Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   The BBQ Pit (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Shodan, HurricaneDitka, and George Zimmerman: Three Racist Peas in a Racist Pod (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=866775)

Babale 12-06-2018 11:46 AM

Shodan, HurricaneDitka, and George Zimmerman: Three Racist Peas in a Racist Pod
 
In a recent thread, inspired by manson1972's controversial thread, I made the mistake of bringing up George Zimmerman. Boy, did that bring the racists out of the woodwork...

Shodan, you get to go first. You really need to realize that laws aren't always just, and that sometimes, a person can be a fucked up individual even if he isn't found guilty of a crime. Case in point, Zimmerman. Even if the story is exactly as you tell it -- Zimmerman followed Martin around, eventually losing him; then Martin stalked him and attacked him*, but Zimmerman was able to overpower him and shoot Martin -- then ZIMMERMAN IS STILL A FUCKED UP RACIST PIECE OF SHIT. Who died and made him Sheriff? Can you accept that even if it's totally legal, Zimmerman is human filth whose behavior makes the world LESS SAFE, not MORE? Especially considering how many violent gun-related incidents this motherfucker has been involved in since then?

No, of course you can't. Because he's a white man, and using a gun in "self defense", and so is beyond reproach.

*Apparently, we know Martin was the sort of deranged and violent individual who would do such a thing, because at one point he claimed to be a "no limit nigga" -- a heinous crime that clearly deserves the death penalty, delivered by Chubby Batman, AKA George Zimmerman.


Now, HurricaneDitka, if I had just read Shodan's posts, I wouldn't think it was possible to get any more racist and depraved. Luckily, you're here to set me straight. Where do I even start? Like Shodan, you ignore any evidence that doesn't line up with your way of thinking. You ignore Zimmerman's history of violence. You portray Martin as doubling back after reaching the safety of his father's house, despite the record not showing this at all, and in fact showing the opposite: Zimmerman approached Martin, who was tired from running and not yet at his father's house. Yet of course, you ignore this, because you've got an alternate theory. For some reason, Martin followed Zimmerman around and attacked him, unprovoked. You claim to have a theory that explains this, better than our "ridiculous" theory that Martin was scared of Zimmerman and attacked him in self defense. But you won't share this theory, because you're worried we'd find it "disgusting".

Well, Ditka, it's pretty obvious why you think Trayvon is guilty, and frankly, it IS disgusting.


I think my last post in the thread sums up my opinion of you two.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21362945)
Let me just remind everyone what you guys are arguing...

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 21362928)
AFAICT, that history consists of shooting Martin in self-defense and later having two girlfriends accuse him of violence and then recant. Is that the "long and varied history of violence" we are to discuss?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21362356)
He was looking for a fight. Martin thought of himself as a bad-ass. Remember the whole "NO LIMIT NIGGA" thing?

He had been kicked out of school for drugs and theft and vandalism, his mother couldn't handle him, so she sent him to his father to see if his father could do any better.

Martin thought he was a tough guy. Maybe he was. Few people, however, are tougher than a bullet.

You fuck with enough people, sooner or later you find you fucked with the wrong people. He was only 17, so this was sooner.

Regards,
Shodan

So, people accuse Zimmerman of threatening them with guns, but that's no evidence that he may have done so to Martin. And yet, Martin is suspended because of possession of marijuana, and therefore he is a violent thug who most likely assaulted Zimmerman for no reason.

And your opinion of Zimmerman and Martin has nothing to do with the race of either individual.


Really Not All That Bright 12-06-2018 11:48 AM

Yay, another Zimmerman/Trayvon thread. We were really lacking for those.

Babale 12-06-2018 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright (Post 21362960)
Yay, another Zimmerman/Trayvon thread. We were really lacking for those.

Would you prefer we just allow racism to be stated on this board unchallenged?

The argument for not moderating racism is that, through the free exchange of ideas, people would realize that racist ideas are simply not as good as non-racist ideas. Well, that only works if you challenge the racists.

iiandyiiii 12-06-2018 11:55 AM

I'll endorse this Pitting. HD is a dishonest troll, and Shodan thinks it's okay to sometimes refer to black people by the n-word, and justifies this by citing a Chris Rock comedy bit: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...6&postcount=58

Babale 12-06-2018 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iiandyiiii (Post 21362987)
I'll endorse this Pitting. HD is a dishonest troll, and Shodan thinks it's okay to sometimes refer to black people by the n-word, and justifies this by citing a Chris Rock comedy bit: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...6&postcount=58

Holy fucking shit.

Shodan 12-06-2018 12:57 PM

There has been discussion on the SDMB that liberals have trouble understanding the motivations of conservatives. The reverse isn't nearly as true - conservatives and independents are more likely to be able to accurately define what drives liberals. I think that might be what is going on here.

White guy (okay, half-Hispanic/half-white) shoots black kid. There is no room in your brain for any explanation except the one - it has to be racist. That's not a conclusion; it's an assumption. And there is no room in your teeny little brain for any other explanation - Zimmerman shot a black kid (who attacked him and was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in), so Zimmerman is a racist racist who is racist.

Then I point out that the reason Zimmerman shot him is because Martin was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in. That doesn't fit into your head - it requires the ability to set aside what you have been conditioned to do, and actually think analytically. That's hard work. So, it's easier not to do that - I must be a racist racist who is racist too. I get that.

There is a currently active thread in GD about how liberals talk differently to black people, because the liberals are afraid of being thought racist. Conservatives don't do that, according to the study, because conservatives don't worry as much about being thought of as racist. I think some of that is going on here as well.

The accusation of racism as thrown about by liberals has evolved, to some extent. It is no longer enough to treat black people the same as everyone else - that's racism. You have to talk down to them, and use softer, more agreeable language to them. Otherwise, they might call you racist. Similarly, you can't apply a standard that asks, might shooting someone be a reasonable response to that someone's attacking you and trying to bash your head in. No no - even asking that question is racist racist racist.

