patrick.net

Bap33 says

The facts are currently being twisted as tight as a drum by the Jesse Jacksonites in an effort to legally lynch Zimmerman. As with all things the racebaitors do, facts do not matter.

He needs to be charged with at least manslaughter, and given a fair trial.

Bap, please recuse yourself from this thread because of your race issues and your gun issues.

THe normal and intelligent people are arguing in essence that he needs to be charged with Murder, or manslaughter and tried, and they are rightfully appalled that he hasn't been charged with anything.

The guy killed an unarmed teen, when any person with an IQ over 50 knows that it was not necessary.

("yeah, but,.. but,... maybe he was gonna bring friends back to hurt him if he didn't kill him." Right, like if he had such friends they wouldn't do much worse now).

I didn't realize until this thread how much of a frightened little girls some right wingers are. I miss the days when a fist fight would be a fist fight, without some scared little pussy pulling out a gun and killing the other guy.

But my common sense tells me that without Zimmerman having gun there wouldn't have even been a confrontation. Yes thats a guess, but it's a hundred times more likely than that Martin was a "prowler," also a guess.

marcus says

I miss the days when a fist fight would be a fist fight, without some scared little pussy pulling out a gun and killing the other guy.

I miss the day when our national culture, media and politicans would treat this sad incident with some perspective and restraint.

Is this really the most pressing issue facing America today to warrant all of this media coverage and division? Are there really tons of incidents of Hispanic neighborhood watch dudes killing unarmed African-Americans and not being prosecuted?

I'd wager there are over 1,000 cases of innocent black, white, hispanic, asian, indian folks getting murdered by gang members (of any race) each year with no arrests than cases like this Zimmerman/Martin situation.

Why does this story get so much more national attention while the other far more numerous cases of wrongful death don't?

socal2 says

Why does this story get so much more national attention while the other far more numerous cases of wrongful death don't?

You have a point. But I wonder, do you think it's really frequent that something like this happens? We know who the guy is that shot the unarmed teen. They mostly have only have his word for what happened, and it seems so very likely given even most of Zimmerman's story that this was not necessary.

You think there are a lot of such cases where the guy isn't even charged and tried for at least Manslaughter.

I personally don't think that happens very often. It takes a degree of incompetence on the part of law enforcement, and yes at least some institutional racism for something like this to happen.

It is just one case, I guess some might think it's trivial compared to all murders. But I believe that he will be charged and tried, so all this attention will be more productive than many of the things we obsess about.

marcus says

You have a point. But I wonder, do you think it's really frequent that something like this happens?

I don't think it is frequent at all. I think it is extremely rare. Hence no need for all of this national attention, T-shirts, tweeting home addresses, putting out bountys and even having the President of the US commenting on it.

FFS - we are even talking about it on a real estate blog.

There is far more injustice in America and on this planet occuring every single day that don't get a fraction of the coverage.

It's all politics. A "white guy" with a Jewish sounding last name shoots an innocent black guy, so Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson jump on a plane and gin up a bunch of racial division.......................all the while they (and the Media) are absolutely mute to the 1000's of cases of innocent black kids Martin's age getting killed in gang related crime.

socal2 says

gin up a bunch of racial division.......................all the while they (and the Media) are absolutely mute to the 1000's of cases of innocent black kids Martin's age getting killed in gang related crime.

Yeah, not feelin it. Those guys aren't mute to gang violence.

They see this situation as a symbolic. I don't know how much it stirs up division versus how much it creates awareness, especially among young people who hopefully haven't formed their racist biases too much yet.

Most kids these days don't see race through the same lens that a middle aged people do.

What media makes this out to be isn't necessarily what it is. None of us here were present at the scene of the crime. Just let the police handle the case without jumping to the conclusions.

marcus says

I didn't realize until this thread how much of a frightened little girls some right wingers are. I miss the days when a fist fight would be a fist fight, without some scared little pussy pulling out a gun and killing the other guy.

fists dont cut it when you have armed thugs .

Armed Homeowner Shoots Robbers During Daytime Invasion (AZ)

http://www.DuhKCiY-lu0&feature=related

What do the protesters want?

Allow teenagers to carry guns too?

They are easy targets because they have no way to fight back.

I don't know about the incident in question, but it sounds bad from everything I heard.

