Hate Crimes

[Marcus]

I will say that our nation would be better, not worse, if more men took enough of an interest in their community to keep a neighborhood watch like Zimmerman, even if he was amateurish and in over his head.

Fair enough, but they ought to be qualified. Any dude with a gun won't do.

Rhap, it's my understanding that anyone with a concealed-carry permit in any state must undergo a training course and pass it. Moreover, it's my understanding that Z underwent and passed some sort of course for participating in the neighborhood watch program.

Such folks may not be "professionals," but they damn' sure ain't amateurs either.

[Parodite]

I will say that our nation would be better, not worse, if more men took enough of an interest in their community to keep a neighborhood watch like Zimmerman, even if he was amateurish and in over his head.

Fair enough, but they ought to be qualified. Any dude with a gun won't do.

We could call them... the police.

For starters.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

I would argue, and have argued, that anybody who kills an unarmed man should stand trial, and killers being cleared of wrongdoing without a trial is a miscarriage of justice.

For example the woman who, while she is being violently raped, gets her hands on a weapon and kills her assailant. Put the bitch on trial and let her tell it to the judge!

[Marcus]

. . I would argue, and have argued, that anybody who kills an unarmed man should stand trial,. .

Well, argue in one hand and piss in the other, and see which one gets full first . . .

Take your gripes to the Florida legislature . .

[cincinnatus]

I will say that our nation would be better, not worse, if more men took enough of an interest in their community to keep a neighborhood watch like Zimmerman, even if he was amateurish and in over his head.

Fair enough, but they ought to be qualified. Any dude with a gun won't do.

When the civil trail against this HOA goes through, I doubt we'll see many HOA-sponsored neighborhood watch groups that activly allow their members to carry, even with a CCW. Seems like an insane liability risk.

Stricly ancedotal: When I lived in Tucson a few years ago, our community experiened several upticks in crime, to include incidents by local chapters of a certain nationwide gang. Our HOA had a big meeting and someone raised the Neighborhood Watch idea, but the management company's lawyer convinced everyone the liability was too great to an already stressed HOA. Intead, he just said "just take care of your own area, your own street, and call the cops if you see something." An off-duty PD member of the HOA pretty much said "yup." After a while, the city got tired of spending money on cleaning up gang grafiti, so they basically set up a PD substation that had PD cars going through the main artery on a regular basis, and crime stats went down.

[Parodite]

Rhap, it's my understanding that anyone with a concealed-carry permit in any state must undergo a training course and pass it. Moreover, it's my understanding that Z underwent and passed some sort of course for participating in the neighborhood watch program.

Such folks may not be "professionals," but they damn' sure ain't amateurs either.

So such events causes those neighborhood watch programs to re-evaluate their training and make it even better? The Z-case could be used as a showcase of how things can go wrong and how to avoid that. Or is everybody just leaning backwards enjoying the blame game.

[Ibrahim]

Murder, as opposed to manslaughter, would be a question of malicious intent, and precedent (as far as I know) agrees that pointing a gun at somebody and shooting is malicious intent, and therefore murder ("murder two," since he didn't plan to kill Martin beforehand). Manslaughter is more about negligent rather than malicious action. Since the fact that Zimmerman aimed and fired at Martin doesn't appear to be in question I don't think this distinction will matter in the trial.

It seems like manslaughter still would have been an easier case for the prosecution: Couldn't they argue that, although there may have been no malicious intent, Zimmerman's irresponsible actions (pursuing Martin, possibly initiating contact) led to a situation which ended up in a shooting that, while it may have been self-defense at the moment the trigger was pulled, was precipitated by Zimmerman's actions?

Malicious intent, in the legal sense, is fulfilled when Zimmerman points the gun at Martin and fires, but then he is claiming that he only did so in fear for his life. As the Florida statute reads, the fact that Zimmerman created the overall situation himself doesn't figure in determining whether or not the shooting itself was a criminal action.



The argument you make above is how they would make, and probably win, a civil suit for wrongful death.

[Ibrahim]

. . I would argue, and have argued, that anybody who kills an unarmed man should stand trial,. .

Well, argue in one hand and piss in the other, and see which one gets full first . . .

Take your gripes to the Florida legislature . .

