Zimmerman Trial

Use this forum to suggest topics, and to find others to debate with.

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:00 pm

Stat, i think youre relying on an impossible definition of necessity. How does riding around in your car with a gun and then profiling people and thrn getting out to confront them not constitute looking for a fight? In what world??
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25948
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:11 pm

First, he didn't get out to confront him. Second, lots of people ride around in cars with guns without looking for fights.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:26 pm

Statik, one doesnt need to be a mind reader. Actions speak louder than thoughts, and we can infer what people think and feel based on their behavior. Of course, we will be wrong some of the time, but that doesnt make the process pointless. If i tell you your girlfriend is cheating on you and you turn and punch a hole in the wall, i suppose without reading your mind i can't say for sure that you were angry, but absent evidence to the contrary, it's still a reasonable inference for me to make. I'm saying that based on what he did, including what he said, if follows that Zimmerman was itching to catch a bad guy that night. You and Fuse are putting forth the exact opposite as being an equally plausible scenario. i want to know specifically what it was he did or said that might reasonably lead one to such a conclusion? Was it because he was patrolling the neighborhood with a gun and calling 911 everytime he saw anyone who fit his bad guy profile? Was it because he ignored the 911 operator and continued to pursue Martin, eventually getting out of his car with said gun to do something that he seemed to think required a firearm? You think he just stopped following Martin, said "fuck this" and decided to go for a walk instead?

Can anyone know with absolute certainty what another person did or did not intend? Ever? No. If that's your point i take it. But when you ask someone to doubt what seems obvious to them based on the evidence they have, then it helps to have some contrary evidence of your own to point to.

Explain to me why else he got out of the car if not to catch Martin, and what you base that on.
Last edited by uglypeoplefucking on Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:32 pm

He got out to watch him until the cops came. I mean, it's telling that he called the cops at all rather than going vigilante. He took a gun to protect himself because he obviously thought Martin was up to no good. I actually agree that he wanted to help catch a bad guy that night. What I disagree with is that he was looking for a fight. The fact that he took a gun suggests otherwise.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:38 pm

statiktech wrote:He got out to watch him until the cops came. I mean, it's telling that he called the cops at all rather than going vigilante. He took a gun to protect himself because he obviously thought Martin was up to no good. I actually agree that he wanted to help catch a bad guy that night. What I disagree with is that he was looking for a fight. The fact that he took a gun suggests otherwise.


i didn't mean a fistfight - clearly he wasn't very skilled in hand to hand combat - but he was carrying a gun and profiling local teenagers. He was out to get someone.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:45 pm

If he was only keeping an eye on Martin til the cops came, why did he get out of the car? He was prepared to follow Martin, on foot, with a gun. After all how else was he going to successfully watch him until the cops got there? It's not like Martin was just standing in plain sight, not moving.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:47 pm

I don't even think he was looking for a confrontation. He was out to catch a criminal. If that's what you mean by "get someone", I suppose I'd agree. The question is whether he meant any harm.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:48 pm

uglypeoplefucking wrote:If he was only keeping an eye on Martin til the cops came, why did he get out of the car? He was prepared to follow Martin, on foot, with a gun. After all how else was he going to successfully watch him until the cops got there? It's not like Martin was just standing in plain sight, not moving.


Uh, yeah, he followed him to watch him. Cars can't go everywhere people can.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:55 pm

statiktech wrote:I don't even think he was looking for a confrontation. He was out to catch a criminal. If that's what you mean by "get someone", I suppose I'd agree. The question is whether he meant any harm.


I'd say he deliberately and unnecessarily put himself in a situation where it was likely someone would get hurt. He's not a cop (though we know he wished he was) but he was trying to catch criminals. In his mind, he probably wasn't out to do harm, but he put himself in a situation where harm would be the likely result.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:59 pm

statiktech wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:If he was only keeping an eye on Martin til the cops came, why did he get out of the car? He was prepared to follow Martin, on foot, with a gun. After all how else was he going to successfully watch him until the cops got there? It's not like Martin was just standing in plain sight, not moving.


Uh, yeah, he followed him to watch him. Cars can't go everywhere people can.


He was told it was not necessary to follow him. If he thought Martin was so dangerous, why was he following him from outside the safety of his car if 911 had already been called and the police were on their way? If Martin was a criminal, as Zimmerman believed he was, then how could Zimmerman not expect to provoke a fight following him on foot.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:10 pm

uglypeoplefucking wrote:
statiktech wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:If he was only keeping an eye on Martin til the cops came, why did he get out of the car? He was prepared to follow Martin, on foot, with a gun. After all how else was he going to successfully watch him until the cops got there? It's not like Martin was just standing in plain sight, not moving.