This "stand your ground" law sounds crazy the way the police chief describes it - is it really the case that there's no burden on a shooter to prove that he was threatened, that he can simply assert it and its up to the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he wasn't? Isn't that going to be nearly impossible in most cases?

bdrasin says

Isn't that going to be nearly impossible in most cases?

Go to Youtube and search for "Man (or woman) kills intruder"

or watch the above video posted.

Apparently if someone asserts that institutional racism may be a factor in the injustice of Zimmerman not even being charged with anything, that's "racebaiting."

Note: You will only hear racists say this.

Charge Zimmerman and give him a fair trial. This is called justice.

marcus says

He needs to be charged with at least manslaughter, and given a fair trial.

Yup. And that's why we need a trial. There is more than enough evidence to charge him, was from the moment the police arrived.

Other news: EMS report just leaked, no injuries on Zimmerman, second ambulance was cancelled. They only took Tray Martin.

Also: Zimmerman was fired from a Security Guard Job for being too aggressive.

Daily News so best treated with some skepticism:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ems-tapes-show-george-zimmerman-sustain-fatal-injuries-encounter-trayvon-martin-article-1.1053821

I think the theory that his unfulfilled dream of being a cop is the main cause for this whole situation.

thomas.wong1986 says

bdrasin says

Isn't that going to be nearly impossible in most cases?

Go to Youtube and search for "Man (or woman) kills intruder"

or watch the above video posted.

OK, that video was pretty cool. Mad props to the homeowner for being prepared.

On the other hand, I don't think it helps much with my concern. If someone's trying to break into a home that's pretty much a threatening by definition (even without the weapons and ski masks that these guys had). On the other hand, the sheriff seems to think the law is (and for all I know he may be right) "no arrest until we have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it was NOT self-defense".

In a public encounter, it seems to me there has to be SOME onus on the shooter to prove an actual threat...Zimmerman's story is that he got out of his car and pursued Martin, then changed his mind and headed back to his car when he was attacked. I don't know how you would prove that it didn't happen that way (particularly with no arrest, no chance to cross-examine him), but it sure sounds fishy.

bdrasin says

In a public encounter, it seems to me there has to be SOME onus on the shooter to prove an actual threat...

carry video on you or in your car, as police do these days.

Obama is trying to start a race war. Why? Maybe he wants to utilize his NDAA and instate Martial Law. Maybe this is more about being a distraction.

http://www.KMBs1NlqOf0&feature=digest_sat

"because Obama can't get people free houses and free cars like he promised"

I can't believe that moronic asshole has an audience.

If you want to believe a conspiracy, ask yourself why hasn't Zimmerman been arrested, so that he can be given a fair trial ?

By not arresting him, they put Obama in an awkward position, and totally cause this fiasco. Yes it's divisive, but the solution is for the right thing to happen.

I agree that we are seriously fucked over by media manipulation, but I believe that if anything the right wing powers that be see a political advantage to NOT doing the right thing and just arresting Zimmerman. Afterall, they do have a stronghold in FLorida. I'm sure by now the federal government has tried to influence things in that direction (toward an arrest and trial)

So just ask yourself why ? Why haven't they ?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-911-20120331,0,250481.story

Why would the media outlets show a cute 10 year old picture of a boy that does resemble Obama and then show an actual picture of Zimmerman at his correct age.

It's sad that the medias focus is to play a side against another side and the dumb public just falls for it. Zimmerman was Hispanic, why then are there "Cracker" T-shirts out there.

Why can't the media just report absolute unskewed facts? Why is it always about instigating an opinion to rally people against each other? Is that the only way that they can steal business away from the alternative media outlets who are stomping their butts with the stats? Why is there no focus on all of the other hate crimes out there? Is is because this cute 10 year old looks like Obama?

If this guy is guilty, there will be a jail cell awaiting him. That's a fact. However, for anyone, especially the president to inject himself into the picture is just wrong. Why has this become a race war? Haven't we learned anything from history?

Why can't it just be that a man in or not in defense of himself killed a young adult? What about the millions of others who are killed daily throughout the world and our nation that are not being reported on. My opinion is that skin color should just be tossed aside. Now let the media report on everyone who is innocently killed every day, even here in Calif.

solver says

an actual picture of Zimmerman at his correct age

The pictures are equally old, or possibly the Zimmerman picture is older.

dude .... 3 years is a MUCH bigger change at 14 to 17 than it is from 22 to 25 ... you know this, so lets move on.