What gripes? He is standing trial.

I'm getting my way here, you're the one flipping out about some miscarriage of justice.

[Ibrahim]

I would argue, and have argued, that anybody who kills an unarmed man should stand trial, and killers being cleared of wrongdoing without a trial is a miscarriage of justice.

For example the woman who, while she is being violently raped, gets her hands on a weapon and kills her assailant. Put the bitch on trial and let her tell it to the judge!

Wow, what a genius.

[Demon of Undoing]

Again, I would be just fine with having a weapons certification. Have it subject to the use of force syllabus ( modified) required for state law enforcement certification. Make for a physical fitness component waivable only on grounds of disability. Not just shooting safety, but for accuracy and practical application. Require certification in chemical and hand weapons, with a vigorous unarmed component. You can't just pick and choose which narrow fragment of the force spectrum you want to cheaply inhabit and then stuff all other situations into that little ghetto. It contributes to unarmed kids getting shot.

[Marcus]

Malicious intent, in the legal sense, is fulfilled when Zimmerman points the gun at Martin and fires, but then he is claiming that he only did so in fear for his life. As the Florida statute reads, the fact that Zimmerman created the overall situation himself doesn't figure in determining whether or not the shooting itself was a criminal action . .

More legalistic, mumbo-jumbo BS. For all you know, Z simply responded, within his rights legally, to M's malicious intent. Nor did Z necessarily "create" the overall situation. Unless of course, he's guilty until proven innocent as seems to be your point . .

Heaven forbid anyone should be able to stand up for oneself . . weenies and sheeple abound!

[Ibrahim]

Malicious intent, in the legal sense, is fulfilled when Zimmerman points the gun at Martin and fires, but then he is claiming that he only did so in fear for his life. As the Florida statute reads, the fact that Zimmerman created the overall situation himself doesn't figure in determining whether or not the shooting itself was a criminal action . .

More legalistic, mumbo-jumbo BS.

Being legalistic, about the law, with regards to a legal trial?! Shocking!

For all you know, Z simply responded, within his rights legally, to M's malicious intent.

If only there was a method for determining these kinds of things. Oh right, it's called a trial.

Nor did Z necessarily "create" the overall situation.

Certainly he did, by identifying and following Martin. In Zimmerman's/your version of events Martin ruthlessly attacked Zimmerman as a result of Zimmerman following him in the first place.

Unless of course, he's guilty until proven innocent as seems to be your point . .

I've stated my position several times, and that isn't it.

Heaven forbid anyone should be able to stand up for oneself . . weenies and sheeple abound!

Who "stood up for themselves" in your view?

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

There is plenty of evidence that Martin doubled back to confront Zimmerman. The crime scene maps with known times of certain events have been posted.

[Demon of Undoing]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

There is plenty of evidence that Martin doubled back to confront Zimmerman. The crime scene maps with known times of certain events have been posted.

And I'm not saying this is what happened, by the way. Just responding to the idea that we "know" Zimmerman caused the attack by following Martin. We do not.

[cincinnatus]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

Blasphemer!!!!

[Ibrahim]

There is plenty of evidence that Martin doubled back to confront Zimmerman. The crime scene maps with known times of certain events have been posted.

And I'm not saying this is what happened, by the way.

Well clearly. I don't think your description is accurate either. There is conflicting evidence about who confronted or attacked who, and when.

But a trial will attempt to sort out all those details.

Just responding to the idea that we "know" Zimmerman caused the attack by following Martin. We do not.

The Zimmerman/Marcus account is that Martin noticed Zimmerman observing him, and then doubled back to attack Zimmerman, savagely beating him. If Zimmerman had not initially followed Martin none of that would have happened. Even by the most generous account in Zimmerman's favor, his initial actions of following Martin caused the chain of events which led to Martin's death. This observation is distinct from Zimmerman's culpability in the shooting itself.

[Ibrahim]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

I don't see how the law allows for that in this case. Martin was criminally attacking Zimmerman, or Zimmerman criminally fired on Martin.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

The Zimmerman/Marcus account is that Martin noticed Zimmerman observing him, and then doubled back to attack Zimmerman, savagely beating him. If Zimmerman had not initially followed Martin none of that would have happened. Even by the most generous account in Zimmerman's favor, his initial actions of following Martin caused the chain of events which led to Martin's death.

