Black Teen Shot by Neighborhood Watch

Off Topic
181

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

My dad is from Watts. It is a fairly not so good neighborhood in Los Angeles, California. As a kid I hated going to visit relatives. I was harassed and pushed around being a little blonde white girl in a predominantly black neighborhood. And that was just the tip of what they would call me. But then again I suppose if you look at it the other way, I was an outsider and all that happened was a lot of ugly words and some pushing and hair pulling.

Just actually am now thinking about that.

[/quote]

I’m not making light of your situation
but I grew up going to mostly white schools and even a mostly white church when I was a kid and have worse stories about both
especially at church.

That’s not a “black vs white” thing. That is a “that kid is different than us” thing
and that has no specific color and never did.
[/quote]
x2

182

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
Shit, I wish I could even think of one stereotype that’d make me piss my pants if I saw a white guy walking down my upper class hood. Damn! I can’t think of any.[/quote]

One of the MANY reasons why being white is the tits.

FYI[/quote]

Hahaha!!

183

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
These stories always leave out a huge hunk of what went down so it’s hard to comment.

If the kid was a threat to his life yeah

Now the cops must have had a reason for not taking CCW watch captain in so I would like to hear why? [/quote]
Bump and edited for bias.[/quote]

Hehehe well thank you for admitting you cut up my orig post at least.

Not sure what the point is though because if they struggled he could have felt the kid would get his gun so heb shot him. But he put himself in that situation by walking up to a kid with a loaded gun.

The cops had a reason to not arrest the guy. Does not mean it was a good reason. In NY the cops had a reason for shooting a man in his on doorway 45 times. When he went to pick up his wallet they thought it was a gun
 It wasn’t it. And he was not guilty of anything but picking up a wallet.
But they did have a reason just not a good one.

So what was your point?

Playing devils Advocate is only valid if your points add up and you fell off target about 4 pages back.

184

[quote]anonym wrote:
Look, a self-appointed NW “captain” who carries a loaded firearm around with him to walk up and down a street in his gated community is clearly a wannabe vigilante who is itching for shit to go down regardless of skin color
 that alone makes it completely unsurprising that he put himself in that position in the first place and suggests to me that he is most likely a little bit off to begin with. Note that he was also arrested in 2005 on charges of battery on a cop and resisting arrest with violence
 while the charges were dismissed, it does suggest that he’s possibly got a crazy/violent streak in him.

Based on all that, I honestly wouldn’t put it past him to try and work over any strange teenager he saw walking around, if for no other reason than to whip his gun out and get off on a power trip quickie. This stranger just happened to be black.

What I find interesting is the horrified, hyper-reflexive, knee-jerk reaction to crucify the guy for a hate crime from the “white community” without second’s hesitation
 it’s like youtube comments for black on white crime with better grammar. That’s not to say that we should be shrugging and saying, “now, now, maybe that kid had it coming” – because Zimmerman CLEARLY dun goofed – but the speed at which whitey tried to distance themselves from the actions of this guy by flat-out refusing to entertain the idea of ANY cause OTHER than some shady racial vendetta is certainly funny, since these people are ALSO usually the first to talk about how they are just so darn mystified by how some people can’t get past skin color.

I mean, there are actually people arguing that it couldn’t possibly be because of anything else.

Again, though, I’m not suggesting there was no racial motive; we just don’t know for sure either way. What we CAN assume with reasonable certainty is that Trayvon Martin ran into a wannabe tough guy asshole in the wrong place at the wrong time. Anything beyond that and we’re just
 jumping to conclusions. Chart.[/quote]

Well what happened wasn’t a simply run in from a wrong guy at the wrong time.

Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.

185

[quote]BDSLift wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
These stories always leave out a huge hunk of what went down so it’s hard to comment.

If the kid was a threat to his life yeah

Now the cops must have had a reason for not taking CCW watch captain in so I would like to hear why? [/quote]
Bump and edited for bias.[/quote]

Hehehe well thank you for admitting you cut up my orig post at least.

Not sure what the point is though because if they struggled he could have felt the kid would get his gun so heb shot him. But he put himself in that situation by walking up to a kid with a loaded gun.

The cops had a reason to not arrest the guy. Does not mean it was a good reason. In NY the cops had a reason for shooting a man in his on doorway 45 times. When he went to pick up his wallet they thought it was a gun
 It wasn’t it. And he was not guilty of anything but picking up a wallet.
But they did have a reason just not a good one.

