patrick.net

leoj707 says

In fact I have only tried to confront one prowler in recent memory.

Damn, leoj707 is a superhero.

Don't bring skittles to a gunfight.
Don't beat up a random guy in Florida, Texas, Arizona, or Vermont, he may be packing heat.
Don't attack guys who may be annoying you by following you around.
Don't get suspended from school.
Don't wear gangster style outfits, invest in an umbrella, goretex, etc.
Of course, I have no idea exactly why Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman. Maybe someday we'll find out. Maybe not.

clambo says

Of course, I have no idea exactly why Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman.

We have no reason to believe Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman, but if some guy was following you in a truck and then got out of the truck and came up to you, I think you might suspect that he's trying to attack you.

Dan8267 says

Damn, leoj707 is a superhero.

Ah, haha, Phoenix Jones I am not. I have never paroled my neighborhood.

Just someone who wanted to know why someone was looking in my windows at night.

leoj707 says

Bap33 says

Unrelated: Somehow I have lived an entire life having never once been mistaken for a prowler. Not even once.

How can you be sure, how is your situational awareness? I have suspected plenty of people that I have not confronted. In fact I have only tried to confront one prowler in recent memory.

very good point .... I can't figure a way to rephrase my point though .. but, since Dan said the same thing, I think I may be ok on this point .. wheew! lol

http://www.sJQi7yYhVVA

Phoenix Jones doesn't understand the concept of a secret identity.

"So when I walk in a neighborhood, criminals leave because they see the suit." Yes, and non-criminals also leave because they see the suit.

Dan8267 says

clambo says

Of course, I have no idea exactly why Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman.

We have no reason to believe Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman, but if some guy was following you in a truck and then got out of the truck and came up to you, I think you might suspect that he's trying to attack you.

if that's the case there shopuld be a 911 tape of the paniced 17 year old asking for polifce help ... you know, just like the Zimmerman one.... right?

And if using colorful lingo results in giving up ones rights, this is no longer America.

Also, there is no indication that the 17 year old suspect has ever been to Africa.

Dan8267 says

clambo says

Of course, I have no idea exactly why Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman.

We have no reason to believe Martin snapped and attacked Zimmerman, but if some guy was following you in a truck and then got out of the truck and came up to you, I think you might suspect that he's trying to attack you.

It is unlikely we are ever going to know exactly what happened. I think that photos of Zimmerman's beaten face would help his story in the court of public opinion.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/27/MN0R1NQC9D.DTL

...there is about a one-minute gap, after Zimmerman called police and before he fatally shot Martin, during which police say they're not sure what happened.

In Zimmerman's version of events, he had stopped following Martin and had turned around and was walking back to his SUV when Martin approached him from behind. The two exchanged words, then Martin punched him in the nose, sending him to the ground, and began beating him.
Then, Zimmerman says, he began yelling for help.

Several witnesses heard those cries, and there has been a dispute about from whom they came: Zimmerman or Martin. Lawyers for Martin's family say it was Martin, but police say their evidence indicates it was Zimmerman. One witness was unequivocal that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help.

* * * * *

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

It would be interesting to know what words were exchanged and if Zimmerman, emboldened by the gun in his pocket, provoked a fight.

Dan8267 says

Yes, and non-criminals also leave because they see the suit.

Ah, haha, just the other day I saw a guy wearing what looked to be like a security guard uniform, but instead of patches identifying the security company there were superman patches. Also, the shirt was open a little and he was wearing a superman shirt underneath.

Yes, I did give him a wide berth.

Bap33 says

if that's the case there shopuld be a 911 tape of the paniced 17 year old asking for polifce help ... you know, just like the Zimmerman one.... right?

There was no "panicked" 911 call from Zimmerman, just one where he called the kid a "coon".

Bap33 says

And if using colorful lingo results in giving up ones rights, this is no longer America.

No, but the use of colorful lingo may result in someone -- probably not rightfully so -- punching you in the face.

