[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
A police dispatcher has more than a neighborhood WATCH volunteer.
[/quote]
Others have said it, but police dispatchers have zero authority. Dispatchers are not sworn officers, and have zero training in state or federal laws. THe job of the Dispatcher is to get information that is relevant to the call, any interaction beyond that is to cover the ass of the police department. If for example your daughter is in the other room getting raped a dispatchers advice wont be much different from what they told Zimmerman, don’t do anything. This is due to anything the dispatcher tells you, the city,or county may be liable for during a civil suit.[/quote]
Again, from a legality perspective, I understand that. Just wondering from a legality standpoint, what authority does my neighbor have who is a citizen just like me but sees something he perceives as suspicious? I’ve have been to neighbrhood watch meetings because of my young children. Never have told anyone to approach and question suspicious activity. Watch and report. But some act as though Zimmerman had the “authority” to do so as a volunteer watchman. [/quote]
Neighborhood watch has the same legal authority as anyone else. Zimmerman certainly shouldn’t have gotten out of his car but, Zimmerman had no legal obligation to obey a dispatcher. What this case really amounts to is a altercation in which physical contact was initiated by Martin in a place where both parties had a legal right to be.
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
A police dispatcher has more than a neighborhood WATCH volunteer.
[/quote]
Others have said it, but police dispatchers have zero authority. Dispatchers are not sworn officers, and have zero training in state or federal laws. THe job of the Dispatcher is to get information that is relevant to the call, any interaction beyond that is to cover the ass of the police department. If for example your daughter is in the other room getting raped a dispatchers advice wont be much different from what they told Zimmerman, don’t do anything. This is due to anything the dispatcher tells you, the city,or county may be liable for during a civil suit.[/quote]
Again, from a legality perspective, I understand that. Just wondering from a legality standpoint, what authority does my neighbor have who is a citizen just like me but sees something he perceives as suspicious? I’ve have been to neighbrhood watch meetings because of my young children. Never have told anyone to approach and question suspicious activity. Watch and report. But some act as though Zimmerman had the “authority” to do so as a volunteer watchman. [/quote]
Neighborhood watch has the same legal authority as anyone else. Zimmerman certainly shouldn’t have gotten out of his car but, Zimmerman had no legal obligation to obey a dispatcher. What this case really amounts to is a altercation in which physical contact was initiated by Martin in a place where both parties had a legal right to be.
[/quote]
How do you know Martin initiated it?
[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
With this also comes the ideology that “blacks” should act white. That’s their culture, their system, their own. Who the fuck are we to walk in and say “nope, youre doing that wrong.”[/quote]
You must be the biggest libtard ever.
So let’s not change
- The high murder rate
2)Poverty
- lack of education
because it’s “their culture and we have no right to say they’re doing it wrong”
if you want to follow that logic then black people should just be left to suffer these circumstances and not be allowed to complain about it otherwise “we’re changing their culture”
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
A police dispatcher has more than a neighborhood WATCH volunteer.
[/quote]
Others have said it, but police dispatchers have zero authority. Dispatchers are not sworn officers, and have zero training in state or federal laws. THe job of the Dispatcher is to get information that is relevant to the call, any interaction beyond that is to cover the ass of the police department. If for example your daughter is in the other room getting raped a dispatchers advice wont be much different from what they told Zimmerman, don’t do anything. This is due to anything the dispatcher tells you, the city,or county may be liable for during a civil suit.[/quote]
Again, from a legality perspective, I understand that. Just wondering from a legality standpoint, what authority does my neighbor have who is a citizen just like me but sees something he perceives as suspicious? I’ve have been to neighbrhood watch meetings because of my young children. Never have told anyone to approach and question suspicious activity. Watch and report. But some act as though Zimmerman had the “authority” to do so as a volunteer watchman. [/quote]
Neighborhood watch has the same legal authority as anyone else. Zimmerman certainly shouldn’t have gotten out of his car but, Zimmerman had no legal obligation to obey a dispatcher. What this case really amounts to is a altercation in which physical contact was initiated by Martin in a place where both parties had a legal right to be.
[/quote]
How do you know Martin initiated it?
[/quote]
evidence says he did, whether he did or not we’ll never know but we have to go with the evidence
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
Lol Baltimore? Great example. Guess they represent all of Americas inne cities. [/quote]
What’s wrong with this example? Should I use a city I’m not familiar with?
I guess I was expecting some national statistics of inner cities as opposed to just certain places. Didn’t go to school in Baltimore but I have seen the wire lol.
