Philando Castile shooting dash cam video

[k9bfriender]

@HurricaneDitka

Pretty sure he was still on the sidewalk. That’s what Zimmerman’s head was getting bashed against.

A sidewalk. Not the sidewalk by the road, but the sidewalk that goes in between the houses.

Heres a map.

Anyway, this is still quite the hijack. It is based on your callus assertion that Martin “earned a bullet”.

The idea that someone can earn a bullet due to being in fear for their life for being followed by an armed man, off the road, behind and between houses, is just so out there that it really needs to be addressed. This mentality that you display is exactly the mentality that needs to be addressed.

I don’t know who threw the first punch, I don’t know how the fight would have ended, but what I do know is that zimmerman created the situation in which he then felt the need to kill someone who had done nothing to zimmerman prior to the incident.

I suppose you would just let some armed guy get out of his suv and follow you around in the dark with absolutely no confrontation whatsoever? If that is the case, then I guess I can understand why you would think that someone who would react with fear about someone acting in a threatening fashion towards them had “earned a bullet”, but, as I am aware that you are yourself a gun advocate, I doubt that to be the case. The only difference being that you would have been armed, and you would have shot zimmerman first, rather than physically defending himself by unarmed melee, as this kid did.

[Scumpup]

@iiandyiiii

I have no certainty as to what happened; I’m not ignoring anything.

Yet, you present yourself as if you are certain Martin did not deserve to be shot. Please don’t tell me you have no preferred narrative of those events when you manifestly do.

[iiandyiiii]

@Scumpup

Yet, you present yourself as if you are certain Martin did not deserve to be shot. Please don’t tell me you have no preferred narrative of those events when you manifestly do.

I’m sure I have some bias, who doesn’t? But I not certain about anything in this circumstance.

[k9bfriender]

@HurricaneDitka

Stick with the Castile, or Levar Jones, shootings. They’re much better cases to make the #BlackLivesMatter arguments than Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown.

Don’t callously talk about people having “earned a bullet.”

I am not making a BLM argument, I am making an argument that you are being callous about the tragic death of a young kid who did nothing to deserve being in the situation that zimmerman put him in. Maybe he acted inappropriately in the situation, but it was not of his own creation.

And maybe he did not act inappropriately, as we only have the stalker’s word as to what went down, and based on his actions since, he certainly has no credibility. There is a very real chance that everything that zimmerman said was a lie about how the confrontation happened, and that martin was entirely in the right.

So, we have a sliding scale, a spectrum, where it goes from zimmerman being in the wrong, and martin acting incorrectly in that situation that zimmerman created, to zimmerman being very in the wrong, and martin acting correctly. There are no scenarios where zimmerman did not create the situation in which martin was killed.

But you blame it all on martin. That is the problem. That mindset is the reason that BLM needs to exist, because it is very evident that to you, they don’t, not really, if they’ve gotten killed, then they’ve earned it.

Only in the cases like castile where there is actual video evidence to the shooting do you consider the possibility that the dead guy didn’t deserve what he got.

I understand why the jury found the way that did, and had I been on the jury, given the evidence and instructions they did, I probably would have found the same way.

But that does not in any way mean that martin deserved to die, which is what you are saying.

[k9bfriender]

@Scumpup

Yet, you present yourself as if you are certain Martin did not deserve to be shot. Please don’t tell me you have no preferred narrative of those events when you manifestly do.

And you are sure that Martin did deserve to be shot?

I know what narrative you subscribe to.

[HurricaneDitka]

@iiandyiiii

I’m sure that’s great comfort to the Martin family as they observe strangers routinely slander their dead son and justify his death.

“Slander” suggests it was a lie. As near as we can tell, those were the actual true events: he attacked George Zimmerman, and his death was justified.

[iiandyiiii]

@HurricaneDitka

“Slander” suggests it was a lie. As near as we can tell, those were the actual true events: he attacked George Zimmerman, and his death was justified.

I disagree. Maybe there wasn’t enough evidence to convict, but that’s very, very different than enough to say Zimmerman was morally justified in his actions.

[kayaker]

@HurricaneDitka

Stick with the Castile, or Levar Jones, shootings. They’re much better cases to make the #BlackLivesMatter arguments than Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown.

Sure is a shit-ton to choose from. Isn’t that alone a concern?

[HurricaneDitka]

@k9bfriender

The idea that someone can earn a bullet due to being in fear for their life for being followed by an armed man, off the road, behind and between houses, is just so out there that it really needs to be addressed. This mentality that you display is exactly the mentality that needs to be addressed.