Bap33 says

Lord Barry made a stupid comment about this 17 year old suspect looking "like his son" if he had one. That is from whence my comment was built. His comments were ignant, and my comments point out just how ignant they be.

Bap. So sad that you parrot Gingrich's pathetic political bs.

Everyone knows that the only reason the psycho Zimmerman was following Martin was because of how he looked.

This is an accepted fact. This happened because of how he looked. Now that doesn't mean that he wasn't a gang banger. But Zimmermans innapropriate pursuit of him and ultimately his murder is very much related to how he looked.

This is the context in which Obama said if I had a son he would look like Trayvon.

The fact that you don't get this is stunning. (or maybe you've just been listening to too many racist idiots)

Anybody know where I can get some misinformation to back up what I want to believe about this whole story ?

Bap33 says

if that's the case there shopuld be a 911 tape of the paniced 17 year old asking for polifce help ... you know, just like the Zimmerman one.... right?

The 17-year-old was on a call to relative saying that he was being attacked. And from Zimmerman's 911 recording, it was clear that Zimmerman didn't give Martin time to dial 911.

Bap33 says

And if using colorful lingo results in giving up ones rights, this is no longer America.

No one is arguing that. We are arguing that the racial slurs along with the long history of reporting anyone black as suspicious to 911 shows motive. Joining the KKK and attending cross burnings isn't illegal, but it is "suspicious" behavior that might make the cops think that you have reason to attack blacks, or prosecution think you had racial motives for killing a black (had you also then done that).

By any reasonable standard, the evidence that has come out shows Zimmerman to be a hard-core racist. It's not illegal to be a racist, but premeditated murder is illegal and the racism does show why Zimmerman was not acting in defense.

Bap33 says

Also, there is no indication that the 17 year old suspect has ever been to Africa.

That's not what African American means. I'm an Italian American, and I've never been to Italy. I'm an Irish American, and I've never been to Ireland.

leoj707 says

It is unlikely we are ever going to know exactly what happened. I think that photos of Zimmerman's beaten face would help his story in the court of public opinion.

Possibly, but the stand-your-ground law doesn't cover simple assault. It covers rape and murder defense, not getting a black eye.

Furthermore, if you provoke a fight and get a black eye, stand-your-ground doesn't apply. You can't go hit someone and then shoot them when they hit back and claim self-defense.

Furthermore, Zimmerman who was driving a car could have decided not to get out, if he had any reason for fear. And he could have shot Martin in the leg instead of fatally shooting him. Hell, if Zimmerman had even just pulled the gun out and showed it, there would be no cause to fire it.

As far as I can tell from the facts presented, it was Martin, not Zimmerman, that was acting in self-defense. And given all of Zimmerman's actions leading up to the murder, it is his burden to prove that he was really acting in defense.

I'm not saying it would be unreasonable if a jury returned a not-guilty verdict on first-degree murder, but there is certainly enough evidence to charge him with first-degree. I think it would be pretty implausible for him not to at least be convicted of voluntary manslaughter.

leoj707 says

Ah, haha, just the other day I saw a guy wearing what looked to be like a security guard uniform, but instead of patches identifying the security company there were superman patches. Also, the shirt was open a little and he was wearing a superman shirt underneath.

Yes, I did give him a wide berth.

That might have been me. Did he look like this?

leoj707 says

No, but the use of colorful lingo may result in someone -- probably not rightfully so -- punching you in the face.

And I would be happy to state that the offensive statements are perfectly legal and the punching is completely not legal. But that's another issue.

Dan,
You are wrong to a degree that is uncommon for you. Interesting.

marcus,
I honestly have not herd Nute's opinion on this matter. I'm not a Nute fan, either, incase that matters.

Bap33 says

Dan,
You are wrong to a degree that is uncommon for you. Interesting.

Specifically, about what?

