[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
[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.
[/quote]
Where?
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.[/quote]
Prove it.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.[/quote]
Yeah well, on a planet with a few billion people, shit happens.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.[/quote]
Yeah well, on a planet with a few billion people, shit happens. [/quote]
Yes it does. But how we react is key.
After an unjust tragedy, I’m not one to say, “Oh well, shit happens”.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.[/quote]
Yeah well, on a planet with a few billion people, shit happens. [/quote]
Yes it does. But how we react is key.
After an unjust tragedy, I’m not one to say, “Oh well, shit happens”.
[/quote]
I understand that, but if I have learned anything from history, any rash action will probably be idiotic.
We are rain forest apes, our instincts necessarily mislead us.
No need to worship them or to accept them as final answers.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
It was a modern-day lynching.
And whitey goes free.[/quote]
Yeah well, on a planet with a few billion people, shit happens. [/quote]
Yes it does. But how we react is key.
After an unjust tragedy, I’m not one to say, “Oh well, shit happens”.
[/quote]
The desecration of innocent until proven guilty is a tragedy indeed.
[quote]orion wrote:
I understand that, but if I have learned anything from history, any rash action will probably be idiotic.
We are rain forest apes, our instincts necessarily mislead us.
No need to worship them or to accept them as final answers. [/quote]
Instinct is being inherently suspicious of somebody because their skin is a different color than yours.
Higher intelligence is to acknowledge that within us, such bias exists. And to not only accept that, but do something about it, and learn to stop judging people by things they have no control over.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]BDSLift wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]BDSLift wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
I just want to say that nobody was there.
Who knows what happened.
Maybe the guy was racist and questioned the kid for no good reason and the kid gave empty threats, creating the perception of a threat the neighborhood watch took seriously.
And before “everyone said he was a good kid”, my mom and her neighborhood friends would say that too.
And gated communities aren’t shit. They are just neighborhoods with gates.[/quote]
Not 100% true. It must be a true possibility of harm before lethal force can be used. Just yelling threats is not enough. But this is something the cops would or should already checked on. So this goes back to the question what is the police report say. Because for this guy to be walking around free something more must have happened…or the cops just plain suck
Well a heated conversation even by a CCW holding Neighborhood Watch God and a Kid with skittles does not explain the Shooting.
Even in The Free State of Florida you need to explain how you felt your life was on the line to justify shooting a guy on THE STREET.
[/quote]
In Texas, all you need to use deadly force is the threat of bodily harm, even if only verbal.
The only other witness is dead of course but the watchman very well could’ve been within the law.[/quote]
[/quote]
Nope. If you receive a direct threat, you may use deadly force within the confines of the law.
Call the HPD non emergency line and ask your self defense rights if an aggressor threatens your life.
If you do it, ask objectively, don’t slant the answer with conjectured bullshit.[/quote]
Jesus Christ, stop acting like ANYWHERE in the continental US has definitions of “self defense” and “appropriate force” as loose as the ones in Texas. In the state of Texas, you can break into your neighbors house when they aren’t home in order to shoot a burglar who is in the process of robbing said house. This isn’t Texas, where even toddlers are encouraged to arm themselves for fucks sake, it’s Florida, a sort of southern state populated almost entirely by northern transplants.
Very interesting that the shooter wasn’t even taken in. Not very often you get to shoot and kill someone in apparent cold blood and just go home*. This guy may have gotten very lucky since there have been cases where 911 calls prior to a killing have been used to assert that premeditation existed.
*outside of the state of Texas[/quote]I don’t care where Florida law falls ultimately, if the boy did threaten the man, I support his decision to shoot in this arm chair jury conversation of conjectured opinions and projected insecurities.
[/quote]
If you believe being threatened by a kid is reason enough to kill someone, then you are one messed up individual.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
You’re assuming again. Who says the watch cruises around in attack mode? Cautious curiosity is more like it.
Cautiosly curios watchman responding to we don’t know what vs. teen with typical anti-authority attitude. My money says the teen escalated the situation. And for all you know, he was breaking out windows, snatching purses, slashing tires et cetera on his way home.
Just because he had skittles doesn’t mean anything. I eat skittles. I also use illicit drugs, sometimes simultaneously.[/quote]
If you think breaking out windoes, snatching purses or slashing tires is justification to kill someone, you are one messed up individual.