But, at least in the case of this particular conservative, I have been called racist for applying the same standard to people no matter what their race, that I care very little about it.

'Zimmerman shot Martin. That was racist.'

'Martin had attacked him, and was sitting on his chest trying to smash his head in.'

'For saying that - I am going to call you a racist.'

Maybe I cared about it the first four hundred times it happened. Now - not so much.

Regards,
Shodan

PS - As I have mentioned before, iiandyiiii, if your idea of not engaging with me on race is to drop your turd into every Pitting, you have an interesting, not to say stupid, interpretation of "not engaging".

iiandyiiii 12-06-2018 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
There has been discussion on the SDMB that liberals have trouble understanding the motivations of conservatives. The reverse isn't nearly as true - conservatives and independents are more likely to be able to accurately define what drives liberals. I think that might be what is going on here.

White guy (okay, half-Hispanic/half-white) shoots black kid. There is no room in your brain for any explanation except the one - it has to be racist. That's not a conclusion; it's an assumption. And there is no room in your teeny little brain for any other explanation - Zimmerman shot a black kid (who attacked him and was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in), so Zimmerman is a racist racist who is racist.

Then I point out that the reason Zimmerman shot him is because Martin was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in. That doesn't fit into your head - it requires the ability to set aside what you have been conditioned to do, and actually think analytically. That's hard work. So, it's easier not to do that - I must be a racist racist who is racist too. I get that.

There is a currently active thread in GD about how liberals talk differently to black people, because the liberals are afraid of being thought racist. Conservatives don't do that, according to the study, because conservatives don't worry as much about being thought of as racist. I think some of that is going on here as well.

The accusation of racism as thrown about by liberals has evolved, to some extent. It is no longer enough to treat black people the same as everyone else - that's racism. You have to talk down to them, and use softer, more agreeable language to them. Otherwise, they might call you racist. Similarly, you can't apply a standard that asks, might shooting someone be a reasonable response to that someone's attacking you and trying to bash your head in. No no - even asking that question is racist racist racist.

But, at least in the case of this particular conservative, I have been called racist for applying the same standard to people no matter what their race, that I care very little about it.

'Zimmerman shot Martin. That was racist.'

'Martin had attacked him, and was sitting on his chest trying to smash his head in.'

'For saying that - I am going to call you a racist.'

Maybe I cared about it the first four hundred times it happened. Now - not so much.

Regards,
Shodan

PS - As I have mentioned before, iiandyiiii, if your idea of not engaging with me on race is to drop your turd into every Pitting, you have an interesting, not to say stupid, interpretation of "not engaging".

"Engaging" is like this -- the post above is full of falsehoods, half-truths, and incredible bullshit. Do I sometimes violate my own rules of engaging? Sure.

Not engaging is pointing out to others that it's not worth engaging you about race because you're an unconscious (or maybe conscious, I don't know) racist who thinks it's reasonable to refer to black people as the n-word based on the ludicrous justification of a long-disavowed/regretted-by-the-comedian comedy routine.

Cheesesteak 12-06-2018 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
conservatives don't worry as much about being thought of as racist.

I submit this quote for the "no shit, Sherlock" observation of the year.

Thing Fish 12-06-2018 01:28 PM

Yep. What a trio of worthless assholes.

Babale 12-06-2018 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
There has been discussion on the SDMB that liberals have trouble understanding the motivations of conservatives. The reverse isn't nearly as true - conservatives and independents are more likely to be able to accurately define what drives liberals. I think that might be what is going on here.

You know, I used to consider myself an independent. But since 2016 assholes like you have made me question every conservative position I've held. I still hold many of those positions, but I had to have a good, hard think about it, because the fact that I agree with someone who is THIS blind or hateful is kinda disturbing.

Quote:

White guy (okay, half-Hispanic/half-white) shoots black kid. There is no room in your brain for any explanation except the one - it has to be racist. That's not a conclusion; it's an assumption. And there is no room in your teeny little brain for any other explanation - Zimmerman shot a black kid (who attacked him and was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in), so Zimmerman is a racist racist who is racist.
Hmmm, no, try again. Let's think about what actually happened. White guy followed a black kid around, demanded to know what he was doing, then got in a fight with him, then shot the black kid.

At the end of the day, an unarmed black kid who was not committing any crimes before Zimmerman came on the scene is dead. Before we move forward, can we just agree that this is a bad thing? That even if Zimmerman was right to fear for his life, it was tragic that Trayvon ended up dead? Because as far as I can tell, neither you nor HurricaneDitka ever acknowledged this.

Now, why did Trayvon Martin end up dead? Because Zimmerman shot him. Why were Trayvon and Zimmerman in contact in the first place? Because Zimmerman followed Trayvon despite being told not to. Why did he do this?

Well, this is where we should take another quick pause. Can we at least agree that George Zimmerman is a piece of shit individual? Regardless of whether this particular shooting was justified, do you understand that his behavior is not beneficial to our society? Even if he had stopped Trayvon, had a short chat with him, and sent him on our way, that would still be a bad thing, because who the bloody FUCK is George Zimmerman to stop random people on the street and demand to know their business? We have police officers for that, and fuckheads like Zimmerman, with his history of questionable behavior (can you just agree to THAT? That Zimmerman is a person with a history of bad judgement? Because regardless of the Trayvon Martin case, that's still a fact!) should not be patrolling our streets, armed with a gun?

OK, now that we've addressed that -- so Zimmerman is following Trayvon. Why? I'm not asking you what you can "prove beyond reasonable doubt". Based on your experience with the human fucking race, why do you think that Zimmerman was following Trayvon? Do you think it might be because he was black? Do you understand that these types of encounters between blacks and law enforcement -- even when they end up totally peaceful, and the cop and black man just converse and go about their days -- still lead to a hostile relationship between the African American community and our law enforcement? And do you agree that a fat fuck like George Zimmerman is much less qualified to handle that complex relationship than a trained officer of the law? Because these are very important issues to consider when we look at what happened that night.

