# George Zimmerman - In the news again **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 31, 2014, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480 "2014-07-31T13:26:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 44
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 9:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/861 "2015-01-15T09:23:15Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Well, you might have purchased a crap house. Leveled a Brunswick for a friend, and it turned out his flooring was…eccentric. No, I meant having to use shims because the table has nothing built-in that allows you to level it. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/862 "2015-01-15T11:58:37Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Thank god for dictionaries! Before they existed, how did people even talk? Obviously there was no English language until [1604](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_Alphabeticall)! As Humpty Dumpty taught us: > [@](#): > > ‘You don’t know what you’re talking about!’ cried Humpty Dumpty. ‘How many days are there in a year?’ > ‘Three hundred and sixty-five,’ said Alice. > ‘And how many birthdays have you?’ > ‘One.’ > ‘And if you take one from three hundred and sixty-five, what remains?’ > ‘Three hundred and sixty-four, of course.’ > Humpty Dumpty looked doubtful. ‘I’d rather see that done on paper,’ he said. > Alice couldn’t help smiling as she took out her memorandum-book, and worked the sum for him: > > ``` > 365 > 1 > ____ > > 364 > ___ > > ``` > > Humpty Dumpty took the book, and looked at it carefully. ‘That seems to be done right—’ he began. > ‘You’re holding it upside down!’ Alice interrupted. > ‘To be sure I was!’ Humpty Dumpty said gaily, as she turned it round for him. ‘I thought it looked a little queer. As I was saying, that SEEMS to be done right—though I haven’t time to look it over thoroughly just now—and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents—’ > ‘Certainly,’ said Alice. > ‘And only ONE for birthday presents, you know. There’s glory for you!’ > ‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory,”’ Alice said. > Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’ > ‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument,”’ Alice objected. > ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’ ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/863 "2015-01-15T12:37:39Z")
**Bricker** , did you miss my response in post #828? I think you misread my post about “thug”. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/864 "2015-01-15T14:48:44Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > **Bricker** , did you miss my response in post #828? I think you misread my post about “thug”. No. And for clarity, here it is: > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Huh? That doesn’t fit what I wrote. Assad is very violent. I was talking about the use of the word to describe non-violent people, who inevitably (it seems to me, anyway) usually end up being young black men. But it seems to me that your objection is simply that I changed the definition you were advancing. On the other hand, you’re ok with trying to change the definition I was advancing. So I guess my question would be: at what point do we say, “Yes, sure enough, ‘thug’ has acquired a secondary (and invidious) meaning?” I am not particularly comfortable leaving it in the hands of either Charles Barkley or you. But at the same time, it would seem mad to declare that as of 2015, the English language has stopped changing. So – when? ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/865 "2015-01-15T15:02:36Z")
When the people routinely targeted with the word tell you that it’s being used this way towards them, and therefore those that use it too often are likely to be misunderstood unless they are mindful of when they use it. Why is that not an appropriate time? How about the word ‘gay’? It used to be about being happy and cheerful, now it has an entirely different meaning. People can continue to use it in the original way, of course, such as saying “I had a really gay time yesterday!”, but they shouldn’t be surprised if people raise their eyebrows at the statement and wonder what exactly you mean. What time was the appropriate time for this switch to have happened? I think trying to ascertain the appropriate time for language changes is a mistake. Society and culture changes, and with this language changes as well. Its a natural process. You can acknowledge it and try to keep up with the times, or you can freeze your vocabulary in time and never change your usage. Insisting that others are trying to change the meaning of words is false as well. The meaning is changing whether anyone wants it to or not, its just that some people are acknowledging this change and others are digging in their heels for some odd reason. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/866 "2015-01-15T15:04:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. And for clarity, here it is: > > But it seems to me that your objection is simply that I changed the definition you were advancing. > > On the other hand, you’re ok with trying to change the definition I was advancing. > > So I guess my question would be: at what point do we say, “Yes, sure enough, ‘thug’ has acquired a secondary (and invidious) meaning?” > > I am not particularly comfortable leaving it in the hands of either Charles Barkley or you. But at the same time, it would seem mad to declare that as of 2015, the English language has stopped changing. > > So – when? The bolded part below is the part I think you missed: > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think that’s a bit different. Do you really think that (for example) calling Jordan Davis a thug while not calling his killer thug has absolutely nothing to do with stereotypes? How about all the insults and labels of thug for Richard Sherman, after he committed the terrible crime of talking smack exuberantly after a football game? It seems like the word, **when used to describe people who aren’t violent** (like, say, Davis and Sherman), is disproportionately used to label young black males. > > I don’t know if this is racist, but it seems unfortunate to me, and it seems like a not-good thing that should probably be criticized, to me. The Kerry quote was not relevant, because I was talking about (and criticizing) usage of the word “thug” to describe people who aren’t violent or criminal (like Davis and Sherman). Kerry was describing a violent person. About the language – I don’t know if we can be sure by any means that it has acquired a racial connotation on a large-scale, but I think it’s reasonable to be worried that it might be on its way, and point this out and criticize when it’s used inappropriately. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/867 "2015-01-15T17:30:53Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Did you know what the term “computer” meant before your mom bought you one? Of course I knew what a computer is, a computer is a [woman at a desk with an adding machine](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/computing-power-used-to-be-measured-in-kilo-girls/280633/). Don’t tell me its changed since then, she’ll be really crushed to learn we have to let her go. Although I have been thinking of upgrading since I get some serious lag when I use her to play Call of Duty. eman s’roboT fo nigiro eht wonk od I sey dna Trying to get a bit back on topic, if Stephan is still checking out this thread I would honestly be very interested what his response to my post [#793](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18053025&postcount=793) was ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/868 "2015-01-15T18:03:51Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Trying to get a bit back on topic, if Stephan is still checking out this thread I would honestly be very interested what his response to my post [#793](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18053025&postcount=793) was Ok, I actually missed that post. > [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > So Stephan, > > Suppose that Davis actually did have a shotgun in the car, and when Dunn came up to the window he blew Dunn’s face off, claiming that he thought he saw Dunn reaching for a gun. I assume that you would say that Davis was not gulity of murder, after all he felt threatened (given what actually happened it turns out that his concern would have been justified.) > > But just for fun let’s assume that Dunn was unarmed and was just going to yell at Davis for having his music too loud, and Davis actually blew Dunn away because Davis was a thug. Based on your previous posts I assume that this wouldn’t change anything and you would still find Davis innocent, after all there is no evidence that he didn’t think that Dunn was going for a gun. > > In that case is there any reason for every altercation to lead to a wild west quick draw showdown, since anyone you argue with could be justified in shooting you while claiming self defense, and it’s better to shoot first than end up dead. If you can’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that it’s the second scenario - murder - rather than the first - justified self defence - then yes, he should be acquitted. It’s important to note that I wouldn’t _find_ Davis innocent, he would _be_ innocent, and remain that way unless and until found guilty. The point is, in my opinion, in any altercation where you are fear of imminent death or serious injury, and that fear is reasonable, _you have the right to shoot first_. You don’t have to wait until you’re actually attacked, or actually injured or dying, before defending yourself. Are you saying that people should be convicted even if there is reasonable doubt about their guilt, in order to prevent “wild west quickdraws”? If so I disagree, I don’t care what the consequences are, don’t do it. I don’t happen to believe that would, in fact, be the result, but I don’t think it’s relevant either. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/869 "2015-01-15T18:17:43Z")
That sounds like the best strict gun-control argument I have every heard of! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/870 "2015-01-15T18:57:13Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > The point is, in my opinion, in any altercation where you are fear of imminent death or serious injury, and that fear is _ **reasonable** _, _you have the right to shoot first_. You don’t have to wait until you’re actually attacked, or actually injured or dying, before defending yourself. Heh. Reasonable fear. And whose word do we take for that? ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/871 "2015-01-15T18:59:58Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Heh. Reasonable fear. And whose word do we take for that? The white guy, of course. Who else knows what’s best for everybody? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/872 "2015-01-15T20:08:14Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > The bolded part below is the part I think you missed: > > The Kerry quote was not relevant, because I was talking about (and criticizing) usage of the word “thug” to describe people who aren’t violent or criminal (like Davis and Sherman). Kerry was describing a violent person. Yes, I understand that’s what you were doing. But I’m asking you why you are confident that “thug” means “violent” or “criminal?” ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/873 "2015-01-15T20:22:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, I understand that’s what you were doing. > > But I’m asking you why you are confident that “thug” means “violent” or “criminal?” That “thug” has become a euphemism for “black” is at least debatable, but I honestly can’t fathom where you’re going with this question. Are you aware of a definition of “thug” that does not involve violence or criminality? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/874 "2015-01-15T20:27:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, I understand that’s what you were doing. > > But I’m asking you why you are confident that “thug” means “violent” or “criminal?” That’s the only definition I was aware of for “thug” – a violent, usually criminally violent person. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/875 "2015-01-15T20:30:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, I understand that’s what you were doing. > > But I’m asking you why you are confident that “thug” means “violent” or “criminal?” From here: [http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american\_english/thug?searchDictCode=all](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/thug?searchDictCode=all) Do you have a new alternate definition that you are working with or something? Also, did you see my last post (#865) about the appropriate time for a word to have its meaning evolve? Any thoughts on that? You asked the question and I provided an answer. Would you consider it a satisfactory one then? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/876 "2015-01-15T22:17:42Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Heh. Reasonable fear. And whose word do we take for that? You don’t take anyone’s word for it. You think for yourself, and decide if a reasonable person, in that situation, would have been in such fear. And if you’re judging someone guilty of murder, you only do so if it’s been proven beyond reasonable doubt that a reasonable person _would not_ have been in such fear. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/877 "2015-01-15T22:30:15Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You don’t take anyone’s word for it. You think for yourself, and decide if a reasonable person, in that situation, would have been in such fear. > > And if you’re judging someone guilty of murder, you only do so if it’s been proven beyond reasonable doubt that a reasonable person _would not_ have been in such fear. So a jury can find a man guilty, even if he testifies he was in fear of his life? I think that is all we were wondering. It sounded to me like you believed any claim of self-defense could not be challenged. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/878 "2015-01-15T23:00:39Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > That sounds like the best strict gun-control argument I have every heard of! Strict gun-control means training to hit your target with the first shot. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/879 "2015-01-15T23:08:00Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Strict gun-control means training to hit your target with the first shot. :D:D:D HA! That’s really funny! Did you come up with it? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/880 "2015-01-15T23:16:12Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > …Yeah, I’m not going to be taking advice from you. I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in this. That’s only fair, especially since this exchange is taking place in the Pit. I wouldn’t take any advice from you, either since you seem to be under the impression that a Pit thread is a substitute for an IQ test??? :smack: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480.md?page=43) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480.md?page=45)