The idea that Trayvon was “in fear for [his] life” is pure speculation. He almost certainly was unaware that Zimmerman was armed when he attacked, but if he really felt like he was in danger, doubling back and confronting the threat seems like a very poor choice, as subsequent facts bore out.

@k9bfriender

I suppose you would just let some armed guy get out of his suv and follow you around in the dark with absolutely no confrontation whatsoever?

I certainly wouldn’t have punched him in the face, and straddled him on the ground and bashed his head on the sidewalk. And no, I wouldn’t have shot someone without more justification than “he was following me”.

[HurricaneDitka]

@k9bfriender

… the stalker’s word …

“stalker” is not, in my opinion, an accurate word.

@k9bfriender

There is a very real chance that everything that zimmerman said was a lie about how the confrontation happened, and that martin was entirely in the right.

Do you think it is true or false that Martin punched Zimmerman? If it’s the latter, how do you think Zimmerman’s face got injured?

@k9bfriender

So, we have a sliding scale, a spectrum, where it goes from zimmerman being in the wrong, and martin acting incorrectly in that situation that zimmerman created, to zimmerman being very in the wrong, and martin acting correctly. There are no scenarios where zimmerman did not create the situation in which martin was killed.

No, the sliding scale starts back at “Zimmerman broke no laws”

@k9bfriender

But you blame it all on martin.

Yes. As far as we can tell, Martin initiated the violence.

[HurricaneDitka]

@kayaker

Sure is a shit-ton to choose from. Isn’t that alone a concern?

Yes, in a way. Like I said, I’d favor better de-escalation training for police. As for the headline-grabbing shootings of recent years, some of them appear to be justified and some do not. I’m primarily concerned about the ones that don’t appear to be justified.

[HurricaneDitka]

@iiandyiiii

I disagree. Maybe there wasn’t enough evidence to convict, but that’s very, very different than enough to say Zimmerman was morally justified in his actions.

I think self-defense is morally justified. The evidence I’ve seen suggests that Zimmerman was most likely acting in self-defense, and was therefore justified.

[k9bfriender]

@HurricaneDitka

“stalker” is not, in my opinion, an accurate word.

Do you think it is true or false that Martin punched Zimmerman? If it’s the latter, how do you think Zimmerman’s face got injured?

No, the sliding scale starts back at “Zimmerman broke no laws”

Yes. As far as we can tell, Martin initiated the violence.

Legally, he was not stalking, as he did not have provably malicious intent.

Dictionary definition of stalking “pursue or approach stealthily.
“a cat stalking a bird”
synonyms: creep up on, trail, follow, shadow, track down, go after, be after, course, hunt”

To someone being followed at night by someone with unknown intent, it is stalking. But that is semantics you are trying to quibble into distraction here.

We have zimmerman’s word on that, and nothing else. We do know that martin struck him, but we do not know who initiated it.

We do know that zimmerman got out of his vehicle with his gun, and followed martin off the streets and between the houses.

If martin struck zimmerman first, then I see it as self defense. He was being followed, at night, by an unknown person with unknown intent. It may not have been a smart move, but it was a morally justifiable move. Calling the police is stupid. Even if it weren’t for the perception that they would make the situation worse, they are also minutes away, when the danger is seconds away (isn’t that what the gun advocates say all the time in justifying self defense?). Going back to his home is stupid, as then this person who is following him with unknown intent knows where he lives. If martin had killed zimmerman in the struggle, then martin should have had as much, if not more, claim to self defense as zimmerman did.

If zimmerman struck first, which we only have his word that he did not, then that only makes him even less morally justified for the outcome.

In either case, martin did not “deserve” to die.

Martin broke no laws.

@HurricaneDitka

I think self-defense is morally justified. The evidence I’ve seen suggests that Zimmerman was most likely acting in self-defense, and was therefore justified.

He was acting in self defense in reaction to a situation that he created.

If he was morally justified in this situation, then you would also say that one would be morally justified in picking a fight, and then shooting your opponent when it was apparent that you were outmatched and losing.

Then you would say that the person that you just killed, the person with whom you had just picked a fight, had “earned a bullet”.

[Scumpup]

@k9bfriender

And you are sure that Martin did deserve to be shot?

I know what narrative you subscribe to.

Really? After I just said so right up above there? Damned perspicacious of you.

[HurricaneDitka]

@k9bfriender

Martin broke no laws.

Yes, he did. He assaulted Zimmerman.

@k9bfriender

Then you would say that the person that you just killed, the person with whom you had just picked a fight, had “earned a bullet”.