It would take me hours to go through it ... you write volumes and volumes with little effort, and I can't begin to compete with that. Your position concerning personal safety is wrong. Your assumption that an attacked Zimmerman is ok because he didn't follow the advice of an operator is wrong. Your assumption that Zimmerman was more of a racist than the 17 year old suspect is wrong. I am not going to bother with the volumes of inncorrect stuff ... you flood the converstaion with tons and tons, and normally you can anchor your arguement, but not this time. Zimmerman was acting as a defender of his neighborhood, instead of closing the blinds and allowing the area to turn into East L.A. or Compton. Those areas needed more Zimmermans 30 years ago. America needs more Zimmermans.

Bap33 says

Your assumption that an attacked Zimmerman is ok because he didn't follow the advice of an operator is wrong.

I stated that it would be believable that Martin was defending himself since he was being stalked. If a stranger follows you in a car and then gets out and approaches you aggressively, it is reasonable that you would expect he intends to inflict harm. Given Zimmerman's quite apparent emotional state on the 911 call, we know that he was not acting calmly.

I also stated that one of the reasons Zimmerman's stand-your-ground defense is not believable is that Zimmerman actively pursued the victim, whereas the stand-your-ground defense assumes that the person using it wanted to flee but could not safely do so.

I did not state that an attack on a Zimmerman was justified because he did not follow the 911 operator's order. Martin would not even know about the 911 call. However, the attack may have been justified, if it happened at all, because Martin was being stalked. Given that Martin actually died, it is self-evident that he would have reason to fear being killed or at least harmed.

Bap33 says

Your assumption that Zimmerman was more of a racist than the 17 year old suspect is wrong. I

I have no idea whether or not Martin was a racist or to what degree. Nor have I compared Martin to Zimmerman on a scale of racism. I have only stated that the evidence shows that Zimmerman is a racist. I stand by that conclusion given both the racial slurs and the extensive history of calling 911 to report black people and only black people.

Bap33 says

you flood the converstaion with tons and tons, and normally you can anchor your arguement, but not this time.

Tons and tons of what?

As for evidence to back my claims, see the second article I posted along with the audio of the 911 call. That evidence is the basis of my conclusions. If you think the evidence is flawed or misinterpreted, explain why.

Bap33 says

Zimmerman was acting as a defender of his neighborhood, instead of closing the blinds and allowing the area to turn into East L.A. or Compton. Those areas needed more Zimmermans 30 years ago. America needs more Zimmermans.

America isn't about one neighborhood versus another. Nor does the Zimmerman case mean that all community watches are bad, or even more than a tiny fraction.

However, being a community watcher does not mean a person cannot do evil and deliberately so. America certainly does not need more Zimmermans who let power go to their head so they become judge, jury, and executioner.

Heck, just because a person is a police officer or soldier does not mean the person is good. There are thousands of YouTube videos showing police officers committing heinous crimes including assault. Some police have been arrest and convicted of sexual assault, rape, and even murder while on duty. Soldiers can also commit murder. Just take a look at the current case of a US soldier who murdered 17 unarmed, innocent Afghan civilians including nine children. A uniform does not mean a person can't be evil.

No America does not need more Zimmermans. It needs more cameras. One in every hand that is recording to the cloud so that no crime can be done. Criminals, whether they wear a uniform or not, hate cameras. When everyone has an app that records real time to the cloud, people will be a lot more cautious of the threats they make. Luckily, camera are getting cheaper all the time.

Dan8267 says

No America does not need more Zimmermans. It needs more cameras. One in every hand that is recording to the cloud so that no crime can be done. Criminals, whether they wear a uniform or not, hate cameras

A photographer for the ABC station in San Francisco was attacked while covering a fatal shooting Thursday next to the Occupy Oakland encampment, the station said.

According to KGO-TV, the camera operator was beaten shortly after the shooting, which did not appear to be related to the protest or to campers at the demonstration site.

"Some members of the movement became hostile to the media trying to document the scene. In fact, ABC7 photographer Randy Davis got punched several times in the head," KGO said.

http://www.enQIRVmFPBc&feature=g-u-u&context=G2e60147FUAAAAAAABAA

Bap33 says

and normally you can anchor your arguement, but not this time.

