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.
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 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.
Is Zimmerman still a “white Hispanic”, or is he just white now?
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.
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:
mind your own business.
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.
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.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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?”
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.