out and intend on killing Martin and might be guilty of manslaughter.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 04:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
Calling 911 is calling a law enforcement agency. The person on the other end may not be a police officer, but is nonetheless an agent of the law
Repeating now.

An agent of the law has authority over you. Dispatchers do not.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 07:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Repeating now.

An agent of the law has authority over you. Dispatchers do not.
Semantics. Where is it stated that no "dispatchers" are "agents of the law."

Regardless, he called the police. He was told not to proceed. He did so anyways and did not have to for "self defense." I believe that's all it should take for a jury to determine that he acted carelessly, and had culpability in the conflict that ensued and he wasn't using lethal force in a matter where he protection to "stand his ground."

You can't start a conflict (especially after specifically being told not to by those who law enforcement have chosen to act as their representatives) when it isn't required to stand your ground, have it turn out poorly, and then decide that you are going to kill the other person involved because they are acting in self defense against you and not have some degree of criminal responsibility. I haven't seen a logical argument otherwise.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 08:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Semantics. Where is it stated that no "dispatchers" are "agents of the law."
What's relevant is if this dispatcher is an agent of the law, which as I said above is unlikely, otherwise we would have heard about it.

Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Regardless, he called the police. He was told not to proceed. He did so anyways and did not have to for "self defense." I believe that's all it should take for a jury to determine that he acted carelessly, and had culpability in the conflict that ensued and he wasn't using lethal force in a matter where he protection to "stand his ground."

You can't start a conflict (especially after specifically being told not to by those who law enforcement have chosen to act as their representatives) when it isn't required to stand your ground, have it turn out poorly, and then decide that you are going to kill the other person involved because they are acting in self defense against you and not have some degree of criminal responsibility. I haven't seen a logical argument otherwise.
Your argument is based on all sorts of assumptions for which there isn't hard evidence, as much as we'd like there to be.

This has already been discussed a bunch of times. I'll go over it again, but I really don't feel like defending this guy.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 10:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Repeating now.

An agent of the law has authority over you. Dispatchers do not.
You can repeat all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman had no authority to confront Martin, as the police were already involved in the situation. The situation has nothing to do with who has authority to tell a citizen whether or not they should get out of their car, period! As a private citizen, Zimmerman had no authority to play cop, which is exactly what he did, and as a result someone lost their life, who otherwise would most likely not have! You're nitpicking a point needlessly. Neighborhood Watch volunteers are instructed not to confront, or leave their cars; that's the point! He did, and someone is dead as a result! The reality of the situation is that Zimmerman got overly involved in a situation, when he should have let the police do their job! He murdered Trayvon Martin!
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 10:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Your argument is based on all sorts of assumptions for which there isn't hard evidence, as much as we'd like there to be.
And, here is the fundamental problem with this story. People are making decisions of guilt or innocence based on nothing more than assumptions and speculation.
There might be some evidence, if the police in this case actually did their job and investigated a bit.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 10:47 AM
 
It's also been said that Zimmerman had received instruction by the Police volunteer program coordinator:
“I said, ‘If it’s someone you don’t recognize, call us. We’ll figure it out,’ ” Dorival said. “‘Observe from a safe location.’ There’s even a slide about not being vigilante police. I don’t know how many more times I can repeat it.”
Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to cops - Miami-Dade - MiamiHerald.com
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 11:30 AM
 
My decision was made based on known facts. He got out of his car. Done. "stand your ground" no longer applies because he didn't.

Everything else is just determining how severe the charges are.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 12:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
You can repeat all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman had no authority to confront Martin, as the police were already involved in the situation. The situation has nothing to do with who has authority to tell a citizen whether or not they should get out of their car, period! As a private citizen, Zimmerman had no authority to play cop, which is exactly what he did, and as a result someone lost their life, who otherwise would most likely not have! You're nitpicking a point needlessly. Neighborhood Watch volunteers are instructed not to confront, or leave their cars; that's the point! He did, and someone is dead as a result! The reality of the situation is that Zimmerman got overly involved in a situation, when he should have let the police do their job! He murdered Trayvon Martin!


-t
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 02:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
You're nitpicking a point needlessly.
Interesting.

Why exactly do you think I'm nitpicking it? I obviously feel a need, what do you think it is?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 06:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Interesting.

Why exactly do you think I'm nitpicking it? I obviously feel a need, what do you think it is?
How much more obvious do you need it to be ?

Pursuit of a stranger and confrontation with a weapon is NEVER something non-law-enforcement should do, no matter if being told or not.
The fact that he WAS told and he still did what he was not commissioned to do makes his case even weaker.

-t
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:03 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2