I’m angry no follow-up on this has come out yet…
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
You’re assuming again. Who says the watch cruises around in attack mode? Cautious curiosity is more like it.
Cautiosly curios watchman responding to we don’t know what vs. teen with typical anti-authority attitude. My money says the teen escalated the situation. And for all you know, he was breaking out windows, snatching purses, slashing tires et cetera on his way home.
Just because he had skittles doesn’t mean anything. I eat skittles. I also use illicit drugs, sometimes simultaneously.[/quote]
If you think breaking out windoes, snatching purses or slashing tires is justification to kill someone, you are one messed up individual.[/quote]
I’m fucked up as all get out then.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
I’m angry no follow-up on this has come out yet…[/quote]
Unfortunately, I think that is where most of the fear lies. That no followup will occur.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
I’m angry no follow-up on this has come out yet…[/quote]
Just because charges haven’t been filed at this time it doesn’t mean they won’t be. People are jumping to far too many conclusions and reading way too much into the little bit of information that has come out.
There is a process to the legal system in this country that has to be followed and sometimes it takes time. The moment the police arrest the shooter and read him the Miranda warning there are certain rights that come into play. Such as the right to a speedy trial. Which means they have a limited amount of time to get him into court. If they have not completed their investigation sufficiently to obtain enough evidence to get a conviction the defense could get the case thrown out due to insufficient evidence.
Once they Mirandize him it changes their ability to question the shooter who at this time is also the primary witness. Post Miranda he has the right to remain silent. Which means he doesn’t have to retell his version of events and give the police the chance to pick out inconsistencies with the previous version.
The police have to be careful what they say about the incident lest they be accused by the defense of prejudicing the jury pool. It’s possibly why they haven’t released the recording of the 911 call so it can be played on every news station in the country.
Because the shooter is a criminal justice student this is one of those cases where it is probably going to be very difficult to get a conviction. ie Drew Peterson. It took a long time to finally charge him because he knew how to make things difficult for investigators.
Based on recent information it looks like the kid saw this guy coming at him and thought he was in danger. Then they started fighting and the dude capped him.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Based on recent information it looks like the kid saw this guy coming at him and thought he was in danger. Then they started fighting and the dude capped him.
[/quote]
Irony is strong here. Self-appointed neighborhood watch captain strives to reduce crime and follows a kid walking home and, in reaction to being followed by a stranger, the kid reacts to defend himself and the SANWC kills him (after menacing the kid) and increase crime in the neighborhood.
If the shooter was ever in danger he put himself there by not follow the police’s instructions, getting out of his car (which offered some protection from the kid), approaching the kid in a way that appears to have been menacing and in a resulting altercation kills the kid. It does not matter at this point why exactly the shooter thought the kid was suspicious- the shooters actions demonstrates all sorts of assumptions and the basic inability to avoid escalating the situation. The key assumption here that cannot be avoided, the shooter assumed he had the right to kill someone (not on his property), for what else explains his actions.
Sifu is right.
Apparently, he has been very cooperative to this point. It makes little sense to arrest him when he is willing to talk without a lawyer keeping him from mentioning anything incriminating… so why blow that advantage?
Oh, right. It’s racist cops protecting racist perps.
Currently, my understanding is that there is some witness testimony to corroborate the physical evidence supporting a “self-defense” scenario. The 911 call will be released after the detectives have collected everything they need from the witnesses so as to not risk influencing their accounts of the event.
[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]
I’ve had to deal with it my whole life. Probably not as bad as you or your family has, but I’ve felt it plenty myself and my sister has lots of stories as well. Which is probably why I’m as passionate about it as you are, because I’ve seen it from both sides. Trust me, I don’t like it any more than you do, racism and stereotyping (negative stereotypes, at least, noone ever bitches about positive stereotypes) is something I’d like to think the majority of our culture has moved past. You’d be naive to think everyone has, but sometimes I’m reminded that we’re not as far along nowadays as I thought we were and that makes me sad and angry.
At least now you’re describing it as your opinion, instead of talking about it like you were the fly on the wall watching the whole thing and saying it’s a fact that it was due to race.
It probably WAS due to race. I just don’t think it’s right to jump to that conclusion because there’s plenty of other explanations for his actions and we don’t know the whole story. I was brought up to give people the benefit of the doubt if you don’t know for sure.
