View Single Post
Old 12-06-2018, 04:22 PM
Shodan is online now
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,492
I think we covered most if not all of this, but...
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
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.
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.
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?
I do not agree that, in principle, having a neighborhood watch is bad for society.

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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

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