Now, based on the relationship between law enforcement (and I realize that Zimmerman isn't law enforcement, but when he stops and questions Martin, he's acting in that capacity -- but without any of the respect that comes from the badge, and from being a public servant in the employee of our - hopefully at least somewhat - trusted government) and the African American community, do you see why Martin might feel threatened here? Based on the long, long history of lynching and hate crimes carried out in the South, which I am sure that you condemn just as much as I do, do you see why Trayvon Martin might fear for his life in that moment? You and HurricaneDitka are both very quick to point out that asking someone "what are you doing around here?" isn't a threat, but between 1865 and 1968, how many encounters between blacks and whites that started off with that exact sentence ended up with the black man hanging from a tree? Do you really not see why Trayvon Martin might fear for his life in that situation?

Quote:

Then I point out that the reason Zimmerman shot him is because Martin was sitting on his chest trying to bash his head in. That doesn't fit into your head - it requires the ability to set aside what you have been conditioned to do, and actually think analytically. That's hard work. So, it's easier not to do that - I must be a racist racist who is racist too. I get that.
No, that's not it at all. But you're refusing to consider WHY Martin would do such a thing. Martin was a human being, a rational, thinking human person. Not an animal. He must have had some reason to attack Zimmerman. That reason could have been that Zimmerman had a nice watch and Trayvon wanted to take it, for example. But we can't just make up a reason -- we need to examine what we know.

What we know is that Trayvon Martin was a 17 year old kid who was scared. We know he was scared because he fled from the mail shed at a run, and he explained his actions over the phone to his girlfriend. He told her that he was afraid of the man who was following him.

Do you recognize that for a 17 year old kid, outside after dark, realizing that you are being followed is scary? Do you realize that for a black man in the South, being followed by a white man is even scarier?

Trayvon ran, and eventually he reached his father's street. He said that he was "right outside", but he continued walking, until he saw the man who was following him again. I know you keep insisting that he had made it to his father's doorstep, but as I pointed out in the other thread, that's not consistent with the testimony that HurricaneDitka cited. And we know that he was scared again, because that's what the evidence shows us. Why would he be scared? Well, sometimes you think that someone is following you; but then you turn a corner and they're gone. But if you lose sight of them, and then see them again, that confirms the suspicion: they really are following you.

Trayvon was talking to his girlfriend, telling her how scared he was. Does that sound like the type of thing a big, bad thug looking for a fight would do?

Trayvon didn't run -- according to his girlfriend, he was too winded. Even if that wasn't the case, I believe he has the right to "stand his ground", doesn't he? When Zimmerman approached, he asked him why he was following him. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as a concerned citizen, a member of the neighborhood watch, someone protecting the community. He just demanded to know what Trayvon was doing. Why does Zimmerman do this? What gave him the right to wander around after dark, but forbids Trayvon from doing it? It's pretty obvious that this is a racial issue. Trayvon is suspicious because he's black. You might deny it, Zimmerman might deny it, but come on. Give it a rest. It's a racial issue, and you know it, deep inside. Study after study has shown that race has a real, measurable impact on these sorts of decisions, even among people who aren't racist. And based on Zimmerman's other actions -- for example, his tweets calling Obama a baboon, or setting his profile picture to a confederate flag -- all show that he IS a racist. You can admit that. It doesn't invalidate your "self defense" argument, and it doesn't weaken your gun rights. Even if Zimmerman was fully justified in shooting Trayvon, he's still a racist, as is evidenced by plenty of other actions that he's taken.

So here's Trayvon, on a dark street with a grown man -- a grown white man -- who is demanding to know what his business is. At this point, the facts get blurry. But we know that Trayvon struck Zimmerman and eventually ended up on top of him. What do you think led him to do this? Is it just the fact that he's a 'thug', that the hormones in his body drove him mad, and with no more reason than a wild beast he attacked Zimmerman? Because that's the story you told in the other thread. If you don't see how that narrative lines up precisely with the racist ideology of the South during the height of the Jim Crow era, then you shouldn't be calling anyone else "little brained". And if you DO see it, but you stand by that argument, then you're a racist, plain and simple.

That was your explanation. That Trayvon is some sort of madman, who attacked Zimmerman for the simple pleasure of a fight. I ask you if that lines up at all with Dee Dee's testimony. If the boy who ran away scared is really the man who savagely attacked Zimmerman. I don't believe it, but you apparently do.

I think it's much more likely that, fully aware of the history of his people in the South, Trayvon was scared shitless. Perhaps irrationally -- he is, after all, a 17 year old boy -- when Zimmerman approached him, he decided that Zimmerman was stopping him because of his race, and meant to do harm to him. Maybe he was wrong about that, and Zimmerman was pure of heart, but based on the history involved, I hope you can agree that it isn't too much of a stretch. Maybe he even saw the gun. Humans are notoriously bad at risk assessment, and 17 year olds especially so. Maybe Trayvon decided that Zimmerman was going to hurt him because of his race, and so he tried to defend himself.

Is it really so ridiculous to think that this is possible? You act as if the South has no problems with racism. As if there weren't over 2,000 hate crimes committed against blacks in 2012, the year that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin.

That's why I call you racist. Because you choose to ignore the fact that black people are still discriminated against today, and are even still violently attacked at times. You choose to pretend that Trayvon Martin's killing had nothing to do with race. And you choose to pretend that Zimmerman is a fine Southern gentleman and an example to us all.

I know you probably won't read all of this, or will respond to it with a one-line dismissal. But I chose to believe that maybe you do care about honest debate, so I took the time to explain my thinking. I won't bother responding directly to your accusations -- that I use the label "racist" to discredit you lightly. Hopefully my reasoning is refutation enough.

Babale 12-06-2018 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iiandyiiii (Post 21363187)
"Engaging" is like this -- the post above is full of falsehoods, half-truths, and incredible bullshit. Do I sometimes violate my own rules of engaging? Sure.