I’m just using empathy. Were I caught up in some similar drama (it wouldn’t be this specific story, since I would’ve stayed my ass in the car when the police told me to) that could be translated as me acting on race, I wouldn’t want people to think I did something because the other person or people involved were a different race than I was. I’d hope people would give me more credit than that and I know my friends and family would, but it would be nice if we could get to a point where strangers give you that credit too, instead of condemning you off the break when they weren’t there and didn’t see how it went down.
And to answer your question, I’d like to think that if THE EXACT SAME THING happened, except with a black guy being the neighborhood watch captain/shooter and the visiting teenager being white, that for whatever reason he hasn’t been arrested yet, that the police would be taking the same approach with him regardless of what race he was. I’d like to give the police that credit without assuming they wouldn’t. Would they actually do that? I’m not sure, but I can honestly say that I’d give them enough credit to think it would go down the same way, were the roles reversed racially.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
I’m angry no follow-up on this has come out yet…[/quote]
Just because charges haven’t been filed at this time it doesn’t mean they won’t be. People are jumping to far too many conclusions and reading way too much into the little bit of information that has come out.
There is a process to the legal system in this country that has to be followed and sometimes it takes time. The moment the police arrest the shooter and read him the Miranda warning there are certain rights that come into play. Such as the right to a speedy trial. Which means they have a limited amount of time to get him into court. If they have not completed their investigation sufficiently to obtain enough evidence to get a conviction the defense could get the case thrown out due to insufficient evidence.
Once they Mirandize him it changes their ability to question the shooter who at this time is also the primary witness. Post Miranda he has the right to remain silent. Which means he doesn’t have to retell his version of events and give the police the chance to pick out inconsistencies with the previous version.
The police have to be careful what they say about the incident lest they be accused by the defense of prejudicing the jury pool. It’s possibly why they haven’t released the recording of the 911 call so it can be played on every news station in the country.
Because the shooter is a criminal justice student this is one of those cases where it is probably going to be very difficult to get a conviction. ie Drew Peterson. It took a long time to finally charge him because he knew how to make things difficult for investigators.
[/quote]
I was going to say something along these lines (that hopefully the police are doing their due diligence by investigation before charging), but you said it much better than I could.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets charged with something lesser if there isn’t enough evidence to go with murder or manslaughter. With the publicity this is getting, I’m sure there will be political pressure on the DA to go after this guy with anything and everything they can (which is unfortunate if it was indeed justified).
[quote]waldo21212 wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
I’m angry no follow-up on this has come out yet…[/quote]
Just because charges haven’t been filed at this time it doesn’t mean they won’t be. People are jumping to far too many conclusions and reading way too much into the little bit of information that has come out.
There is a process to the legal system in this country that has to be followed and sometimes it takes time. The moment the police arrest the shooter and read him the Miranda warning there are certain rights that come into play. Such as the right to a speedy trial. Which means they have a limited amount of time to get him into court. If they have not completed their investigation sufficiently to obtain enough evidence to get a conviction the defense could get the case thrown out due to insufficient evidence.
Once they Mirandize him it changes their ability to question the shooter who at this time is also the primary witness. Post Miranda he has the right to remain silent. Which means he doesn’t have to retell his version of events and give the police the chance to pick out inconsistencies with the previous version.
The police have to be careful what they say about the incident lest they be accused by the defense of prejudicing the jury pool. It’s possibly why they haven’t released the recording of the 911 call so it can be played on every news station in the country.
Because the shooter is a criminal justice student this is one of those cases where it is probably going to be very difficult to get a conviction. ie Drew Peterson. It took a long time to finally charge him because he knew how to make things difficult for investigators.
[/quote]
I was going to say something along these lines (that hopefully the police are doing their due diligence by investigation before charging), but you said it much better than I could.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets charged with something lesser if there isn’t enough evidence to go with murder or manslaughter. With the publicity this is getting, I’m sure there will be political pressure on the DA to go after this guy with anything and everything they can (which is unfortunate if it was indeed justified). [/quote]
The shot cannot be justified because the shooter pursued the kid after the cops told him not to. The shooter put himself in that position. He was not in an altercation until he put himself in that position. The kid was in his right to defend himself from what probably looked like a guy following him home - which is a dangerous situation the shooter caused.
It is really hard to argue self-defense when the whole scenario was caused by the shooter AFTER the cops told him to back off.