Bap33 says

dude .... 3 years is a MUCH bigger change at 14 to 17 than it is from 22 to 25 ... you know this, so lets move on.

Yes physically. And fact: I don't care whether you are talking about girls or boys, at 17 they might have taken on nearly adult bodies, but they are still children.

If you worked with kids in this age group day in and day out, as I do, you would realize the very high likelihood that Martin was just an innocent kid. Even if he dabbled in non-innocent activities, he was an innocent kid. Yes, technically a child in my book.

Even 21 is still pretty immature in our culture, but 17 ? Much more so..

I cannot believe that someone is defending Zimmerman.
He carries a gun and looks for a fight.

This is the same reason why some people cheer when rent, oil and gold price go up.

These things are bad for humanity, but lots of people are "in it".

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/os-trayvon-martin-pictures-20120328,0,7277015.photogallery

http://globalgrind.com/news/trayvon-martin-family-sybrina-fulton-sanford-florida-photos?gpage=4

marcus says

Bap33 says

dude .... 3 years is a MUCH bigger change at 14 to 17 than it is from 22 to 25 ... you know this, so lets move on.

Yes physically. And fact: I don't care whether you are talking about girls or boys, at 17 they might have taken on nearly adult bodies, but they are still children.

If you worked with kids in this age group day in and day out, as I do, you would realize the very high likelihood that Martin was just an innocent kid. Even if he dabbled in non-innocent activities, he was an innocent kid. Yes, technically a child in my book.

Even 21 is still pretty immature in our culture, but 17 ? Much more so..

sorry, I was talking about the photo choice of the leftist media. Maturity is a whole nother issue,

Bap33 says

I was talking about the photo choice of the leftist media

Yeah those leftists really have a problem with assholes murdering children.

So what if they emphasize the kids youth, you know because of the morons that can't comprehend that he's a child (and not a scary negro).

So a lot of people have been talking shit about Martin. He was a black prowler in a hoodie with gold teeth, so he must have been an asshole who assaulted Zimmerman. Well, the evidence has come out to show those conjectures were complete bullshit.

Without getting all CSI on your ass, here's the links:

Funeral director says Trayvon's body showed no signs of brawl

EMS contradict Zimmerman's claims of violence.

This, coupled by the fact that Martin was shot in the back, means that all those talking shit about Martin owe his family an apology. Fuss up, you were wrong. Zimmerman was just a racist asshole, and Martin did nothing wrong.

I guess it must be hard for social conservatives to admit that given access to a gun, some assholes will just murder people they don't like for crappy ass reasons. Some people with no criminal history will use guns to commit crimes. Maybe that's not an argument for gun control, but rather for a well-armed society, but it's something social conservatives won't admit. Some of their gun-toting compatriots are just assholes.

wrong - again, Dan.

1) The suspected prowler wasn't in a brawl, he cheap-shot some chubby white/not white/hispanic guy in the nose and GRABBED his head and bounced it on the sidealk. Not much brawl or damage caused from those actions.
2) The shot in the back is possiblely the result of a fast reacting attacker trying to avoid the chosen form of defense from the target. Attacker picked the wrong target. Defender had no choice of time or place of attack, but did retain his choice of defense. If the attacker was not a coward, he would not have turned to run. Besides, the defender may have been a little dazed from the head-thumping on the cement. Ofcourse, had this all happened outside of Trevon's house at 3pm, as he was headed home from school, and as Zimmerman was headed from his KKK meeting, my opinion would change.

Bap33 says

he cheap-shot some chubby white/not white/hispanic guy in the nose

Yet there was no sign of a broken or bloody nose on the video.

Bap33 says

GRABBED his head and bounced it on the sidealk.

That would have left obvious physical evidence, and the EMS would have backed up the story instead of contradicting it. Head injuries are serious.

Bap33 says

The shot in the back is possiblely the result of a fast reacting attacker trying to avoid the chosen form of defense from the target.

So Martin is like the flash. Zimmerman shot at Martin while Martin was facing him, but Martin then turned around faster than a bullet, but not quite fast enough to evade the bullet.

And you think that's more plausible than Zimmerman just aiming for the guy's back?

The evidence shows that Zimmerman was the attacker and Martin was the defender.