Not engaging is pointing out to others that it's not worth engaging you about race because you're an unconscious (or maybe conscious, I don't know) racist who thinks it's reasonable to refer to black people as the n-word based on the ludicrous justification of a long-disavowed/regretted-by-the-comedian comedy routine.

As someone who generally agrees with you and likes you as a poster -- well, I hope you're wrong, is all I can say, because I just spent the last 45 minutes of my life responding to his post in detail. I hope he's at least open to considering other points of view. I guess we'll find out.

Thing Fish 12-06-2018 02:48 PM

You've been here since 2008, and you still hope Shodan is open to other points of view? Good luck with that.

Your post is excellent, though. It accurately identifies what racists do; they refuse to entertain the possibility of racism as a motivating factor for any behavior, absent some ridiculously high standard of evidence being met. No matter how obvious it is from historical and social context that racism is a highly plausible explanation for some action, they insist that to even raise that possibility is to engage in malicious and intellectually dishonest false accusation. And they will keep doing it no matter how many times it is pointed out to them, because they're not about the truth, they're about the racism.

Wolf333 12-06-2018 03:13 PM

Shodan is a piece of shit racist troll who is somehow still around because he’s one of the “good” conservatives around here (how shitty is that?).

At the same time he regularly whines about moderator bias against conservatives.

Ditka is Shodan’s less intelligent little brother.

ElvisL1ves 12-06-2018 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolf333 (Post 21363590)
Shodan...regularly whines about moderator bias against conservatives.

Despite the fact that Mr. Regards is the most notable beneficiary of their Affirmative Action program.

Ravenman 12-06-2018 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
There is a currently active thread in GD about how liberals talk differently to black people, because the liberals are afraid of being thought racist. Conservatives don't do that, according to the study, because conservatives don't worry as much about being thought of as racist.

Other conservative facts:

1. There were WMD found in Iraq
2. Reagan scared the Iranians into returning the hostages
3. Trump's inauguration was the biggest one ever

Shodan 12-06-2018 03:22 PM

I think we covered most if not all of this, but...
Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363339)
Hmmm, no, try again. Let's think about what actually happened. White guy followed a black kid around, demanded to know what he was doing, then got in a fight with him, then shot the black kid.

At the end of the day, an unarmed black kid who was not committing any crimes before Zimmerman came on the scene is dead. Before we move forward, can we just agree that this is a bad thing? That even if Zimmerman was right to fear for his life, it was tragic that Trayvon ended up dead? Because as far as I can tell, neither you nor HurricaneDitka ever acknowledged this.

Yes, it was tragic that Martin died, and I said so in my first post to your thread.
Quote:

Now, why did Trayvon Martin end up dead? Because Zimmerman shot him. Why were Trayvon and Zimmerman in contact in the first place? Because Zimmerman followed Trayvon despite being told not to. Why did he do this?
Zimmerman followed Martin originally because he felt Martin was acting suspiciously, in a neighborhood that had experienced a number of recent break-ins. Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch guy.

He also stopped following Martin when the NEN dispatcher asked him to. This has no legal or moral force, IMO. But he did stop after losing sight of Martin. It was while Zimmerman was trying to find a street sign that would give a precise location that Martin doubled back and confronted Zimmerman.
Quote:

Well, this is where we should take another quick pause. Can we at least agree that George Zimmerman is a piece of shit individual?
No.
Quote:

Regardless of whether this particular shooting was justified, do you understand that his behavior is not beneficial to our society? Even if he had stopped Trayvon, had a short chat with him, and sent him on our way, that would still be a bad thing, because who the bloody FUCK is George Zimmerman to stop random people on the street and demand to know their business?
I do not agree that, in principle, having a neighborhood watch is bad for society.

Quote:

OK, now that we've addressed that -- so Zimmerman is following Trayvon. Why? I'm not asking you what you can "prove beyond reasonable doubt". Based on your experience with the human fucking race, why do you think that Zimmerman was following Trayvon?
Because he was the neighborhood watch guy, in a neighborhood that had experienced a number of recent break-ins.
Quote:

Do you think it might be because he was black?
Maybe here is where you are going wrong. There is no evidence that Zimmerman was following Martin because he was black.
Quote:

Do you understand that these types of encounters between blacks and law enforcement -- even when they end up totally peaceful, and the cop and black man just converse and go about their days -- still lead to a hostile relationship between the African American community and our law enforcement? And do you agree that a fat fuck like George Zimmerman is much less qualified to handle that complex relationship than a trained officer of the law? Because these are very important issues to consider when we look at what happened that night.
Zimmerman was not law enforcement. What he did has nothing to do with law enforcement. Zimmerman was a private citizen, with the same rights and responsibilities as Martin or anyone else.
Quote:

Do you really not see why Trayvon Martin might fear for his life in that situation?
As I have mentioned several times, if Martin was scared of being lynched, all he had to do was walk into his own living room. The fact that he did not, but instead doubled back and confronted the person of whom he was allegedly so scared, indicates that he was not scared of being lynched. His motives for going back and confronting Zimmerman were probably other than that.
Quote:

Do you recognize that for a 17 year old kid, outside after dark, realizing that you are being followed is scary? Do you realize that for a black man in the South, being followed by a white man is even scarier?
See above. He was so scared at being followed that he did not enter his own house, but went back looking for Zimmerman.
Quote:

Trayvon ran, and eventually he reached his father's street. He said that he was "right outside", but he continued walking, until he saw the man who was following him again. I know you keep insisting that he had made it to his father's doorstep, but as I pointed out in the other thread, that's not consistent with the testimony that HurricaneDitka cited. And we know that he was scared again, because that's what the evidence shows us.
No, it is actually consistent. If you look at diagrams as to where Zimmerman originally spotted Martin, where Martin's house was, and where the fight took place, you will note that it is consistent with someone doubling back from Martin's house to where the confrontation and the fight took place.

We hashed this out in several of the monster threads.

