'Florida'

[scribblet]

What gets me is the mob mentality, maybe they should’ve not bothered with a trial ‘cos everyone assumes he’s guilty? Maybe they should’ve just lynched him when he was first caught and saved time and effort going through a justice system

This is from Derryck Green, a black American.

http://derryckgreen.net/2013/07/13/george-zimmerman-verdict/

The jury has ruled- considering the evidence presented, and rightly in my opinion- that George Zimmerman is innocent. Despite the considerable emotion surrounding this case, justice has been served. Not “justice for Trayvon” and not “justice for George”; but simply justice.

To celebrate justice rendered in this case is not an admission or an articulation that Trayvon Martin deserved what happened to him that fateful night in February of 2012. As most will acknowledge, it’s a sad and unfortunate thing that Trayvon Martin lost his life resulting in his parents having to bury their son.

At the same time, George Zimmerman also did not deserve what has happened to him either. The death threats, the editing of the 9-1-1 tapes to make him appear as a zealous racial profiler; the releasing of his Social Security number, the tweeting of an address thought to be his by Spike Lee, the violent bounty offered by the New Black Panther Party, the dishonest projection onto him that he hunted Trayvon “down like a dog” simply because Trayvon was black, was simply unwarranted and unjustified.

cont..

[scribblet]

Well gee.... here is a woman who did "resort to her gun" to defend herself against an abusive husband.... and she didn't even hurt anyone....

And guess what? ...she is going to spend 20 years mandatory in jail. Oh, what else?... Well, she is black, but that has nothing to do with it, correct? ,

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

Probably not. The prosecutor is the same zealot who over charges and withheld evidence in the Zimmerman trial.

[Guest American Woman]

It's the motivation of the prosecutor in question, not the motivation of the criminal.

Yet it's the motivation of the criminal that's at issue in the Zimmerman case. The issue regarding the Zimmerman case is hate crimes and/or white on black verdicts being biased. As for the case mentioned, one would have to show that this is happening to Blacks as others get off rather than it being a one time scenario. I see no evidence of that at all.

If a white woman had fired a warning-shot to scare off an abusive white husband, do you think it's likely that she would be charged with a crime that would result in a mandatory 20 year sentence?

Could very well be. I see no reason to think otherwise. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? As I see it, it's more an issue of the "mandatory sentencing" than it is anything else. I think that when people make everything about race, the real issues are lost - and that's too bad. It's the mandatory sentencing that should be at the center here, not their being Black.

I think it's a reasonable question.

I don't, unless there's more to the story, which I've seen no evidence of.

I find it astounding that anybody, regardless of race, was charged with such a crime for firing a warning-shot, especially in a state where "stand your ground laws" are in effect. It's mind-boggling.

According to her husband, she shot at him. What if the shot hadn't missed? But yes, it would be the charge rather than race that one should be astounded over if they are to be astounded over such a thing. For me, it's not the charge that I find astounding, but the mandatory sentencing.

Again. I don't agree with the mandatory sentencing, but I don't condone taking a shot at someone under the circumstances either, and I think both of those factors are what's at issue here - not race. Too many people seem to want to make anything that isn't 'white crime' about race.

Edited July 18, 2013 by American Woman

[GostHacked]

Too many people seem to want to make anything that isn't 'white crime' about race.

Whitey does not need to be involved for there to be racism.

[Hudson Jones]

Stop pretending that there isn't a racism in United States.

Zimmerman, against the instruction of the police, initiated a pursuit of a stranger who was not committing a crime. Zimmerman would not have followed and confronted Martin if Martin was not black.

What's telling about this situation is that Zimmerman has been given more of a right to self-defense than his victim, even though it was Zimmerman who followed him and confronted him.

[Shady]

Stop pretending that there isn't a racism in United States.

Zimmerman, against the instruction of the police, initiated a pursuit of a stranger who was not committing a crime. Zimmerman would not have followed and confronted Martin if Martin was not black.

What's telling about this situation is that Zimmerman has been given more of a right to self-defense than his victim, even though it was Zimmerman who followed him and confronted him.

Nobody's saying that there isn't a racism in the United States.

The police didn't instruct Zimmerman, a dispatcher did. That's not the police.

Zimmerman didn't confront Martin. Martin confronted Zimmerman.

When somebody breaks your nose, mounts you, and slams your head against the ground, you have a right to defend yourself. Just because you think somebody is following you, doesn't give you the right to brutally assault someone.

[Hudson Jones]

Nobody's saying that there isn't a racism in the United States.

The police didn't instruct Zimmerman, a dispatcher did. That's not the police.

Zimmerman didn't confront Martin. Martin confronted Zimmerman.

When somebody breaks your nose, mounts you, and slams your head against the ground, you have a right to defend yourself. Just because you think somebody is following you, doesn't give you the right to brutally assault someone.

He had no right to defend himself from a suspicious grown man who was following him around and most probably saying things to him, but that same man has the right to kill with a gun, a person he followed around, as self defense.