So what was your point?

Playing devils Advocate is only valid if your points add up and you fell off target about 4 pages back.[/quote]
The point is that you don’t know what happened to cause the incident or why, and that the police who do didn’t see a reason for an arrest, meaning it is not fair to crucify the guy for racism simply because of his race (racism).

The same point you made on page one. Playing devils advocate was and is valid, until posters try to change the subject and chase a semantical tangent in place of following the illustrated logical fallacies they are banking on.

Back that thing up and prove racism.

186

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

I’m not sure you either read what I wrote correctly or fully understand it.

Either way, you are misreading, misinterpreting and making commentary that has little to do with the substance of my post.

187

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Well what happened wasn’t a simply run in from a wrong guy at the wrong time.

Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

Also, where did you read he was in his house at the time?

All the article says was that he called the police and followed him in his car before getting out to confront him.

188

Jim Lahey “Trailer Park Supervisor” comes to mind when I envision this “watch commander” or whatever this guy is.

189

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Well what happened wasn’t a simply run in from a wrong guy at the wrong time.

Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

Also, where did you read he was in his house at the time?

All the article says was that he called the police and followed him in his car before getting out to confront him.[/quote]

To expand a little: this video states that there was a two minute difference between the initial 911 call and the shooting.

So, two minutes to make the call, grab the gun, get in the car, trail the kid long enough to get called out, get out of the car, confront him, argue, scuffle and shoot?

Crump and Jackson also said, “[Zimmerman] had no business patrolling his neighborhood like a cop with a gun.”

So, where’s your story coming from?

190

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
These stories always leave out a huge hunk of what went down so it’s hard to comment.

If the kid was a threat to his life yeah

Now the cops must have had a reason for not taking CCW watch captain in so I would like to hear why? [/quote]
Bump and edited for bias.[/quote]

Hehehe well thank you for admitting you cut up my orig post at least.

Not sure what the point is though because if they struggled he could have felt the kid would get his gun so heb shot him. But he put himself in that situation by walking up to a kid with a loaded gun.

The cops had a reason to not arrest the guy. Does not mean it was a good reason. In NY the cops had a reason for shooting a man in his on doorway 45 times. When he went to pick up his wallet they thought it was a gun
 It wasn’t it. And he was not guilty of anything but picking up a wallet.
But they did have a reason just not a good one.

So what was your point?

Playing devils Advocate is only valid if your points add up and you fell off target about 4 pages back.[/quote]
The point is that you don’t know what happened to cause the incident or why, and that the police who do didn’t see a reason for an arrest, meaning it is not fair to crucify the guy for racism simply because of his race (racism).

The same point you made on page one. Playing devils advocate was and is valid, until posters try to change the subject and chase a semantical tangent in place of following the illustrated logical fallacies they are banking on.

Back that thing up and prove racism.[/quote]

Nothing to back up.

He shot the kid because of the struggle I have posted that 5 or 6 times already.
Why he picked out this kid and decided to go against the police is the question

191

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

I’m not sure you either read what I wrote correctly or fully understand it.

Either way, you are misreading, misinterpreting and making commentary that has little to do with the substance of my post.[/quote]

I read all of what you wrote and agreed with most of it. The only thing I had question with was the simplification of how the two parties came together in your post. It was more than just wrong guys meeting at the wrong time.

One guy hunted down the other.

192

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Well what happened wasn’t a simply run in from a wrong guy at the wrong time.

Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

Also, where did you read he was in his house at the time?

All the article says was that he called the police and followed him in his car before getting out to confront him.[/quote]

You are correct. He didn’t leave his house he left his car after the police told him to stay away from the kid.

193

[quote]BDSLift wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

I’m not sure you either read what I wrote correctly or fully understand it.

Either way, you are misreading, misinterpreting and making commentary that has little to do with the substance of my post.[/quote]

I read all of what you wrote and agreed with most of it. The only thing I had question with was the simplification of how the two parties came together in your post. It was more than just wrong guys meeting at the wrong time.

One guy hunted down the other.[/quote]

I meant from the victim’s perspective. Martin was unlucky enough to be in a place where Zimmerman could confront him at a time when criminal paranoia would be the most heightened.