No, that's weak "I didn't like the way he was looking at me so I punched him" logic. You could just as well say Zimmerman caused the chain of events by leaving his house that night... or by getting out of bed that morning... or by being born.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

I don't see how the law allows for that in this case. Martin was criminally attacking Zimmerman, or Zimmerman criminally fired on Martin.

I have wondered if perhaps Martin felt threatened by a stranger following him and, reasonably, chose to attack in order to avoid being a victim of a mugging, but then Zimmerman freaks out because his suspicions of Martin's intent were confirmed when Martin jumped him. Very unfortunate if that's the case. It's like Martin could have been on a separate 911 call saying "There is someone following me. He looks suspicious, like he's on drugs or something... he's just walking around in the rain looking at me... He looks Hispanic..."

[Ibrahim]

The Zimmerman/Marcus account is that Martin noticed Zimmerman observing him, and then doubled back to attack Zimmerman, savagely beating him. If Zimmerman had not initially followed Martin none of that would have happened. Even by the most generous account in Zimmerman's favor, his initial actions of following Martin caused the chain of events which led to Martin's death.

No, that's weak "I didn't like the way he was looking at me so I followed and shot him" logic.

fixed

You could just as well say Zimmerman caused the chain of events by leaving his house that night...

Had Zimmerman carried on with his planned errands this would not have happened. The initial choice to follow Martin is where the chain of events can reasonable be said to begin.

[Ibrahim]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

I don't see how the law allows for that in this case. Martin was criminally attacking Zimmerman, or Zimmerman criminally fired on Martin.

I have wondered if perhaps Martin felt threatened by a stranger following him and, reasonably, chose to attack in order to avoid being a victim of a mugging, but then Zimmerman freaks out because his suspicions of Martin's intent were confirmed when Martin jumped him. Very unfortunate if that's the case. It's like Martin could have been on a separate 911 call saying "There is someone following me. He looks suspicious, like he's on drugs or something... he's just walking around in the rain looking at me... He looks Hispanic..."

This theory would still leave either the attack or the shooting as criminal.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

Just everybody understand that all parties involved could have been well within their legal rights. We could have a tragedy with no bad guy.

I don't see how the law allows for that in this case. Martin was criminally attacking Zimmerman, or Zimmerman criminally fired on Martin.

I have wondered if perhaps Martin felt threatened by a stranger following him and, reasonably, chose to attack in order to avoid being a victim of a mugging, but then Zimmerman freaks out because his suspicions of Martin's intent were confirmed when Martin jumped him. Very unfortunate if that's the case. It's like Martin could have been on a separate 911 call saying "There is someone following me. He looks suspicious, like he's on drugs or something... he's just walking around in the rain looking at me... He looks Hispanic..."

This theory would still leave either the attack or the shooting as criminal.

I get it... the attack or the shooting would be criminal, but I would be hard-pressed to call either man morally culpable.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

The Zimmerman/Marcus account is that Martin noticed Zimmerman observing him, and then doubled back to attack Zimmerman, savagely beating him. If Zimmerman had not initially followed Martin none of that would have happened. Even by the most generous account in Zimmerman's favor, his initial actions of following Martin caused the chain of events which led to Martin's death.

No, that's weak "I didn't like the way he was looking at me so I followed and shot him" logic.

fixed

You could just as well say Zimmerman caused the chain of events by leaving his house that night...

Had Zimmerman carried on with his planned errands this would not have happened. The initial choice to follow Martin is where the chain of events can reasonable be said to begin.

I was under the impression that there was evidence that Zimmerman shot him while he was being beaten. That's not the same as shooting someone for looking at you funny.

If someone is driving in their neighborhood and sees a stranger, calls the police because he there have been a spate of robberies in the neighborhood and this stranger is just walking around in the rain, goes back to his car after initially following him to report his location to the police, and is then confronted and attacked by the stranger, and you still say that he caused the chain of events that led to his beating, you must have a very severe opinion of women who go to bars in short skirts.

[Enki]

But how would you know? . .

Can't know that you find him, can only know that celebrating people's deaths doesn't even remotely resemble the teachings of Christ that I know of.