Quote:

Trayvon didn't run -- according to his girlfriend, he was too winded. Even if that wasn't the case, I believe he has the right to "stand his ground", doesn't he?
If Zimmerman had attacked Martin, Martin would have been entirely within his rights to stand his ground. Likewise, if Martin attacked Zimmerman, which is what the evidence indicates happened, Zimmerman would have been within his rights to stand his ground. Zimmerman didn't get the chance - it is hard to stand with someone sitting on your chest banging your head on the ground.
Quote:

When Zimmerman approached, he asked him why he was following him. Zimmerman didn't identify himself as a concerned citizen, a member of the neighborhood watch, someone protecting the community. He just demanded to know what Trayvon was doing. Why does Zimmerman do this?
Because he was the neighborhood watch guy.
Quote:

What gave him the right to wander around after dark, but forbids Trayvon from doing it?
Nothing forbids either of them from wandering around, or forbids them from asking anyone they please what they are doing. Both are forbidden from attacking people on the street, even if they ask what you are doing.
Quote:

It's pretty obvious that this is a racial issue. Trayvon is suspicious because he's black.
If by "pretty obvious" you mean "something you are assuming without a scrap of evidence", OK.
Quote:

You might deny it, Zimmerman might deny it, but come on. Give it a rest. It's a racial issue, and you know it, deep inside.
No, I don't know anything of the sort.

As I mentioned above, this might be an example where you literally cannot comprehend the thinking of someone who declines to share your automatic assumptions.

If you mean it is a racial issue to you , sure. If you mean either I or Zimmerman are motivated by racism, no.
Quote:

So here's Trayvon, on a dark street with a grown man -- a grown white man -- who is demanding to know what his business is. At this point, the facts get blurry. But we know that Trayvon struck Zimmerman and eventually ended up on top of him. What do you think led him to do this? Is it just the fact that he's a 'thug', that the hormones in his body drove him mad, and with no more reason than a wild beast he attacked Zimmerman? Because that's the story you told in the other thread.
Martin doubled back, confronted and attacked Zimmerman, because he was a hot-headed, unstable teen ager with a history of acting out. He had been kicked out of school for theft, vandalism, and drugs, and was sent to his father to see if his father could do any better with him. That's the story I told in the other thread.
Quote:

If you don't see how that narrative lines up precisely with the racist ideology of the South during the height of the Jim Crow era, then you shouldn't be calling anyone else "little brained". And if you DO see it, but you stand by that argument, then you're a racist, plain and simple.
See my earlier post.

Being called a racist doesn't bother me, especially not when I am arguing based on facts and evidence and the accuser is not. Perhaps it should, but it doesn't.
Quote:

And you choose to pretend that Zimmerman is a fine Southern gentleman and an example to us all.
No doubt you can quote me where I have said anything of this sort.
Quote:

Hopefully my reasoning is refutation enough.
It isn't.

Regards,
Shodan

Morgyn 12-06-2018 03:23 PM

Babale, I don't recall seeing you around here before, although I see you've been a member for years. That was a truly admirable bit of writing. Thank you. I intend to start looking for your posts.

Shodan 12-06-2018 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravenman (Post 21363617)
Other conservative facts:

1. There were WMD found in Iraq
2. Reagan scared the Iranians into returning the hostages
3. Trump's inauguration was the biggest one ever

Liberal facts
  1. Nuh-uh! and
  2. Racist!
Regards,
Shodan

Babale 12-06-2018 03:30 PM

To everyone who said I was wasting my time, you were right and I was wrong.

Edit: no, you know what? Morgyn, Thing Fish, thanks for your support :)

Babale 12-06-2018 03:40 PM

From the GD thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka (Post 21363650)
Whether Martin was 'defending himself' or 'attacking' hinges on who started the physical altercation. Merely seeing a holstered gun does not justify assault (see open-carriers, for example).

Anyone know how to save a post? This one's gonna come in REAL handy next time the cops shoot an unarmed black man at 50 feet and this asshole is defending them.

iiandyiiii 12-06-2018 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363618)
Being called a racist doesn't bother me, especially not when I am arguing based on facts and evidence and the accuser is not.

So apparently Shodan thinks it's "arguing based on facts and evidence" to believe that it's totally fine to refer to some black people by the n-word, and justify this by citing a (long-disavowed and regretted by the comedian) Chris Rock comedy bit. 'Cause that's why I called him a racist. In case anyone thinks it might be worthwhile to talk with him about any issue related to race.

Sadly, most racists don't know that they are racist. They think they have good reasons (like a disavowed and regretted comedy bit!?) for various racist assertions. And very rarely are they capable of looking within themselves and realizing this. I suppose there's a chance that Shodan could become one of these rare individuals... we can always hope.

The Tooth 12-06-2018 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak (Post 21363239)
I submit this quote for the "no shit, Sherlock" observation of the year.

It must have concerned them at one point, judging from the pointy hoods that hid their faces.

Babale 12-06-2018 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Tooth (Post 21363701)
It must have concerned them at one point, judging from the pointy hoods that hid their faces.

Now they march in the open, heads and tiki torches held high as the ol' Stars and Bars waves behind them. Truly, we've come so far.

Sunny Daze 12-06-2018 04:08 PM

I admire your fortitude, Babale.

bucketybuck 12-06-2018 04:16 PM

Two cunts and George Zimmerman.

Heffalump and Roo 12-06-2018 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363339)
Is it really so ridiculous to think that this is possible?

Well, I read every word of your post. I wasn't thinking too much about this issue when it happened, so I just went along with the narrative that it was racist. Your rendition is making me think twice about that.

Sure, your interpretation is possible. Anything is possible. You're insisting that your version is the *only* one that's possible. I'm buying that less after reading your post.

Of course, there has been more information about Zimmerman later that may tip the scales, but again, I haven't been paying that much attention to the specifics.

If someone sees someone in their neighborhood who they don't think lives there or is obviously visiting someone there, and that person happens to be African American, what are their options if they think the police won't arrive in time to stop any potential bad activity?