Uh, yeah, he followed him to watch him. Cars can't go everywhere people can.


He was told it was not necessary to follow him. If he thought Martin was so dangerous, why was he following him from outside the safety of his car if 911 had already been called and the police were on their way? If Martin was a criminal, as Zimmerman believed he was, then how could Zimmerman not expect to provoke a fight following him on foot.


He didn't want him to get away. Listen to his 911 call. He didn't expect to provoke a fight because he didn't expect a confrontation. Maybe he actually thought he was clever enough to avoid Martin. What he did was stupid. I'm not arguing otherwise.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:16 pm

Stupid but not negligent?
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:33 pm

Yeah, negligent too.

Look, I'm not defending Zimmerman. I'm just saying he wasn't quite the aggressor that everyone paints him as. He did some stupid shit and got his ass kicked. Had it ended at that, Zimmerman would be thought of as little more than a fool.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:24 am

You say he got out to watch him. Why couldn't he watch him from the car?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25948
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:14 am

Cars can't go everywhere people can.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Moreno » Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:50 am

statiktech wrote:Yeah, negligent too.

Look, I'm not defending Zimmerman. I'm just saying he wasn't quite the aggressor that everyone paints him as. He did some stupid shit and got his ass kicked. Had it ended at that, Zimmerman would be thought of as little more than a fool.

I Think this is a fairly likely scenario. He may have been worse than this, I can't see how he could have been much better, but it seems like a likely scenario. He shouldn't have a gun anymore and he should do Community service. Negligent and stupid is OK in many situations, especially if you learn from it. With cars or guns and Deaths, you should lose a priviledge. And then try to contribute something to make up for the mess you contributed to.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Jul 19, 2013 2:32 am

statiktech wrote:Cars can't go everywhere people can.


I mean at what point to we start talking about how he wasn't supposed to keep following him?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25948
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Fri Jul 19, 2013 11:53 am

Moreno wrote:
statiktech wrote:Yeah, negligent too.

Look, I'm not defending Zimmerman. I'm just saying he wasn't quite the aggressor that everyone paints him as. He did some stupid shit and got his ass kicked. Had it ended at that, Zimmerman would be thought of as little more than a fool.

I Think this is a fairly likely scenario. He may have been worse than this, I can't see how he could have been much better, but it seems like a likely scenario. He shouldn't have a gun anymore and he should do Community service. Negligent and stupid is OK in many situations, especially if you learn from it. With cars or guns and Deaths, you should lose a priviledge. And then try to contribute something to make up for the mess you contributed to.


Well, his own wounds were superficial, yet he shot Martin through the chest. i can't help but question if he needed to do that? Did he have a chance to aim, and was that the only place he could get the shot off? He only fired one round after all, and it was fatal, which makes me think that in the moment he fired the gun he intended to kill him. Could he have shot him in the leg to incapacitate him instead? If we can agree that he was negligent in attempting to follow Martin, how can we simply dismiss the fact that he shot and killed him as though it were his only choice, and as if there was no negligence involved in his decision to kill him? i'm not a legal expert, but it still seems like a case for manslaughter to me.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:58 pm

Smears wrote:
statiktech wrote:Cars can't go everywhere people can.


I mean at what point to we start talking about how he wasn't supposed to keep following him?


Nobody said he was. The question is why he kept following. I don't think you have enough evidence to conclude that he meant Martin harm.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby PavlovianModel146 » Fri Jul 19, 2013 2:04 pm

Smears wrote:Pav, what reason over which Martin had any control, was Zimmerman following him for?

Or was it all just Zimmerman being a mistaken overzealous profiler?


He may have been a mistaken overzealous profiler, but Martin was still dressed in a, "Gangsta," type of way. I'm not condoning extra suspicion of someone based upon how he is dressed, but the fact remains that some people will be more suspicious of a person dressed in such a manner.

