Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

[GaryTaylor]

The reason for the suspicious behavior was given… I mean .how many times do you have to say it? As well, when or why is it necessary to have someone standing next to you on phone to corroborate the behavior. You simply report what you see. If someone else sees the behavior that you did , your lucky. Many times thats not the case. It comes down to refusing to believe Zimmerman on the behavior. Thats shows bias towards one view.

One that 75% of America agrees with however. Lots of bias opinion out here I suppose. People need time to process. Seems to be the real issue. Not uncommon really.

Apparently this reached another stage with church services around the county as of last night. Hoefully everyone remains calm and other violence as a result doesn’t occur.

And hopefully whatever happens with court be it legal or criminal all accept this is the country and system we use. And if that is not acceptable then the next step is called WE THE PEOPLE need to change the issues in correct manner. Whatever it is, be it the extermes of the Shoot First, what they believe to be corrupt officials etc etc.

And no I don’t believe any of this should have any effect on the Right to bear arms. I believe before one carrys a firearm they seriously ought to be educated in its use, and the possibility that an incident may well occur. And if does, then know how to handle yourself, and your firearm, because what you think of yourself in your mind thus your image if often as we see a facade, it has no bearing on reality and the two are often confused. And I do believe its happened with BOTH the individuals in this situation. The ego and illusion goes out the window when instant reality gets behind the drivers seat.

Peace

 

[johnnyjones]

One that 75% of America agrees with however. Lots of bias opinion out here I suppose. People need time to process. Seems to be the real issue. Not uncommon really.

Apparently this reached another stage with church services around the county as of last night. Hoefully everyone remains calm and other violence as a result doesn’t occur.

And hopefully whatever happens with court be it legal or criminal all accept this is the country and system we use. And if that is not acceptable then the next step is called WE THE PEOPLE need to change the issues in correct manner. Whatever it is, be it the extermes of the Shoot First, what they believe to be corrupt officials etc etc.

And no I don’t believe any of this should have any effect on the Right to bear arms. I believe before one carrys a firearm they seriously ought to be educated in its use, and the possibility that an incident may well occur. And if does, then know how to handle yourself, and your firearm, because what you think of yourself in your mind thus your image if often as we see a facade, it has no bearing on reality and the two are often confused. And I do believe its happened with BOTH the individuals in this situation. The ego and illusion goes out the window when instant reality gets behind the drivers seat.

Peace

You make my point. It is those who embrace the racial component of this case that have lit the fires of destruction. Bounties, advocating civil disobedience and the like all come from a trumped up desire for this to be a profiling case. Will the young black youth who was shot by another black (that happens regularly) be accused of profiling or get the deserved attention that his life was valuable. Driven by racial divide and speculation we have come to a heated emotional powderkeg. Lets pray it doesn’t blow.

 

[mary_bobo]

One that 75% of America agrees with however. Lots of bias opinion out here I suppose. People need time to process. Seems to be the real issue. Not uncommon really.

Apparently this reached another stage with church services around the county as of last night. Hoefully everyone remains calm and other violence as a result doesn’t occur.

And hopefully whatever happens with court be it legal or criminal all accept this is the country and system we use. And if that is not acceptable then the next step is called WE THE PEOPLE need to change the issues in correct manner. Whatever it is, be it the extermes of the Shoot First, what they believe to be corrupt officials etc etc.

And no I don’t believe any of this should have any effect on the Right to bear arms. I believe before one carrys a firearm they seriously ought to be educated in its use, and the possibility that an incident may well occur. And if does, then know how to handle yourself, and your firearm, because what you think of yourself in your mind thus your image if often as we see a facade, it has no bearing on reality and the two are often confused. And I do believe its happened with BOTH the individuals in this situation. The ego and illusion goes out the window when instant reality gets behind the drivers seat.

Peace

I agree with the part about bias opinion. However, if 75% of the American people believe anything about this case at this point in time, we are in serious trouble. All the facts are not in, we do not know what actually happened yet we are going on the supposition that we do know. Those who do that are no more fair than the likes of Sharpton, Jackson and the Black Panthers. Why not let the situation run it’s course lawfully. There will be plenty of time to affix blame after we have all the facts.

 

[Seamus_L]

There’s a real danger that this case has already been decided upon by a significant number of people in America, and one must wonder how they will respond if George Zimmerman’s lawyer introduces evidence that may be unknown to the newsmedia.

 

[Sarabande]

Wow! Can’t believe how many pages this new thread already has!

In regards to “suspicious activity”, I think part of the problem is how even authorities describe or does not describe what suspicious activity is. It leaves a lot open to opinion. I went on a couple of websites just to see how suspicious activity is described. Some are obvious, others not so much.

For instance, these:

dps.alaska.gov/ast/crimeprevention/suspiciousactivity.aspx

• Strange vehicles parked in your area.
• A clean vehicle with dirty or damaged plates.
• Any activity or event you observe that makes you feel uncomfortable. Always obey your intuitive sense that something is suspicious. If you are not sure about calling law enforcement, CALL ANYWAY !