The Tooth 12-06-2018 05:20 PM

Minding their own business springs to mind.

The Tooth 12-06-2018 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363706)
Now they march in the open, heads and tiki torches held high as the ol' Stars and Bars waves behind them. Truly, we've come so far.

If they want to make themselves easy to identify I won't stop them.

Babale 12-06-2018 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo (Post 21363898)
Well, I read every word of your post. I wasn't thinking too much about this issue when it happened, so I just went along with the narrative that it was racist. Your rendition is making me think twice about that.

Sure, your interpretation is possible. Anything is possible. You're insisting that your version is the *only* one that's possible. I'm buying that less after reading your post.

Of course, there has been more information about Zimmerman later that may tip the scales, but again, I haven't been paying that much attention to the specifics.

If someone sees someone in their neighborhood who they don't think lives there or is obviously visiting someone there, and that person happens to be African American, what are their options if they think the police won't arrive in time to stop any potential bad activity?

But that's exactly the point. What was suspicious about Trayvon aside from his race?

Dacien 12-06-2018 05:31 PM

The thing I remember most about the trial was when the detective said that he played a trick on Zimmerman, stating that the entire altercation had been caught on a security camera. Typically, he said, a guilty person will reel a bit and begin to slowly walk back their story. An innocent person will be overcome with relief, ostensibly because their accurate telling of events will be proven by video evidence.

According to the detective, Zimmerman was overcome with relief.

A couple questions though.

1. Is Zimmerman still a "white Hispanic", or is he just white now?

2. Isn't racism, in the absence of some obvious indicator (uttering a racial slur, for example), an unfalsifiable crime of the mind that can't possibly be defended against? Like a cop of pulling over a person who happens to be black and saying it's a racist stop. The cop cannot possibly prove he's not a racist.

Heffalump and Roo 12-06-2018 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363925)
But that's exactly the point. What was suspicious about Trayvon aside from his race?

I wasn't there, and that's not my question.

I live in a place where I know the people who live around me. I generally know the people visiting them. If I see someone wandering around their places that doesn't look like they belong, what are the options I have?

Do the options differ based on the color of their skin?

Babale 12-06-2018 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dacien (Post 21363926)
A couple questions though.

1. Is Zimmerman still a "white Hispanic", or is he just white now?

well, Trayvon thought he was white, so when we are discussing Trayvon's frame of mind, it doesn't matter.

Hispanics can be racist just like blacks can, so it's also irrelevant when discussing Zimmerman's frame of mind.

Why are you asking?

Quote:

2. Isn't racism, in the absence of some obvious indicator (uttering a racial slur, for example), an unfalsifiable crime
No, because racism isn't a crime. Acting on it can be.

Babale 12-06-2018 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo (Post 21363946)
I wasn't there, and that's not my question.

I live in a place where I know the people who live around me. I generally know the people visiting them. If I see someone wandering around their places that doesn't look like they belong, what are the options I have?

Do the options differ based on the color of their skin?

Why do you say Trayvon didn't belong? His father lived in that community and Trayvon was living with him. Do you think Zimmerman personally knew every person in the area? If not, what reason did he have for thinking that Trayvon was "suspicious" aside from race?

As for your options:
1) mind your own business.
2) no, that's it.

You don't get to say someone looks like he "doesn't belong". If they are doing something illegal, or something that looks like it might be illegal, you call the cops. If they just look like they don't "belong" you mind your own business.

Dacien 12-06-2018 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363956)
well, Trayvon thought he was white, so when we are discussing Trayvon's frame of mind, it doesn't matter.

Hispanics can be racist just like blacks can, so it's also irrelevant when discussing Zimmerman's frame of mind.

Why are you asking?

Because at the time they were referring to him as a white Hispanic in media reports, and it was pointed out that if Zimmerman had been up for a Nobel prize, no such distinction would have been made. Indeed, such a distinction would be seen as inappropriate.

It seemed odd at the time that it was so important to insert whiteness into the person who shot Trayvon. But OP simply refers to him as white, so I was curious if the perplexing racial categorization of Zimmerman as a "white Hispanic" had been abandoned completely.

And did Trayvon think he was white? I never heard that. Did Zimmerman relay a white-related epithet uttered by Trayvon? Honest question, I haven't heard of that.


Quote:

No, because racism isn't a crime. Acting on it can be.

"Crime of the mind" is a turn of phrase that simply means having a thought that is considered bad or immoral, not that an actual crime has been committed.

RaftPeople 12-06-2018 07:12 PM

Outside observer that did not really follow the details of the incident when it happened:
Based on the data that appears to be available (I only read the GD thread and the wiki recap), it seems that nobody knows who started the altercation.

Regardless of either parties past history or activities that night, the altercation could easily have been started by either party.


Not sure why anyone can be so convinced that they know what happened.

RaftPeople 12-06-2018 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363964)
As for your options:
1) mind your own business.


Counter examples:
1 - Neighbor called the police due to 4 suspicious looking individuals, they broke into the other neighbors house before the police arrived

2 - I spotted some suspicious looking guys walking down the street as I drove past a neighbors house to work. I turned around at the next street and came back to catch them stealing neighbors bike.

3 - Neighbor (older woman) hired a handy man to work on house and my wife and I picked up some odd signals that were tough to identify, something felt off with this person, like manipulative, too friendly, and some other things. We called neighbor's daughter and mentioned our concerns that he seemed really "suspicious" and to watch out for her stuff. A few days later the cops were at the house, the guy had stolen her car, jewelry and a bunch of tools from the garage.


Ignoring data is not smart. Sure you need to try not to let bias and bigotry influence the process, but that doesn't mean you ignore all data until someone commits a crime.


fyi: all people in above examples were white, race is not automatically the issue in all cases, but I do have black friends and they tell me about how often they get pulled over, so I get there is a lot of it.

