Dayum! I didn’t realize it was that fast. Well, clearly Zimmerman had no choice but to kill Martin, anyone who could head smash, punch, smother and reach for the gun that fast… have you heard anything about how the two traveled from the T to the final spot in that much time? No? Me neither…
You are being followed by someone. You have no idea why. Do you really want them to know where you live?
Again, I can see a personally reasonable decision being made not to lead a stalker to the house where you live. I can also see a reason to double back and ask them what they’re doing. So again, I see no proof that the deceased acted rashly.
This death was brought about by the poorly judged actions of Zimmerman. There was no reason for him to decide the deceased was suspicious. There was no reason to get out and follow him on foot. There was no reason to not announce he was neighbourhood watch. A change in any of the above could well have prevented the death of a young man. These are the only facts actually known.
Except those 20 “slammings” are also rather unlikely:
That is one of the best pieces I’ve read on the current situation. The quote from MLK was very telling. That man was worth a thousand of any of the current crop of African-American leaders.
Yes, because the Wall Street Journal is such a bastion of fairness and common sense when it comes to the ‘liberal agenda’.
There’s shit like this for starters.
Racial disparities in sentencing for similiar crimes is also a growing–not shrinking–problem.
While Zimmerman walks as a free man after killing a kid whom he stalked, black people like Marissa Alexander are facing hard time for substantially less.
Denying the obvious is something only white people can get away with. Because black people already know we can’t expect to be treated the same as everyone else. “Innocent until proven guilty” only applies if your skin is light.
People trying to compare the Zimmerman case with the Marissa case should be slapped, because they’re completely different. Marissa went -back into the house- when she could have run away, and it’s not like she made any claim to be ‘trying to save her kids’. She showed bad judgement in going back into the house and firing her gun; some punishment is in order…but yeah, 20 years is ridiculous; mandatory sentences are retarded and should be repealed. The judge should have some leeway to apply some common sense to the unique circumstances of each case, especially when there’s always the risk that you’ll wind up with a bunch of morons on the jury, like our lovely Juror B37 in the Zimmerman trial.
The more interesting thought is that Marissa’s biggest mistake was not *shooting and killing *her husband, claiming he was threatening to kill her and the kids. Based on the Martin/Zimmerman case, there’s no way she could be tried, let along found guilty.
They are similar in that both individuals showed bad judgment in not avoiding the danger when they easily could have. And yet only one has to pay for their decision…despite the fact that she didn’t kill or injure anyone.
I think she should be punished too. But 20 years? That just boggles the mind. In a world where something like that can happen, I will never understand why GZ is a free man and people find it fair.
What crime was Martin committing so that MLK quote should apply to him? Possession of Skittles with intention to distribute?
Wow, I really feel for you both; it must be awful, having your head beaten against something as hard as brick. I truly empathize with people in that situation.
I see what you did there. Difficult to attack the article itself, that might require addressing the points it raises and giving some sort of counter-argument. Far easier to blast the WSJ. Why, you don’t even have to read the article then!
But hey, it’s the Pit, so whatever. (I’m serious. Debate is misplaced here.) So yah, boo, sucks and any other choice Billingsgate term I’m too idle to reach for.
Ah. Well that’s a damn injustice, then, and he’ll be sorely missed. Sore in the “inflamed hemorrhoid” sense.
I find it fair because in the realm of criminal law, the axiom of fairness is that the law must exist before the crime. We can’t see someone commit some act, decide we don’t like it, and punish him. We must first write the law, clearly, so that every person knows exactly what conduct is prohibited.
We did that. Admittedly, we did a sucky job of it, and as a result of that suckitude, Zimmerman suffers no criminal penalty. But that’s nonetheless a fair outcome, in a societal sense.
It would be more fair if we could dispense with the law, and all of you approach the throne of King Bricker I and I would dispense the King’s Justice. But since many of you continue to resist my benevolent rule, and because I certainly don’t want any of you crazy fuckers in charge, we have this system instead.
Marissa’s case does not suffer from the same infirmities. Actually, that’s not true – it suffers from them on the other side. Almost any scheme of “mandatory sentencing” is a bad one, because it binds the hands of judges.
But there’s very little question about Marissa’s case. The facts proved the criminal charge. She lied about what happened and her victim, plus the two children, all testified in contradiction to her story. The physical evidence contradicted her story. So the system is able to convict her.
In Zimmerman’s case, his victim could not testify and contradict Zimmerman’s story. In Zimmerman’s case, other witnesses confirmed portions of his story. So the system is unable to convict him.
That suggests that the system is flawed. But the flawed system’s rules were fairly applied to both.
Bingo.
Quoted for truth.
Wow, that’s about the most offensive thing I’ve read about the Zimmerman trial. So we shouldn’t blame Zimmerman, it was really Trayvon Martin’s fault . For what, exactly? Being black?
The quote might be somewhat appropriate if Trayvon had been committing even a small crime like graffiti. But he was walking home from the store and talking on the phone with his girlfriend.
Please explain how the quoted statement can only be read to call all black people “feral proto-humans.” Thanking you for your clear and cogent analysis in advance.
Well, I guess he might have been referring to another jury.
So, MLK is an offensive racist now too?
He bashed someone’s head into the sidewalk. That’s a bit more than a “small crime” like graffiti.
Only if he had a time machine, or the gift of foreknowledge (in which case you’d think he’d know better than to go to that motel.)