The city you are familiar with just might be the worst example out there.
He didn’t follow and shoot. He only shot after his face was being beaten in. What does his job status have to do with anything?
[/quote
That’s the interesting part, thanks to my girl we taped every day of testimony on HLN, if Tray was on top of George with his knees up to george’s armpits, as his testimony in police report, how the he’ll he reach around legs to get gun? Go-go gadget arms?? All the while he is getting his head supposedly smashed into concrete? Prosecutor asked this also in closing argument. Speaking of head bashing, why did first csi agent on scene testify that she didn’t find any blood on sidewalk where George said his head was being smashed? Doesn’t matter at this point. Just found that interesting
He has no “authority” but he has every “RIGHT” to question someone who he deems suspicious, in his gated community, given the recent history. Hell, even Trayvon Martin had the right to question Mr. Zimmerman on what HE was doing in the gated community.
I agree but the operative word that was previously being used was authority, not right. That’s why I responded in that manner. That’s all.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
[quote]Hell-Billy wrote:
[quote]Cover_corner wrote:
A police dispatcher has more than a neighborhood WATCH volunteer.
[/quote]
Others have said it, but police dispatchers have zero authority. Dispatchers are not sworn officers, and have zero training in state or federal laws. THe job of the Dispatcher is to get information that is relevant to the call, any interaction beyond that is to cover the ass of the police department. If for example your daughter is in the other room getting raped a dispatchers advice wont be much different from what they told Zimmerman, don’t do anything. This is due to anything the dispatcher tells you, the city,or county may be liable for during a civil suit.[/quote]
Again, from a legality perspective, I understand that. Just wondering from a legality standpoint, what authority does my neighbor have who is a citizen just like me but sees something he perceives as suspicious? I’ve have been to neighbrhood watch meetings because of my young children. Never have told anyone to approach and question suspicious activity. Watch and report. But some act as though Zimmerman had the “authority” to do so as a volunteer watchman. [/quote]
Neighborhood watch has the same legal authority as anyone else. Zimmerman certainly shouldn’t have gotten out of his car but, Zimmerman had no legal obligation to obey a dispatcher. What this case really amounts to is a altercation in which physical contact was initiated by Martin in a place where both parties had a legal right to be.
[/quote]
How do you know Martin initiated it?
[/quote]
Zimmerman was waiting for the police to arrive, he stopped following martin after the dispatcher told him not to. Zimmerman got the number of the address he was parked in front of, to give to the police at which point he got jumped returning to his vehicle.
I dunno where you live, but if some shit is going down in my neighbourhood, and I care about my neighbours and my neighbourhood, I will make sure things are ok. Maybe you like to look the other way, and be a coward, but that is your prerogative. Mr. Zimmerman did not make a bad decision. There is nothing wrong with trying to identify a potential criminal, and making sure his whereabouts are known. The bad decision was for Trayvon Martin to attack Mr. Zimmerman, which he had no legal right to do, because it turns out that Mr. Zimmerman was, rightfully, packing, and defended himself completely within the confines of the law.
No matter which way I read your posts, it seems you always attribute the fault to Mr. Zimmerman, because Mr. Zimmerman wanted to make sure that things were ok. He was just being a good neighbour, and in some ways it was his job. There is nothing wrong with that. Just because someone is trying to do a good deed, meet a thug and bad shit goes down does not suddenly change it in to Mr. Zimmerman’s fault. If Trayvon Martin had not attacked Mr. Zimmerman, then Mr. Zimmerman would have had no need to defend himself. Skiddles, following people, dispatchers, etc…all of that is irrelevant. Trayvon got aggressive, and that is the only reason he is dead.
[/quote]
Thats a personal attack & uncalled for. Im no coward I deal with conflict all the time and have no need to go looking for it. Just becuase I dont put on a rubber suit and fight crime on my off time doesnt make me a puss. I never said Martin was a saint its clear he wasnt. But at the same token dont act like Zimm wasnt overzealouse and eager to pull that trigger.
As far as the other stuff goes fine you have your opinion I have mine big fucking deal this is America we get that right. You make a good point ignoring dispatchers, putting yourself in a potential conflict and killing once in a “fear for life” situation justifies deadly force in a “stand your ground” state. But for those of us not in a stand your ground state or that dont agree with stand your ground we just cant agree with the verdict. Based on the law in FL it is what it is. But the big picture to me is laws like this will end up turning everyday Joes into dirty Harry and a whole slew un-nessisary deaths and prison sentences will be the end result. Just having the ability to buy a gun and get a permit shouldnt give you the right to do police work without proper training. For all the guys that would be good armed watchment their will be many that shouldnt be. And those that shouldnt will abuse power and inocent lives will be wrecked.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Why did you post this?