If Zimmerman was really a concerned citizen, he would have been armed with a video camera. They are cheap and provide excellent defense for the lawful. And they aren't mutually exclusive with guns.

Hell, I say all guns should have built in cameras with wireless video transmission. You can't arm the gun unless the video has been rolling for at least five minutes. If you want the gun to be ready to use at all time, it must be transmitting video at all times.

The "new" ABC video shows all kinds of blood and injury to Zimmerman.

The descision to pull a weapon for defense and then the act of firing that weapon take time. The descsion to attack, and then runaway when the target pulls a weapon takes less time.

That part about gun-video sounds neat - but, as with all gun laws - only applies to those who follow the law. None of the supporters of the prowler respect the laws aginst lynching or posting bounties thus far. Any chance they respect gun laws?

Bap33 says

The "new" ABC video shows all kinds of blood and injury to Zimmerman.

Enhanced is another word for "altered" by humans or machines making guesses. Furthermore, such a video does not accurately reflect the real state of the wound, if any, nor does it show that Martin caused that wound.

Had the wound been fresh, it would be bleeding.

http://www.zVSxiTi6kf4

As the above video says, Zimmerman should have been covered in Martin's blood if his account were truthful. Also, Martin's hands should have been bruised. Really, forensic science is advanced enough to collaborate or disprove Zimmerman's account. So far, all the evidence points to Zimmerman lying.

wtf is this ?
Bap33 says

If the attacker was not a coward, he would not have turned to run. Besides, the defender may have been a little dazed from the head-thumping on the cement.

So weak. Now an unarmed guy running from a sociopath with a gun is a coward.

Bap33 says

None of the supporters of the prowler

Yeah, thats the best you've got Bap, calling a random teenager out at night a prowler ?

Once a racist jerk always a racist jerk. SOme people outgrow that particular type of evil. You may be single handeldy killing any small tiny little bit of respect I could find for a fundamentalist Christian. It's all about the hate and ingnorace (in other words the truest form of evil).

You're converting me Bap, because in my mind I previously thought you were some kind of a Christian. And I know you are. So this is what that means eh ?

The world is clearly upside down when I see some people here are defending the killer.

Zimmerman was carrying a gun and looked for a fight.
Martin was unarmed. (It will be different if he has a knife.)

Who is more likely to KILL you if you encounter them in a small conflict?

The gun makers try to confuse people with "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

Do you know how difficult for an unarmed to kill people?

How often do you read on a newspaper that an unarmed teenage kills a 200lb male adult?

Dan, nope. And you know it. Your picking a side to enjoy an arguement. I'm just pointing out facts without adding in the racebaitor games from the left. It is laughable that you touted the ABC vid as undeniable proof when it fit your template, and then discredit the vid when it proves your view false. The way CBS altered the 911 calls should result in prison time for hte racebaitors. Shooting a person in the trunk with a small caliber weapon will not splatter the shooter, and you know this also. At close range, a trunk shot is not a 100% kill shot - again, you knew that.

@marcus,
none of my positions are race based. All of your are. And that makes me a racist? Interesting view. Name calling is your weapon of choice, but you have to lay down your intellect to use it. If you notice, Dan can make points and mess with my points, all day long, and thus far does not attack me personally. My faith in God is what places me here, trying to keep the ship upright. Your inability to grasp basic right and wrong is, in part I think, due to your struggles with God's word ... or just the basics of right and wrong, good and evil. Zimmerman was acting as a defender ... he had a reason to be out walking the neighborhood in the dark, late at night, it was his DUTY and his RIGHT. If he was a Golden Gloves boxer, or an MMA champ, then he may not be stupid to undertake such a task unarmed, but doing his DUTY unarmed with be idiotic without having the WEAPONS of hand-to-hand combat skills. And, now you must know, that a 17 y.o. negro male in athletic condition is a MUCH more dangerous hand-to-hand combat WEAPON than a chubby 25ish non-athletic white/hispanic dude. That is why we send the 18 y.o. males to war ... they do it better than the older guys.

Please answer this: Why didn't Trevon have a weapon on him? Allow me: He did not feel threatened? He had no plans to use one? Why do you automatically place Zimmerman in the catagory of having a weapon becasue of a plan? He carried a weapon because: 1) It is his right to, 2) He was doing a DUTY that was dangerous, 3) It is smarter to be judged by 12 vs carried by 6.