Heffalump and Roo 12-06-2018 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babale (Post 21363964)
You don't get to say someone looks like he "doesn't belong". If they are doing something illegal, or something that looks like it might be illegal, you call the cops. If they just look like they don't "belong" you mind your own business.

Along with RaftPeople's examples, I have a bunch of my own.

A neighbor sees someone shining a flashlight into someone's window. Stopping to ask why they're doing that seems more reasonable than watching them continue or waiting to see if he really does break in.

A neighbor sees someone sitting out in the street, talking to someone on the phone. They don't go in a house. They just sit there, for an hour or more. They get up to go toward an empty house every once in a while.

A neighbor sees someone coming out of someone's yard. They are unfamiliar with them and don't see their neighbor that they are familiar with, at the house.


You're saying that the only option available is to call the police when asking might clarify what's going on.

Little Nemo 12-06-2018 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
There has been discussion on the SDMB that liberals have trouble understanding the motivations of conservatives. The reverse isn't nearly as true - conservatives and independents are more likely to be able to accurately define what drives liberals. I think that might be what is going on here.

Bullshit. Here's what I understand about the motivations of conservatives like George Zimmerman: they're cowards.

People like Zimmerman are scared of black people. Because they're cowards. But they don't see themselves as cowards. They imagine themselves as rugged All-American he-men. They imagine they're really brave. So when a conservative gets scared because he sees a black teenager, he figures that black teenagers must be incredibly scary if they can scare somebody as brave as the conservative imagines he is.

So when they step forward to confront that black teenager, they imagine themselves as the brave knight stepping forward to confront a dragon. They expect everyone around them to admire and respect the courage they are showing. And they figure they're braver than everyone else because they were the only one willing to step forward and confront the threat that they imagine everyone was seeing.

But that's not what everyone else is seeing. Nobody else was scared of the black teenager or felt threatened just because he was walking down the street. So when the conservative confronted the black teenager, their thought was not "That brave man is defending us all" - it was "Why is that asshole harassing that kid for no reason?"

Little Nemo 12-06-2018 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaftPeople (Post 21364092)
Counter examples:
1 - Neighbor called the police due to 4 suspicious looking individuals, they broke into the other neighbors house before the police arrived

2 - I spotted some suspicious looking guys walking down the street as I drove past a neighbors house to work. I turned around at the next street and came back to catch them stealing neighbors bike.

3 - Neighbor (older woman) hired a handy man to work on house and my wife and I picked up some odd signals that were tough to identify, something felt off with this person, like manipulative, too friendly, and some other things. We called neighbor's daughter and mentioned our concerns that he seemed really "suspicious" and to watch out for her stuff. A few days later the cops were at the house, the guy had stolen her car, jewelry and a bunch of tools from the garage.


Ignoring data is not smart. Sure you need to try not to let bias and bigotry influence the process, but that doesn't mean you ignore all data until someone commits a crime.


fyi: all people in above examples were white, race is not automatically the issue in all cases, but I do have black friends and they tell me about how often they get pulled over, so I get there is a lot of it.

Data? What data? All you said was that these people looked "suspicious".

pool 12-06-2018 09:38 PM

Maybe Zimmerman was racist and profiling, maybe he wasn't. But his action of shooting a guy bashing his head into concrete is not a racist action it's survival instinct. I had a sort of reverse situation occur in real life, when I had to pee so badly that I pulled over into this neighborhood on the side of the road, walked down the street and urinated near some bushes. I'm white and a black guy came out of his house and asked what I was doing in his neighborhood and told me to leave. Now it was impossible from the house he came out of that he saw me peeing. I told him the truth but he wouldn't accept my answer and proceeded to basically chest bump me and tried to physically intimidate me. I had a conceal/carry handgun on my person but I just defused the situation and told him I was leaving even as he was still in my face and even hit my car window as I walked to and got inside my car.

The guy did cross the line and physically pushed me a little bit but if it had crossed a certain threshold and he started bashing my head into the curb I don't think I would have been racist or in the wrong to shoot such a person if I didn't think or know that they would stop. I agree with Shodan but I don't expect most posters on this board to agree with me.

octopus 12-07-2018 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iiandyiiii (Post 21363699)
So apparently Shodan thinks it's "arguing based on facts and evidence" to believe that it's totally fine to refer to some black people by the n-word, and justify this by citing a (long-disavowed and regretted by the comedian) Chris Rock comedy bit. 'Cause that's why I called him a racist. In case anyone thinks it might be worthwhile to talk with him about any issue related to race.

Sadly, most racists don't know that they are racist. They think they have good reasons (like a disavowed and regretted comedy bit!?) for various racist assertions. And very rarely are they capable of looking within themselves and realizing this. I suppose there's a chance that Shodan could become one of these rare individuals... we can always hope.

Maybe you should post that link another 20 times? Truth is Chris Rock did do that comedy routine and probably made millions off of it. Truth is other comedians make race based comedy. Itís not surprising that sometimes other people Knight use the exact same language. Was Chris Rock an evil racist!!11! for the original routine. Of course you will refuse to answer that with a permutation of your own race based reasoning.

yendis 12-07-2018 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pool (Post 21364315)
Maybe Zimmerman was racist and profiling, maybe he wasn't. But his action of shooting a guy bashing his head into concrete is not a racist action it's survival instinct. I had a sort of reverse situation occur in real life, when I had to pee so badly that I pulled over into this neighborhood on the side of the road, walked down the street and urinated near some bushes. I'm white and a black guy came out of his house and asked what I was doing in his neighborhood and told me to leave. Now it was impossible from the house he came out of that he saw me peeing. I told him the truth but he wouldn't accept my answer and proceeded to basically chest bump me and tried to physically intimidate me. I had a conceal/carry handgun on my person but I just defused the situation and told him I was leaving even as he was still in my face and even hit my car window as I walked to and got inside my car.

But in this story you are in Martin's position and the other guy is Zimmerman. So if you had defended yourself and he killed you he would be in the right. Well except that he was black and therefore guilty by default in some people's eyes.