I feel the opposite. I know of instances where emotion skews Dans arguments, such as in the case of religion, or Obama (which I agree with - but just not nearly to the absolute degree).

But in this case Dan is on solid ground. It's a no brainer. It has come out that the main investigator wanted to arrest Zimmerman on charges of manslaughter.

Bap33 says

Zimmerman was acting as a defender of his neighborhood, instead of closing the blinds and allowing the area to turn into East L.A. or Compton.

This is just as big or bigger an assumption in your case as the ones you state.

But even if true, he isn't and wasn't a cop. One version of the story is that he tried to hold MArtin, for police, making essentially a citizens arrest. Face it, he had a sense of power and was involved in behavior that was not his right. In my view that behavior is far more criminal than anything Martin was likely involved in (and I'm talking before the murder).

Even trained police sometimes abuse their power. But what, you think we should all be given guns and can go around randomly confronting suspicious people, and just kill them if they don't cooperate ?

The whole "3 school suspension incidents" just doesn't make much of a case. Were they 3 cases of fighting? No, the only thing mentioned is in one, there was marijuana possession. I've never perceived stoners as particularly prone to confrontation. But OK he's a young man maybe there's a bit of fight in him.

Regardless don't expect this to go away just because there's a few skeletons in Trayvon's closet. I think most people have no idea how strongly this story resonates with African-Americans, and expect this to have a far larger impact than Rodney King.

thomas.wong1986 says

A photographer for the ABC station in San Francisco was attacked

Nevertheless, cameras are the most effective tools for deterring crimes, especially when they are recording remotely so there is no possibility of destroying the recording. In your example, was the camera uploading the recording to a remote server?

Dan8267 says

And that is why I hate social conservatism. A boy with his entire life ahead of him, snuffed out because of some stupid reptilian xenophobia.

1. You dont know all the facts
2. Liberalism is destroying the country, not conservatism.

Dan, you just said that cameras are the most effective tools for deterring crime. I disagree. I see it this way, strengthening families and neighborhoods, punishing criminals swiftly and surely, controlling illegal drugs, and a society that is armed and ready and willing to defend itself is the most effective way to deter crime. The Death Penalty is the most effective way to end repeat offenders.

I have a honest question for anyone here who is a liberal.

1. Why do liberals hate guns? States with more lax gun laws are safer than states with strict gun laws. Why does Wyoming have a lower crime rates than DC? Both maintain the same population.

FaithInHim says

Dan8267 says

And that is why I hate social conservatism. A boy with his entire life ahead of him, snuffed out because of some stupid reptilian xenophobia.

1. You dont know all the facts
2. Liberalism is destroying the country, not conservatism.

The highest percentage of abortions are in the negro group. I submit that those murdered babies had their entire life ahead of them. That's what liberalism does for the negro population.

A 17 year old male negro does not have a very good chance of remaining alive and free and healthy for very long due to the criminal element that is found in that group.

Please support the United Negro College Fund. Thank you.

Peter Schiff is right that this case is about whether or not the shooting was in self-defense. However, he is wrong that race is not an issue in this case because it shows criminal intent, and intent is important in the eyes of the law.

"It shouldn't matter what is in his mind." Actually, it does matter what is in the mind. Whether or not you murder someone because you hate him personally or his race is irrelevant. But to premediatively kill someone is first degree murder. To kill someone delibertly but without forethought in the heat of the momement is voluntary manslaughter. To kill someone only to defend yourself or another is not a crime. And that's why what the state of mind of the killer matters in court.

Furthermore, Peter Schiff is blaming the victim. Whether or not Martin was suspended from school is irrelevant to the case as that has nothing to do with the incident. Whereas, Zimmerman going on a coon hunt certainly is relevant to the incident.