He was certainly zeroed in on after he was spotted; I don’t doubt that one bit. I read a report stating that there was a robbery or two within the past several weeks and that Zimmerman had stated something to the effect of “they always get away” in response to the 911 operator telling him to not intervene.

My impression is that Zimmerman was out looking for trouble and thought he could find some in a kid who didn’t belong in the neighborhood. Where this differs from popular opinion is that I don’t necessarily feel Martin’s race was as big of an issue with this as his unfamiliarity to Zimmerman. He was a stranger walking about at night in a neighborhood fresh from a couple robberies while a frustrated, power-tripping, self-appointed NW captain was trolling about in his car with a loaded weapon.

Reading into it any more than that at this point is an emotional response from black people who have experienced racism in their lives and from white people who are all too eager to show just how totally not racist they are by being overly-vociferous about what they think everyone else wants to hear
 because even attempting to make this about something other than race means you are a sympathizer at the very least.

194

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
No, actually, what you said was the whites didn’t mean to be racially offensive by throwing racial slurs.

That’s it’s either ignorance coming from you or just a way to downplay racism as you’d been doing in this thread. [/quote]
What?[/quote]

I was referring to another conversation we had.

195

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
Anyway, I have no time to go round and round in an argument. I gotta go fuck.
[/quote]

Lucky bastard

196

If I heard the exact same story with the races of the teen and man reversed. I would still think the man who shot the kid was likely racist. You don’t call the police because someone of another race is walking through your neighborhood that is predominately your race. That’s not cause to call the police and approach the person after the police told you not to.

And if this was a black guy killing a white kid in “self defense” he’d still be arrested.

197

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
As soon as you prove racial intent in light of accusations, the question ignored for like 10 pages now.

False conjecture is bullshit, isn’t it? Or only when someone else is using it?

Avoidance is cool and all, I understand your need to shift blame and your desire to turn fingers around in light of the fact you can’t answer for your baseless, sweepingly generalized, racially motivated accusations.

Show me the proof you’re asking for, which is my point in making absurd claims; illustration. You can’t.

I know you are capable of intelligent, objective, substantiated thought processes from what I’ve seen of you and I’m sad you are instead jumping conclusions, making baseless accusations and defaulting to racism.[/quote]

You, as a white man – who probably never experienced racial discrimination in most part of your life, or seen relatives close to you being treated like shit by whites bigots or the police due to ingrained social stereotypes – you are telling me that I should stop making baseless racial accusations and generalizations. Right. chuckles Yeah, we’re in the 21st century and America got a black pres. Racism is over. Stop making a fucking deal about it. Yada yada


Answer this question then, if you would; do you believe had a black man killed a white teen last night, he’d tranquilly be resting his ass in the comfort of his own home right now? Am I generalizing right there? Is this sort of scenario prevalent in America?

Discrediting someone’s opinion by saying they’re using the ‘‘race card’’ takes away the voices of people who have genuine concerns. So yes, I am saying that Zimmerman’s action and the police’s laissez-faire following his crime is racist. If you don’t agree, fine. Let’s just agree to disagree on this. But don’t tell me what my opinions, or anyone else’s should be and, trying to call me low, says more about you than it does about me.

198

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]BDSLift wrote:
Zim picked the kid out. Called the police and then disobeyed a police order to stay away and left his house to go and confront a unarmed child with a handgun.
That is Actually what happened and it’s from the news and the police. It’s more than just let me ask this stranger a question.[/quote]

I’m not sure you either read what I wrote correctly or fully understand it.

Either way, you are misreading, misinterpreting and making commentary that has little to do with the substance of my post.[/quote]

I read all of what you wrote and agreed with most of it. The only thing I had question with was the simplification of how the two parties came together in your post. It was more than just wrong guys meeting at the wrong time.

One guy hunted down the other.[/quote]

I meant from the victim’s perspective. Martin was unlucky enough to be in a place where Zimmerman could confront him at a time when criminal paranoia would be the most heightened.

He was certainly zeroed in on after he was spotted; I don’t doubt that one bit. I read a report stating that there was a robbery or two within the past several weeks and that Zimmerman had stated something to the effect of “they always get away” in response to the 911 operator telling him to not intervene.

My impression is that Zimmerman was out looking for trouble and thought he could find some in a kid who didn’t belong in the neighborhood. Where this differs from popular opinion is that I don’t necessarily feel Martin’s race was as big of an issue with this as his unfamiliarity to Zimmerman. He was a stranger walking about at night in a neighborhood fresh from a couple robberies while a frustrated, power-tripping, self-appointed NW captain was trolling
about in his car with a loaded weapon.