Opinion: ((The BABY DADDY racebait MASTERS Al Jackson and Jesse Sharpten, along with SpikeLee and the idiots at CBS should be jailed for attempted murder, lynching, and inciting a riot.))

Bap33 says

Why didn't Trevon have a weapon on him?

Because he was going out for snacks. And he was 17 and didn't own a weapon.

Bap33 says

2) He was doing a DUTY that was dangerous,

Zimmerman wanted to have a DUTY, but never could because of his prior arrest record. So he named himself Neighborhood Watchman, just like I name myself Gardener. My Gardening is a hobby, not a duty.

Bap33 says

3) It is smarter to be judged by 12 vs carried by 6.

Until you go to PMITA Prison, where there are a lot of horny, evil guys bigger than you.

Bap33 says

1) It is his right to

Yep, he has the right to a firearm. However, he doesn't have the right to use on somebody else, except in self-defense. His pursuit of Tray shows that he went looking for trouble, rather than trouble found him.

Bap33 says

none of my positions are race based. All of your are. And that makes me a racist? Interesting view. Name calling is your weapon of choice, but you have to lay down your intellect to use it.

It's pointless. You still call Martin a prowler. AH, you might as well call me names if you're just going to be a troll about it.

You call AL Sharpton Jesse Jackson and others who only want to see Zimmerman charged names. You basically lie about how they don't care about lynchig and bounties. In my view only a rabid racist would make such comments.

What I said about your Christianity wasn't meant as name calling. I see your stance on this as proof that your ability to determine the difference between right and wrong does not exist.

You seem to think that if I feel Zimmerman murdered Martin(and I state this), that presuming Martin was a prowler is some kind of equivalence.
The thing is, I argue why it is likely that it was murder, because he should be charged given a fair trial. (which I have said about ten times).

Even if Martin was "casing" the neighborhood as a prowler, whatever that even means, Zimmerman is easily guilty of manslaughter. But still if you aren't a racist, then why the repeated use of the assumption "prowler?" All we really know is he was in the neighborhood.

And why do you believe that it's likely he attacked Zimmerman ? Does that really ring true for you ? Is it not obvious that Zimmerman easily could have provoked this, even if it's true ? Is it not obvious that if Zimmerman shot him for little more than being in the neighborhood and or for being "suspicious" and or rude, that he would make up a story about it being self defense ?

I could give you the benefit of the doubt that this is about your defensiveness about guns rather than racism (but I doubt it).

If you aren't a racist, answer me this.

Based on what we know (not what we wish were true), what's more likely ?

1) That Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter or worse.

2) That Martin was a prowler. (If that's to difficult to define - replace with "Martin had motives for being in the neighborhood that were not innocent").

Please, which of those two are more likely in your opinion?

Bap33 says

He carried a weapon because: 1) It is his right to

Yes, according to FL law he was allowed to carry a weapon.

Thought experiment for you Bap33. Let's say that you are in charge of deciding who gets a permit to carry a handgun. An application comes across your desk and in the background check are the following items:
1. Arrested for domestic violence
2. Received a restraining order from his ex-fiancee
3. Arrested for assaulting a police officer
4. Fired from security job for being too aggressive
5. Involved in a road rage indecent where the other driver was followed and thought they may be attacked
6. Self-appointed neighborhood watch captain; several neighbors complained how he is overly aggressive and followed "suspicious" people back to their homes

So, Bap do you grant the permit to carry?

Sounds like a guy you should not attack.

One of the likely scenarios.

Zimmerman calls police describing a suspicious guy who "might be on drugs."

Police tell him not to pursue (but does that mean they also said they would send cops to the scene ?).

Zimmerman approaches Martin and tries to hold him for police. (btw if Martin had some weed on him, would that have been reported in the media?).

Refusing to be held by Zimmerman (and maybe even aware that he has a gun, and not wanting to be held for police because of small amount of weed in his pocket - for consumption), Martin kicks his ass and then runs.

(Bap says this is cowardly - I guess in Baps world he should have killed Zimmerman).

MAybe martin was not just out for Skittles and an ice tea. Maybe it was to smoke a little and then go for the skittles and ice tea.

Just a theory that sounds very plausible to me.

clambo says

Sounds like a guy you should not attack.

SOunds like an asshole who would provoke "an attack."