Just because Zimmerman murdered a black minor for racial motivations does not mean the whole world thinks that any black guy being shot is racially motivated. But this particular case is.

As for Peter's re-enactedment, it's all conjecture.

"I'm a young black man in a hoodie, I might look suspecious." That wouldn't be racist if it weren't for the black part. The race part makes it racist.

"A lot of crimes are committed by young black men." Fine, but going from that statement to "a particular black man must be criminal" is pre-judging or prejudice. The majority of young black men do not commit crimes.

The bottom line is that Zimmerman created the situation, whatever it was, and stand-your-ground was not intended for that.

Bap33 says

Dan, you just said that cameras are the most effective tools for deterring crime. I disagree. I see it this way, strengthening families and neighborhoods, punishing criminals swiftly and surely, controlling illegal drugs, and a society that is armed and ready and willing to defend itself is the most effective way to deter crime.

Actually you are both wrong. The most effective way of deterring crime is family planning so unwanted children are not born -- this includes the use of abortion.

Bap33 says

The Death Penalty is the most effective way to end repeat offenders.

It has the same effect as life in prison without the possibility of parole and life without parole is significantly cheaper than the death penalty.

FaithInHim says

I have a honest question for anyone here who is a liberal.

While I am not a liberal per-say I have an honest answer for you.

FaithInHim says

Why do liberals hate guns?

They don't.

FaithInHim says

1. You dont know all the facts

You don't know all the facts.

FaithInHim says

2. Liberalism is destroying the country, not conservatism.

While this issue is more complex than lib v. con "who is destroying the country", the GOP (i.e.- "modern" conservatives) is doing more damage to this country than "liberals".

FaithInHim says

Let me list all the things liberals have done to destroy this country

Hmmm... Let me see the list of things that you are correct about.

FaithInHim says

1. Safe sex education=high std and pregnancy rates

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

2. Detroit

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

3. Gay rights=destruction of marriage

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

4. Prayer banned in schools=kid shooting rampages

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

5. Separation of church and state=Obama presidency

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

6. Fair housing for everyone=Section 8 and crime spreading

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

7. Welfare= life time laziness

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

8. Legalize marijuana=drug abuse rates skyrocketing

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

9. Abortion=nice word for racial cleansing

Wrong.

FaithInHim says

10. Gun bans=higher crime rates.

Wrong.

And apparently the list can go on.

FaithInHim says

Sorry, this was the fault of liberals, not conservatives.

Sorry, no it is not.

Bap33 says

Dan, you just said that cameras are the most effective tools for deterring crime. I disagree. I see it this way, strengthening families and neighborhoods, punishing criminals swiftly and surely, controlling illegal drugs, and a society that is armed and ready and willing to defend itself is the most effective way to deter crime. The Death Penalty is the most effective way to end repeat offenders.

The things you mentioned are tools but vague goals. And the goals may be good, despite being vague (what does it mean to strengthen a neighborhood?). However, as far as tools go, a camera is a pretty effective one.

As for the death penalty, there has been no evidence that it deters crime, and plenty of studies say that is does not. The chief problem with the death penalty is that if you kill an innocent person, you can't undo it. And that's already happen, probably thousands of times, but we have absolute proof that it has happened at least once.

Nevertheless, doing what you suggest is not mutually exclusive with everyone having a smart phone with video recording and real-time uploading capabilities. So why argue?

I will agree that had Martin been armed, he might still be alive today. Then again, Zimmerman might not be. I think Zimmerman would have thought twice had Martin been carrying an AK47 on his shoulder.

leoj707 says

Actually you are both wrong. The most effective way of deterring crime is family planning so unwanted children are not born -- this includes the use of abortion.

If we're expanding the scope of the conversation to find the most effective ways of preventing or deterring crime, then I say we go to the source.

The primary cause of violent crime is poverty. Eliminate poverty and violent crime will be rare.

leoj707 says

It has the same effect as life in prison without the possibility of parole and life without parole is significantly cheaper than the death penalty.