Also, I recommend that you find some respect for yourself and change your profile photo.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Hudson Jones

[Black Dog]

Nobody's saying that there isn't a racism in the United States.

The police didn't instruct Zimmerman, a dispatcher did. That's not the police.

Zimmerman didn't confront Martin. Martin confronted Zimmerman.

When somebody breaks your nose, mounts you, and slams your head against the ground, you have a right to defend yourself. Just because you think somebody is following you, doesn't give you the right to brutally assault someone.

You keep repeating that despite not one bit of evidence showing it to be fact.

[bleeding heart]

There has been some obvious misunderstanding.

It has not been "proven" (nor did it need to be) that Martin instigated the situation.

We simply don't know who said what to whom, who moved this way or that, exactly when the weapon was drawn...none of it.

I mean, I'm as impressed as anyone by the notion of objective omniscience...but I remain stubbornly skeptical about it.

[Hudson Jones]

Following a person, in close distance, is confrontation.

What would any of you do if you were being followed by someone?

[Shady]

He had no right to defend himself from a suspicious grown man who was following him around and most probably saying things to him, but that same man has the right to kill with a gun, a person he followed around, as self defense.

Also, I recommend that you find some respect for yourself and change your profile photo.

Most probably??? Sorry, but that doesn't hold up in court. Beyond a reasonable doubt is what's needed. No most probably. Regardless, being followed or yelled at doesn't give you the right to physically assault someone. You don't need to defend yourself from words. Edited July 18, 2013 by Shady

[Shady]

Following a person, in close distance, is confrontation.

What would any of you do if you were being followed by someone?

No, it's not a confrontation. I'd keep waking until I got somewhere with more people around. I certainly wouldn't attack them.

[Hudson Jones]

No, it's not a confrontation. I'd keep waking until I got somewhere with more people around. I certainly wouldn't attack them.

To me and anyone else who I have talked to, it's confrontation.

If someone is following me in close distance to send a message that I'm being followed and monitored, I would turn around and ask them why they were following me.

[GostHacked]

Most of the time I am being followed closely is because I am standing in line for something.

[Shady]

Most of the time I am being followed closely is because I am standing in line for something.

In that case, apparently you're being confronted.

[Shady]

To me and anyone else who I have talked to, it's confrontation.

If someone is following me in close distance to send a message that I'm being followed and monitored, I would turn around and ask them why they were following me.

You can ask them anything you want. Just don't physically attack them.

[GostHacked]

So should I have the thread changed to Martin Zimmerman or Zimmerman Martin now?

[Shady]

Probably. I might start a new thread.

[Hudson Jones]

You can ask them anything you want. Just don't physically attack them.

Most of the story of what unfolded was told from only one perspective. It was from the perspective of the person who shot and killed. Did anyone see Martin initiate the physical attack? Martin probably did initiate because he's an aggressive black male, who smokes aggressive drugs such as marijuana.

[Guest American Woman]

Stop pretending that there isn't a racism in United States.

Stop telling me what to do.

Zimmerman, against the instruction of the police, initiated a pursuit of a stranger who was not committing a crime. Zimmerman would not have followed and confronted Martin if Martin was not black.

That's your opinion. No more, no less. And there's absolutely nothing to substantiate it.

What's telling about this situation is that Zimmerman has been given more of a right to self-defense than his victim, even though it was Zimmerman who followed him and confronted him.

Which I have acknowledged - and has nothing to do with race.

[Guest American Woman]

I did. It was deleted.

Seriously??

[Hudson Jones]

Stop telling me what to do.

Pretend all you want. I will continue to comment on you or any other person who I feel like making a comment about.

That's your opinion. No more, no less. And there's absolutely nothing to substantiate it.

We all know that Zimmerman would not have stalked Martin if he was white. You can pretend otherwise.

Which I have acknowledged - and has nothing to do with race.

Sure it does.

According to the Tampa Bay Times, people in Florida who kill a black person walk free 73 percent of the time in Stand Your Ground cases, while those who kill a white person go free 59 percent of the time.

[-TSS-]

Do you think that in some other state the verdict would have been different? After all, even though the laws differ from state to state they all have the principle that guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt and that was the main reason why the verdict was what it was. People see these verdicts in too black and white terms (no pun intended). A not-guilty verdict does not necessarily mean that the jurors believe that the defendant is innocent but only that they can't prove that he's guilty.

[cybercoma]

The fact that a black kid by nothing more than his very presence in Zimmerman's neighbourhood seemed suspicious enough to him that he armed himself and went in pursuit is pretty indicative of endemic racism in the US.

[Guest American Woman]

The fact that a black kid by nothing more than his very presence in Zimmerman's neighbourhood seemed suspicious enough to him that he armed himself and went in pursuit is pretty indicative of endemic racism in the US.

Nooooooo..... it doesn't seem that way at all. Every time bad judgement is shown doesn't = racism.