Second question…why is it people with that mentality ignore the perspective that the issue isn’t that blacks “accept” black on black crime. That doesn’t even make sense.
If someone is killed, that becomes a moral issue in itself.
The issue with perceived violence against blacks especially when stereotypes are involved is that blacks know they will be seen as that victim if they share the same stereotypes.
I am not sure how this is so hard to understand.
Zimmerman was waiting for the police to arrive, he stopped following martin after the dispatcher told him not to. Zimmerman got the number of the address he was parked in front of, to give to the police at which point he got jumped returning to his vehicle.
If that was the case george’s attorneys would have objected to states witness (girl he was on phone with) that said after running and finally stopping, George finally caught up to him and “out of breath” asked what’s he doing here at which point tray asked why he was “chasing him”. Not even the defense argues that trayvon ran away from George. They used that point in argument to say tray “must” have been up to no good. No idea how people can draw conclusion that didn’t run after tray when his own lawyers didn’t object to that fact in trial during cross examination.
reh: haha, nah, not at all actually. what I am trying to hint at is there are several things more to fix concerning those 3 listed and saying it soley applies to black communities.
saying high murder rate does nothing. How should we approach that? Take away the guns? Buff up on police? Stricter rules? Then for who? Its just black communities with higher crime rates? What gets reported? Its not as easy as what the previous commenter posted.
Poverty, fuck yeah should be change. Never said it shouldn’t.
Lack of education? again, fuck-hell-yes. I had to do the statistics report saying there are more African Americans in jail then there are with college degrees…ok…so?..Why? The last 2 people hired to change education in America have quit, stepped down. Its not easy.
But I do think its wrong to adjust someones culture so it fits our values.
Martin walking down the street with a hoodie, and baggie pants and nikes strikes a completely different sign and signifier in our heads than if he was walking down the street with glasses, a suit and tie.
There is no way in hell I am referring to the idea that we should let black people suffer the situation that was created for them. Im saying the adjustments aren’t that easy, nor is it correct to hint that they should act more white, which is how I kind of read the original post.
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
I dunno where you live, but if some shit is going down in my neighbourhood, and I care about my neighbours and my neighbourhood, I will make sure things are ok. Maybe you like to look the other way, and be a coward, but that is your prerogative. Mr. Zimmerman did not make a bad decision. There is nothing wrong with trying to identify a potential criminal, and making sure his whereabouts are known. The bad decision was for Trayvon Martin to attack Mr. Zimmerman, which he had no legal right to do, because it turns out that Mr. Zimmerman was, rightfully, packing, and defended himself completely within the confines of the law.
No matter which way I read your posts, it seems you always attribute the fault to Mr. Zimmerman, because Mr. Zimmerman wanted to make sure that things were ok. He was just being a good neighbour, and in some ways it was his job. There is nothing wrong with that. Just because someone is trying to do a good deed, meet a thug and bad shit goes down does not suddenly change it in to Mr. Zimmerman’s fault. If Trayvon Martin had not attacked Mr. Zimmerman, then Mr. Zimmerman would have had no need to defend himself. Skiddles, following people, dispatchers, etc…all of that is irrelevant. Trayvon got aggressive, and that is the only reason he is dead.
[/quote]
Thats a personal attack & uncalled for. Im no coward I deal with conflict all the time and have no need to go looking for it. Just becuase I dont put on a rubber suit and fight crime on my off time doesnt make me a puss. I never said Martin was a saint its clear he wasnt. But at the same token dont act like Zimm wasnt overzealouse and eager to pull that trigger.
As far as the other stuff goes fine you have your opinion I have mine big fucking deal this is America we get that right. You make a good point ignoring dispatchers, putting yourself in a potential conflict and killing once in a “fear for life” situation justifies deadly force in a “stand your ground” state. But for those of us not in a stand your ground state or that dont agree with stand your ground we just cant agree with the verdict. Based on the law in FL it is what it is. But the big picture to me is laws like this will end up turning everyday Joes into dirty Harry and a whole slew un-nessisary deaths and prison sentences will be the end result. Just having the ability to buy a gun and get a permit shouldnt give you the right to do police work without proper training. For all the guys that would be good armed watchment their will be many that shouldnt be. And those that shouldnt will abuse power and inocent lives will be wrecked.