I didn't believe this when I read it, so I looked it up. You're right. It does cost more to do the death penalty. Surprising, but true.

http://www.deathpenalty.org/section.php?id=13
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
http://www.ncadp.org/affiliate.cfm?affID=23

Still, the expense isn't what's important. Had the death penalty be cheaper, I would still be weary of it.

It is fascinating that liberals (even if white) seem quick to see what they think is an obvious racist component to this (on Zimmerman's part) and also tend to think that it's extremely likely that Zimmerman committed murder.

And hardcore conservatives seem quick to want to defend that Zimmerman may have been within his rights and that the "stand your ground" law (or whatever it's called) may apply.

Forgetting whos view is correct, can we agree how fascinating it is that something so removed from politics seems, at least for many, to fall this way ? Really it is kind of astonishing. From what I have heard a lot of talk radio chatter has been in defense of Zimmerman.

Vicente says

I think most people have no idea how strongly this story resonates with African-Americans, and expect this to have a far larger impact than Rodney King.

This is very true, and it points to how clueless the idiots are who criticize Obama's "if I had a son" comments.

This incident happened on February 26, and blew up big time among African Americans on social media for weeks before it the hit mainstream media.

As someone who works with children, I can only say about Zimmerman, what a completely sick and ignorant asshole Zimmerman (the other child in the story) is. (and Bap - you really should be ashamed of yourself).

Dan8267 says

The primary cause of violent crime is poverty. Eliminate poverty and violent crime will be rare.

The gang violence you see isnt about being in poverty but drugs, money and protecting their turf. And they will kill anyone including bystanders when someone tries to take over their turf. Fact it is a pretty big money making enterprise and organization on its own. Your area of Florida, is the old Gambino family turf.

FaithInHim says

I have a honest question for anyone here who is a liberal.

1. Why do liberals hate guns?

What do you mean by liberal? I'm a social liberal, which means I believe that as long as adults aren't hurting anyone, they should be able to do what they want free of government interference.

I'm a political conservative in that I think government should be small, transparent, and have only the power necessary to do the specific things it is tasked with. Being a political conservative means I have to be a social liberal. After all, a small government does not interfere with what consenting adults do behind close doors.

I'm also a secularist, which means I believe in an absolute separation of church and state. Does that make me liberal or conservative? I thought it made me both.

I also believe in low taxation and low spending, but I want the rich to be taxed more than the poor and middle class. So do I count as liberal or conservative to you?

I don't believe in bailouts, but I do believe in investing in infrastructure, education, technology, and capital goods. I hate the Keynesian obsession with "stimulus", but I would support the Austrian economics idea of spending in areas that will yield a beneficial long-term return. In other words, don't pay men to dig a whole and fill it up, pay them to build an island and then put hotels and tourist attractions on it.

I also believe in conserving the environment like Republican president Teddy Roosevelt, not because I like to hug trees, but because I like to breath clean air and live a long life. Does that make me a conservative or a liberal?

Well, whatever you decide. I don't hate guns. But I do hate the violence glorifying gun culture that America has. Other countries, notable the Swiss, have lots of guns but they have a more rational and respectful culture towards the gun. America, has a shoot 'em up cowboy/gangster culture which is highly repugnant. Personally, I wish America was more like Switzerland when it came to guns, but we're not and I don't know how to make us like them.

FaithInHim says

Why does Wyoming have a lower crime rates than DC? Both maintain the same population.

Yeah, but not the same population density! I think that answers your question.

Population density X poverty = violent crime

thomas.wong1986 says

The gang violence you see isnt about being in poverty but drugs, money and protecting their turf.

What the...?

How many gang bangers do you think come from middle class backgrounds ? The values and beliefs that cause someone to take school seriously and to see mainstream economic success as an option are entirely about socioeconomics. That is, middle class kids tend to usually grow up with these beliefs, those in poverty often don't. This is true, not to suggest it's simple or that this explains everything about violence.