Reading into it any more than that at this point is an emotional response from black people who have experienced racism in their lives and from white people who are all too eager to show just how totally not racist they are by being overly-vociferous about what they think everyone else wants to hear
 because even attempting to make this about something other than race means you are a sympathizer at the very least.[/quote]

And I agree for the most part. But it goes both ways. To even say that the kids race made him more of a suspect to zim is almost looked at as calling Zim a Klan member to some in this thread.

199

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]Capricious wrote:
About 11-years ago or so, the man who essentially has taken over T-Nation, Chris Shugart, wrote an article called, “Be the Hammer”. I assume this is why his thread was called “Shugart’s Hammer”, or whatever.

In this editorial article, which if I’m not mistaken came on the heels of 9-11, Shugart, from Texas, extolled the virtues of initiating violence first rather than waiting to see if the person, or country, that you are afraid of has violent tendencies. Included was his account of gun-toting Texans, (including a pastor), and how you wouldn’t want to fuck with them.

The whole thing was a veiled reference for why we should attack any odd country in the Middle East that Bush and Cheney decided were a threat to the US, and ask questions later. Anyone remember how that turned out?

This story called to mind that article, and that simple, regressive mindset: that somehow it’s better to aggressively respond to perceived threats with basic self-protective instinct; that it is the right, courageous thing to do.

Except when it’s not the right thing to do at all.[/quote]
Yeah, we wrecked shop, dismantled the taliban, broke up violent “anti-western” support groups, eliminated a genocidal fascist and ushered the middle east in to the beginning stages of modern civilization although completing that work takes time.

It turned out pretty fucking awesome.

And, I bet you’re exaggerating. I doubt he alluded to indiscriminately killing on a whim, don’t be intentionally stupid.[/quote]

Awesome.

Whatever you smoke, I want some.

Because it seems to me like you shredded your constitution and the Magna Charter , reinvented Augustus “Firsts Citizen”, the Starchamber and the Spanish Inquisition, all for the low, low price of completely, utterly and irreversibly ruining your country with debt.

Bonus points for selling that debt to the Chinese, handing your balls over to your main rivals has a certain panache.
[/quote]
Let’s see China collect. Meanwhile, we will be restructuring a mineral rich region to our liking, with contracts ultimately assisting our bottom line.[/quote]

Yeah, of course you will.

Meanwhile they will not collect.

Whenever they deem it to appropriate they will sell. dollar denominated assets will plummet and hyperinflation might very well ensue.

And what can you do about, oh mightiest of nations?

Jack shit.

200

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
As soon as you prove racial intent in light of accusations, the question ignored for like 10 pages now.

False conjecture is bullshit, isn’t it? Or only when someone else is using it?

Avoidance is cool and all, I understand your need to shift blame and your desire to turn fingers around in light of the fact you can’t answer for your baseless, sweepingly generalized, racially motivated accusations.

Show me the proof you’re asking for, which is my point in making absurd claims; illustration. You can’t.

I know you are capable of intelligent, objective, substantiated thought processes from what I’ve seen of you and I’m sad you are instead jumping conclusions, making baseless accusations and defaulting to racism.[/quote]

You, as a white man – who probably never experienced racial discrimination in most part of your life, or seen relatives close to you being treated like shit by whites bigots or the police due to ingrained social stereotypes – you are telling me that I should stop making baseless racial accusations and generalizations. Right. chuckles Yeah, we’re in the 21st century and America got a black pres. Racism is over. Stop making a fucking deal about it. Yada yada


Answer this question then, if you would; do you believe had a black man killed a white teen last night, he’d tranquilly be resting his ass in the comfort of his own home right now? Am I generalizing right there? Is this sort of scenario prevalent in America?

Discrediting someone’s opinion by saying they’re using the ‘‘race card’’ takes away the voices of people who have genuine concerns. So yes, I am saying that Zimmerman’s action and the police’s laissez-faire following his crime is racist. If you don’t agree, fine. Let’s just agree to disagree on this. But don’t tell me what my opinions, or anyone else’s should be and, trying to call me low, says more about you than it does about me.
[/quote]

All circumstances remaining the same other than flipping race, yes, I think the black shooter would’ve been the same.