[/quote]
Opinions on Stand your ground laws from people outside of SYG states are irrelevant, due to the United States being a Federalist government in which individual states make laws that reflect the dispositions of its residents. Besides your opinion you don’t seem to have much of an understanding of the case since the defense used standard self defense rather than a stand your ground defense, seeing as Zimmerman was under Trayvon and did not have the ability to retreat.
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:If he would have listened to reason no one would have died. In Zimms case he did not listen to reason and put himself in a situation that could have been avoided.
So " not listening to reason" is a crime now
Guess we all need to waltz into our nearest police station and turn ourselves in …
Citizen: I’m here to turn myself in officer
Cop: what is your offense?
Citizen: I didn’t listen to reason
Cop: I see … Please put your hands behind your back … You have the right to remain silent …
[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Martin walking down the street with a hoodie, and baggie pants and nikes strikes a completely different sign and signifier in our heads than if he was walking down the street with glasses, a suit and tie.
this isn’t a racial thing. ANYONE looks different and is judged differently based on those two extremes. If i saw a white man dressed in a hoodie and gangster jeans i’d be suspicious of him as well. If I saw a black man in a suit i’d assume he was a respectable individual just like anyone else in upscale clothing.
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
this isn’t a racial thing. ANYONE looks different and is judged differently based on those two extremes. If i saw a white man dressed in a hoodie and gangster jeans i’d be suspicious of him as well. If I saw a black man in a suit i’d assume he was a respectable individual just like anyone else in upscale clothing.[/quote]
Wow…I hope life shows you not to judge books by their cover that simply before some guy in a suit kills you.
[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Martin walking down the street with a hoodie, and baggie pants and nikes strikes a completely different sign and signifier in our heads than if he was walking down the street with glasses, a suit and tie.
[/quote]
Agreed. I think that is ok. A white kid with the same clothing would probably get profiled as well. Nothing wrong with that imo. Nobody, white, black, hispanic, or white-Hispanic (lol), should expect to be perceived any differently than the way they present themselves. Someone walking into a store wearing a heavy jacket and baggy pants in 95 degree heat will get followed regardless of skin color.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Martin walking down the street with a hoodie, and baggie pants and nikes strikes a completely different sign and signifier in our heads than if he was walking down the street with glasses, a suit and tie.
[/quote]
Agreed. I think that is ok. A white kid with the same clothing would probably get profiled as well. Nothing wrong with that imo. Nobody, white, black, hispanic, or white-Hispanic (lol), should expect to be perceived any differently than the way they present themselves. Someone walking into a store wearing a heavy jacket and baggy pants in 95 degree heat will get followed regardless of skin color.[/quote]
??
But it wasn’t 95 degrees.
It was raining and cool…which justifies the clothing option completely.
I just found your analogy interesting.
I don’t think so. Honestly. Anyone walking between houses on a rainy night, with breakins in the neighborhood recently, dressed the way he was dressed, would have been profiled. As I have said, ive been profiled 2x at gun point over seas, I wasn’t wearing a hoodie either. There is a difference between profiling and racially profiling. I live in a mostly white city now, so profiling white kids happens all day, and yes, the police, have to do the smart and safe thing and judge a book by its cover. I wasn’t so much gangsta image growing up as I was skate and surf, so in the right areas I was profiled as a punk. So are the kids out here.
Prof: That example actually comes from a pop culture studies book I took last semester. The showed a black make in a black wife beater and jeans and asked our thoughts, then they showed the same black male in a suit and tie with glasses and asked our thoughts. Can you guess what we thought? 
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]hipsr4runnin wrote:
Martin walking down the street with a hoodie, and baggie pants and nikes strikes a completely different sign and signifier in our heads than if he was walking down the street with glasses, a suit and tie.
[/quote]
Agreed. I think that is ok. A white kid with the same clothing would probably get profiled as well. Nothing wrong with that imo. Nobody, white, black, hispanic, or white-Hispanic (lol), should expect to be perceived any differently than the way they present themselves. Someone walking into a store wearing a heavy jacket and baggy pants in 95 degree heat will get followed regardless of skin color.[/quote]
??
But it wasn’t 95 degrees.
It was raining and cool…which justifies the clothing option completely.
I just found your analogy interesting.[/quote]
That example was to show how ones clothing has an effect on how they are perceived, not Trayvon’s clothing specifically. I thought this was obvious as Trayvon wasn’t walking into a store either.
