M
Mickey_Finn
Guest
Yes it is.No it’s not.
Yes it is.No it’s not.
While this fellow has had some minor brushes with the law. The article also states that he was involved in catching a thief, and helped solve many crimes. His aspiration seems to have been law enforcement. The point being, his intent seemed to be to do good. We always look at the intent.Thanks for the re-post, Sabda.
I’ve read many articles about Zimmerman’s “prior acts.”
If the police had done their job and arrested this vigilante (it’s not uncommon to detain a suspect without filing any charges), he would obviously be in protective custody and would not have to worry about death threats. Now, it’s too late for that.How can you have a bounty on a man who is not charged with anything?
By “we,” do you mean law enforcement or people in general? The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t want to live in a Wild West society where vigilante wannabe Billy The Kid types around playing cops and robbers at the expense of public safety. Any word on whether this vigilante even had a CCW permit for his firearm or if he did “neighborhood watch” with the cooperation of any local law enforcement agencies?While this fellow has had some minor brushes with the law. The article also states that he was involved in catching a thief, and helped solve many crimes. His aspiration seems to have been law enforcement. The point being, his intent seemed to be to do good. We always look at the intent.
As a “white Hispanic” (this is how the Associated Press calls him), he is also guilty of being white regardless of anything else, as far as followers of Black Liberation Theology are concerned. The case of Beat Whitey Night at the Iowa State Fair in 2010, and recently (February 2012) the attack during which the 13-year old boy Allen Coon was doused with gasoline and set on fire, demonstrate this attitude.Because he is guilty of shooting a black man. Guilt of a specific crime is irrelevant.
This “New Black Panther Party”, which is not the same as the larger historical one, is certainly a fringe, small, racist, and anti-semitic group using this event to further their aims of racial divisiveness. It is not helpful, though it is characteristic, to focus on the fringe activities of a bombastic group to further one’s picture of what is going on here.How can you have a bounty on a man who is not charged with anything?
Yet Trayvon Martin, an actual child, had no prior “minor brushes with the law.”While this fellow has had some minor brushes with the law. The article also states that he was involved in catching a thief, and helped solve many crimes. His aspiration seems to have been law enforcement. The point being, his intent seemed to be to do good. We always look at the intent.
Some here have pointed out that Trayvon was a minor, a child even. But, they fail to mention that minors, or children if you prefer. Go out of their way to look like gang bangers. “Thuging?”
They dress that way. They talk that way. And, like Mr. Zimmerman in that bar, they disrespect authority. This is what comes of it.
Don’t be distracted by the media hype. Mr. Zimmerman should stand trial if the law says so. Not because some professional instigators, and alot of sheep, are bleating.
ATB
And actually, the ones offering the bounty are not affiliated with the “official” New Black Panther Party so they are even more fringe.This “New Black Panther Party”, which is not the same as the larger historical one, is certainly a fringe, small, racist, and anti-semitic group using this event to further their aims of racial divisiveness. It is not helpful, though it is characteristic, to focus on the fringe activities of a bombastic group to further one’s picture of what is going on here.
THIS. The defending of this man’s childish “cops and robbers” routine, I must admit, makes me a little angry. He is NOT a professional law enforcement officer, and his behavior was bound to get someone hurt eventually.By “we,” do you mean law enforcement or people in general? The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t want to live in a Wild West society where vigilante wannabe Billy The Kid types around playing cops and robbers at the expense of public safety. Any word on whether this vigilante even had a CCW permit for his firearm or if he did “neighborhood watch” with the cooperation of any local law enforcement agencies?
Yep.Since it’s been brought up in this thread, I will say it again. The Coon and Martin cases are not comparable.
In the Coon case the perpetrators were arrested and the family is getting justice. In the Martin case, the police did less than a cursory investigation and let a murderer walk free. Were it not for the public outcry, there would be no investigation of Martin’s death. If anything, the two cases illustrate that white families get justice while black families STILL have to fight for justice.
They didn’t even have to arrest him. They didn’t do the basics of what they would do in a normal shooting. They didn’t run a ballistics test on the gun. They didn’t order a full autopsy to determine the trajectory at which the bullet entered the child’s body. They didn’t test for gun residue on both Martin and Zimmerman’s hands to determine if there was a struggle over the gun. They did not keep Zimmerman’s clothing as evidence that there were blood and grass stains on his clothes. They did not take pictures of Zimmerman’s alleged injuries.If the police had done their job and arrested this vigilante (it’s not uncommon to detain a suspect without filing any charges), he would obviously be in protective custody and would not have to worry about death threats. Now, it’s too late for that.
So, in other words, you choose not to answer all of the questions! That does not change the fact that those questions are there.When I fill out my census forms, I put my name, address, and number of people living in my house, and their ages. No more, no less.
I case you didn’t know, Billy the Kid was a criminal, not a vigilante cop-wannabe.By “we,” do you mean law enforcement or people in general? The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t want to live in a Wild West society where vigilante wannabe Billy The Kid types around playing cops and robbers at the expense of public safety. Any word on whether this vigilante even had a CCW permit for his firearm or if he did “neighborhood watch” with the cooperation of any local law enforcement agencies?
And the “wild West” was not as violent a period as popular cuture depicts. I hate that comparison.I case you didn’t know, Billy the Kid was a criminal, not a vigilante cop-wannabe.
Don’t you agree that a “stand your ground law” / “shoot first law” / “wild west law” as it was called by some when being considered by the Florida legislature sets things up for vigilantes and makes tragedies like this inevitable?Yes. - a vigilante looking for prey.
This is absolutely correct but I think to emphasize your last (unnumbered) point: What the lynch mob seems to forget is that to convict someone of a crime in this country requires evidence of guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. The police and DA are not simply guessing about what might have happened, as some theorize, but whether they are likely to gain a successful conviction based on the evidence. Lacking the evidence to convict they will rightly choose not to indict.Local sources behind selectively reporting national narratives
Points of fact: It was not illegal for Mr. Zimmerman to carry a gun. It was not illegal for Mr. Zimmerman to follow Mr. Martin. It was not illegal for them to exchange words. It does not matter whether Mr. Zimmerman shot Mr. Martin, snapped his neck, or brained him with a rock - lethal force is lethal force.
1.)It was probably illegal for one or the other to initiate violence against one another.
2.) It was also probably illegal for Mr. Martin to continue to beat Mr. Zimmerman after he was down not the ground screaming for help (excessive force), even if Mr. Zimmerman instigated the violence.
3.) The extent to which self-defense allows for legal protection depends on who initiated the violence.
If Mr. Martin knocked Mr. Zimmerman down with a blow from behind, climbed on him, and started beating his face against the concrete while he cried for help then Mr. Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense holds up and there’s no case against him. Until real evidence shows up to the contrary you can’t charge him, let alone punish him.
All the rhetoric about race, children, vigilantism, gun laws, etc. is just foolishness, ax-grinding, and opportunism distracting from the actual process of justice.
It depends on how the law is worded.Don’t you agree that a “stand your ground law” / “shoot first law” / “wild west law” as it was called by some when being considered by the Florida legislature sets things up for vigilantes and makes tragedies like this inevitable?