Following someone != “picking a fight”. It’s perfectly legal to follow someone in public, AFAICT, and the act of punching someone for doing that perfectly legal activity is itself a crime, not some contorted view of morally-justified self-defense.

The key to these self-defense laws, that I think you’re missing, is the term ‘reasonable’. Zimmerman had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger when Martin was on top of him, smashing his head on the sidewalk. Martin did NOT have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger merely because a nosy neighbor was watching him and trying to follow him in the public spaces of their neighborhood.

[iiandyiiii]

@HurricaneDitka

Following someone != “picking a fight”. It’s perfectly legal to follow someone in public, AFAICT, and the act of punching someone for doing that perfectly legal activity is itself a crime, not some contorted view of morally-justified self-defense.

The key to these self-defense laws, that I think you’re missing, is the term ‘reasonable’. Zimmerman had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger when Martin was on top of him, smashing his head on the sidewalk. Martin did NOT have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger merely because a nosy neighbor was watching him and trying to follow him in the public spaces of their neighborhood.

Lots of things are perfectly legal that still might be both unwise or immoral in various situations. Based on Zimmerman’s own account, he was behaving unwisely and immorally in singling out and following Martin late at night, IMO, and therefore bears at least some culpability for a situation that wouldn’t have occurred had he not chosen to follow, late at night, a teenager who had done nothing wrong. I think it’s entirely reasonable for a young black male to feel fear for one’s life if a stranger is following him for no good reason late at night, and therefore I believe Zimmerman took an action, for no good reason, that would cause a reasonable young black person fear for one’s life. When one takes such an action, causing reasonable fear for one’s life, IMO one bears at least some moral culpability for a bad outcome that follows.

[k9bfriender]

@HurricaneDitka

Yes, he did. He assaulted Zimmerman.

According to zimmerman.

In any case, he could have claimed self defense.

I see no reason to believe that he had no reason to think that he was not in danger.

Following someone != “picking a fight”. It’s perfectly legal to follow someone in public, AFAICT, and the act of punching someone for doing that perfectly legal activity is itself a crime, not some contorted view of morally-justified self-defense.

Okay, go find someone on the street or in a park somewhere, and start following them. Make it obvious that you are following them, if they don’t know, then it doesn’t count. Keep following them until they either confront you or the police show up to ask you to stop.

Once you have done that, try it at night, but I would be careful about that one.

The key to these self-defense laws, that I think you’re missing, is the term ‘reasonable’. Zimmerman had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger when Martin was on top of him, smashing his head on the sidewalk. Martin did NOT have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger merely because a nosy neighbor was watching him and trying to follow him in the public spaces of their neighborhood.

He did not know it was a neighbor. He had a man who was following him, off the streets and in between houses, at night.

You do not think that it would be reasonable to think that such actions are those of someone who wishes to do you harm?

You think that maybe it would be more reasonable to think that he was following him to give him a pony?

[HurricaneDitka]

@iiandyiiii

Based on Zimmerman’s own account, he was behaving … immorally in singling out and following Martin late at night…

I agree that it was unwise for Zimmerman to follow Martin. I’m not sure how you got to the quoted conclusion though. What was “immoral” about it?

Wasn’t he doing pretty much what we expect neighborhood watches and concerned citizens everywhere to do: report suspicious behavior to authorities? Isn’t that the whole point of the “see something, say something” campaigns, etc? Inevitably, some of those reports are going to be of perfectly innocent activities that only appeared suspicious to the person making the report, but does that make the act of reporting “immoral”?

[Scumpup]

Zimmerman seems like an odious, toxic little toad based on his media persona. An odious, toxic little toad who relishes the spotlight.

[iiandyiiii]

@HurricaneDitka

I agree that it was unwise for Zimmerman to follow Martin. I’m not sure how you got to the quoted conclusion though. What was “immoral” about it?

Wasn’t he doing pretty much what we expect neighborhood watches and concerned citizens everywhere to do: report suspicious behavior to authorities? Isn’t that the whole point of the “see something, say something” campaigns, etc? Inevitably, some of those reports are going to be of perfectly innocent activities that only appeared suspicious to the person making the report, but does that make the act of reporting “immoral”?

Zimmerman didn’t just report it – he followed Martin, against the recommendation of the police operator, which IMO was immoral since it could cause a reasonable person in Martin’s position to feel afraid for their life. Add to that there was no indication Martin was doing anything that should have reasonably been seen as suspicious, and I believe Zimmerman acted very immorally.