Little Nemo 12-07-2018 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yendis (Post 21364588)
But in this story you are in Martin's position and the other guy is Zimmerman. So if you had defended yourself and he killed you he would be in the right. Well except that he was black and therefore guilty by default in some people's eyes.

I think that's the principle at work. For some people, it doesn't matter what the actual circumstances were. They'll always believe that the black guy started it and the white guy was just defending himself. Everything else can be adjusted to fit that narrative.

iiandyiiii 12-07-2018 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octopus (Post 21364577)
Maybe you should post that link another 20 times? Truth is Chris Rock did do that comedy routine and probably made millions off of it. Truth is other comedians make race based comedy. It’s not surprising that sometimes other people Knight use the exact same language. Was Chris Rock an evil racist!!11! for the original routine. Of course you will refuse to answer that with a permutation of your own race based reasoning.

No, I don't think Rock is a racist.

Do you agree with Shodan that some black people ought to be referred to as the n word?

MrDibble 12-07-2018 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
White guy (okay, half-Hispanic/half-white)

This is not a thing.

MrDibble 12-07-2018 05:12 AM

Chris Rock doesn't regret the bit becasuse it was he himself being racist, he regrets it because it gave some semblance of plausible deniability to racist shitstains like Shodan.

Locrian 12-07-2018 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaftPeople (Post 21364069)
Outside observer that did not really follow the details of the incident when it happened:
Based on the data that appears to be available (I only read the GD thread and the wiki recap), it seems that nobody knows who started the altercation.

Regardless of either parties past history or activities that night, the altercation could easily have been started by either party.


Not sure why anyone can be so convinced that they know what happened.

This. ^^ Whether or not you followed every part of this case, we will never know who or how this altercation really started. I think Zimmerman is an asshole for thinking confrontation as a neighborhood watch person is entirely stupid. I can't say he shot Trayvon because he was black. I'd like to THINK so... 'cause, hey, that'd make this easy. But unfortunately, I do not know and will never know what really happened when they started at each other.

What is neighborhood watch? It means a citizen with eyes and ears and quick communication with the police-- the professionals (we hope) in these cases. IOW, it means any grown up with half a brain. You're no more special than me to report a crime. Zimmerman seems like the type who joined just so he could brag about how great he is. Nevertheless, I don't know what the hell really happened.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo (Post 21364132)
Along with RaftPeople's examples, I have a bunch of my own.

A neighbor sees someone shining a flashlight into someone's window. Stopping to ask why they're doing that seems more reasonable than watching them continue or waiting to see if he really does break in.

A neighbor sees someone sitting out in the street, talking to someone on the phone. They don't go in a house. They just sit there, for an hour or more. They get up to go toward an empty house every once in a while.

A neighbor sees someone coming out of someone's yard. They are unfamiliar with them and don't see their neighbor that they are familiar with, at the house.


You're saying that the only option available is to call the police when asking might clarify what's going on.

I won't speak for anyone else, but my answer is an absolute yes, call the cops. You remember curiosity (not the Mars droid) and the cat? Someone with a flashlight at the windows of an empty neighbor's house equals call the cops. NEVER walk over and say, "'Sup, dude?" And that's for two main reasons: common sense and what happened to Trayvon. Hey, maybe you're a trained police/military person who would handle this better than me. I'm not, so... 911 it is for me on any of these examples.

So, Babale, I did really love your post. But there are assumptions we unfortunately can't make. Like I said, Zimmerman is an ass, but how and why and for what reason this happened we don't know. Do I think he's racist? Yes. Do I think he should not have confronted Trayvon? Yes. Why he shot Tayvon? I do not know why FOR SURE. All racist reasons are possible, but we can't just conclude that.

Heffalump and Roo 12-07-2018 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locrian (Post 21364725)
I won't speak for anyone else, but my answer is an absolute yes, call the cops. You remember curiosity (not the Mars droid) and the cat? Someone with a flashlight at the windows of an empty neighbor's house equals call the cops. NEVER walk over and say, "'Sup, dude?" And that's for two main reasons: common sense and what happened to Trayvon. Hey, maybe you're a trained police/military person who would handle this better than me. I'm not, so... 911 it is for me on any of these examples.

This actually happened. A neighbor saw a flashlight beam from around my place. He came over to see what was happening. It turned out that I was shining a flashlight to see something in the dark. He didn't realize I was there. I'm glad he didn't call the police because I wouldn't want to deal with them.

The other thing happened too. I saw some young people sitting around the car for a really long time. I hadn't seen them before. They were probably friends of someone in the area. After watching them for a while, I went over and asked why they were sitting out in the street. They went into the friend's house after I asked.

Neighborhood watches are organized so that people can group together and ask each other what's going on instead of calling the police for everything that seems out of place.

Shodan 12-07-2018 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locrian (Post 21364725)
What is neighborhood watch? It means a citizen with eyes and ears and quick communication with the police-- the professionals (we hope) in these cases.

Zimmerman called the non-emergency police dispatcher immediately upon spotting Martin acting (in his opinion) suspiciously. And it was while Zimmerman was trying to find a house number or street address so that he could meet up with the police, who were on their way, when Martin confronted and attacked him.
Quote:

Hey, maybe you're a trained police/military person who would handle this better than me. I'm not, so... 911 it is for me on any of these examples.
Same for Zimmerman. Which is why he did what he did.

Regards,
Shodan

Budget Player Cadet 12-07-2018 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shodan (Post 21363166)
There has been discussion on the SDMB that liberals have trouble understanding the motivations of conservatives. The reverse isn't nearly as true - conservatives and independents are more likely to be able to accurately define what drives liberals. I think that might be what is going on here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Also Shodan, literally one sentence later (Post 21363166)
White guy (okay, half-Hispanic/half-white) shoots black kid. There is no room in your brain for any explanation except the one - it has to be racist.

Dunning-Krueger is one hell of a drug. What a stupid motherfucker.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.