An extreme example would be if I walked into 7-11 wearing a ski mask, I don't believe that's inherently illegal, but the clerk will naturally assume I am there to rob the place. That doesn't make the clerk correct, it simply means that different manners of dress will result in different people making varying assumptions. Of course, that's also why I don't wear a ski mask into 7-11. Martin projected a certain image (allegedly) and Zimmerman really bought into it.
"Love is the gravity of the Soul" - Abstract -/-/1988 - 3/11/2013 R.I.P

Image
User avatar
PavlovianModel146
Ringing The Bell
 
Posts: 7084
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:56 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Fri Jul 19, 2013 3:21 pm

I have long watched what I wore to avoid violence against me, I'm so used to the idea that I can't wear what I what when I want I almost take it for granted. The disposition I face almost seems to be the opposite of those who get problems from wearing sweatshirts with hoods and such. If I don't wear a sweatshirt I'm more likely to get attacked. The older I get the less it matters, but it used to be I would wear a sweatshirt even when it was too hot to do so. Where's the NABTWEPHUOIA (National Association for the Betterment of Those Who can't so Easily be Pigeon-Holed by the Use of an Offensive and Inappropriate Adjective) when you need them?
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Orbie » Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:07 am

The president weighs in. The defense responds: by admonishing those who would wrongly interpret the president('s message.

There is so much opinion floating around in this case, innuendo, withwash (literally), argument counter argument, he did this, why didn't he do this, what kind of guy was he, his hear was in the right place,



We have a jury of six fallible women. Who are equally shrouded. The juror on tv made an arse out of herself when she said , I do declare, those kinds of people live like that. Referring to those kind of people there. Wherever there is. It sounded ignorant, and demeaning, and sounded like she was talking from platitudes.

The other jurors immediately disassociated themselves from her, probably out of fear of generalized opinions about them.

There is fear. Personal, gut wrenching fear, but now show of a substantial ability to back up opinion. The whole fiasco conveys an attitude of well, hell,your guess is as good as mine, no one was there, but the animation must have been the way it went down.$

Conjectures and admonishment about this could not possibly have happened with anything remotely connected to race.


What is going on? Does jurisprudence really think people on the street are that stupid? Give me a break.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Moreno » Sat Jul 20, 2013 5:13 am

PavlovianModel146 wrote:
He may have been a mistaken overzealous profiler, but Martin was still dressed in a, "Gangsta," type of way. I'm not condoning extra suspicion of someone based upon how he is dressed, but the fact remains that some people will be more suspicious of a person dressed in such a manner.

he had a hooded sweatshirt on. If that's gangsta, pretty much everyone I knew as an adolescent was a gangsta-clad, which most would have found amusing, probably a few cool. I mean, it's a very cheap comfy piece of clothing. Colleges often sell them with college logos. I blabbed all this earlier or in Another thread on the trial, but I mean really it's a nice versatile piece of clothing. Great to jog to the gym in Winter, and even work out in, great for coming home from the workout when a more appropriate coat would actually be too warm. I see upperclass women doing this and I hope they get profiled. I realize you said you didn't condone it, but it seems to me there is even a myth in the idea that he was dressed in a gansta kinda way. He was dressed in flexible outerwear that all classes and kinds of people wear, though younger people wear them in higher percentages. It's almost in the ballpark of saying a T-shirt is gangsta wear because that's what a lot of gangstas have under their hooded sweatshirts.

He was suspiciously clad in sneakers (runners) so we put his house under surveillance. Research has shown that Young criminals tend to wear sneakers.
He was wearing the typical gang tube socks so we frisked him.


I would love to see this kidn of profiling go down in the rich suburbs, no adding in race in the profiling, and suddnely there would be a million lawsuits against the city or security firms, with very pricey lawyers winning these lawsuits for the parents.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat Jul 20, 2013 7:29 am

statiktech wrote:
Smears wrote:
statiktech wrote:Cars can't go everywhere people can.


I mean at what point to we start talking about how he wasn't supposed to keep following him?


Nobody said he was. The question is why he kept following. I don't think you have enough evidence to conclude that he meant Martin harm.



I think the question is whether he did anything to make martin believe he may have been facing harm. If martin was afraid for his life, of this armed man who was pursuing him and verbally denigrating him based solely on his profile, then he may have been murdered while trying to defend himself. I guess the only witness is dead so no one can know.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 25948
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby xzc » Sun Jul 21, 2013 7:15 am

It seems the outrage and certainty of the race-conscious camp is over the fact that the court didn't take into account what they feel are the most important facts of the case. Namely those blank parts of the story for which we have no facts to reasonably fill in, yet they believe they can easily fill in and justify, because they have a good hunch about it, or maybe they just have a good sense for these things. Look, about the question of whether Zimmerman chased, confronted and tried to detain Martin, or whether Martin confronted and assaulted Zimmerman we have no way to justifiably say, but come on, man...you know?

#nojustice
Carcasse, tu trembles?
Tu tremblerais bien davantage, si
tu savais, ou je te mene.
User avatar
xzc
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3926
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:52 am
Location: Pale Blue Dot

PreviousNext

Return to Challenges



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users