I am often in New York City and they have the “If You See Something, Say Something” Campaign which has been around since after 9/11. I understand that it has since been adopted nationwide. Again, though, some of what the MTA tells us to be suspicious of is not really descriptive. Two such ones are:

mta.info/mta/security/

• Be wary of suspicious behavior.
• Take notice of people in bulky or inappropriate clothing.

What is suspicious behavior for one person is not to another. What is inappropriate or bulky clothing for one person is not to another… especially in NYC where you can basically see anything, thus leading most people to just ignore what certain people wear or don’t wear.

Then you do have people describe what is considered “suspicious” where it also seems to say, especially on page two that even something seemingly “innocent” could be suspicious and that you should go with your gut feelings.
lubrinco.com/articles/Informed%20Sources%20November%202003.pdf

Then the National Terrorist Alert Response Center
nationalterroralert.com/suspicious-activity/

It’s still not very definitive all the time:

• Any type of activity or circumstance that seems frightening or unusual within the normal routines of your neighborhood, community, and workplace.

Unusual or suspicious activity does not necessarily mean that terrorist activity is happening, but be aware of the following suspicious behaviors:

Individuals acting furtively and suspiciously
Individuals avoiding eye contact
Individuals departing quickly when seen or approached
Individuals in places they don’t belong

Now, there is a difference in terms of none will tell you to pursue the person, but to report it. To me, though, a lot of this leaves what is suspicious is up to interpretation, especially when you’re told to follow your gut.

In regards to Zimmerman, it seemed he was doing what would fit the descriptions of the above…noticing suspicious people or behaviour, especially since it does seem to leave people to decide for themselves. BUT he was following the “suspicious” person, which was definitely not a wise decision and not something that is recommended. And what happened later which led to Martin’s death is still not clear. Was he still following Martin? Did Martin make unwise decisions as well? That, unfortunately, we will never know.

More definitive descriptions of what constitutes suspicious behaviour would be much more helpful.

 

[Seamus_L]

What constitutes suspicious activity for one person may not apply to another, and as for “See Something Say Something” don’t forget that when the Good Lord handed out paranoia, the DHS got in line 50 times.

 

[Sarabande]

What constitutes suspicious activity for one person may not apply to another, and as for “See Something Say Something” don’t forget that when the Good Lord handed out paranoia, the DHS got in line 50 times.

Exactly. That’s my point. When the authorities aren’t completely definitive about what truly constitutes suspicious behaviour, you are going to have these kinds of problems. You are leaving people to go with their gut and to report anything that seems suspicious to you.

Again, the authorities don’t appear to condone pursuing the suspicious person or handle the suspicious object (which may have been the first mistake Zimmerman made that led to Martin’s death), but they encourage reporting it no matter how innocent it may actually be.

 

[HailStarofSea]

You make my point. It is those who embrace the racial component of this case that have lit the fires of destruction. Bounties, advocating civil disobedience and the like all come from a trumped up desire for this to be a profiling case. Will the young black youth who was shot by another black (that happens regularly) be accused of profiling or get the deserved attention that his life was valuable. Driven by racial divide and speculation we have come to a heated emotional powderkeg. Lets pray it doesn’t blow.

The powderkeg comes from the apparent lack of justice that initially happened, and the belief that this happens frequently but does not get justice - not the type of killing itself, but the police department’s refusal to fairly prosecute the case.

Racial profiling goes on; it involves suspecting people of crime due to the color of their skin.

Sadly, that is the reality. Not me, nor any of my white friends, have ever been stopped by police, and we are no less “suspicious-looking” than our black counterparts. In 2011, the New York City Police Department stopped nearly 700,000 people, over half of which were black, and only nine percent of which were white. That certainly seems suspect in a city where nearly half of the population is white, and only one in four are black.

Advocates claim that the program is legal, necessary, and only a small price to pay for the potential of catching a criminal or recovering a weapon. But of all the people stopped in 2011, nearly 90 percent of them were completely innocent. Sure, it may be legal, but is it really making us safer?

huffingtonpost.com/jess-coleman/if-i-were-trayvon-martin_b_1376095.html

Do any of the people who think race was not at issue have to bear the burden of being profiled due to the color of their skin? Or are these people who do not have to pay the costs of experiencing racism saying that it doesn’t exist.

Blacks who shoot other blacks get plenty of attention from conservative outfits. There are MANY articles saying shut up about this case and pay attention to blacks who kill other blacks. Whites kill other whites too at near the same rate that blacks kill other blacks, but with a racial case where a black person kills a white person, the same people do not use the same argument to get the media to stop covering the case.

Personally, I think that Zimmerman’s past history has been completely and unjustly ignored in the media reporting of this case and is likely to be a very big factor.

 

[mary_bobo]

The powderkeg comes from the apparent lack of justice that initially happened, and the belief that this happens frequently but does not get justice - not the type of killing itself, but the police department’s refusal to fairly prosecute the case. With all due respect to your OPINION, you do not know that there was anything to bring justice down on. You do not have the facts. The police department cannot prosecute a case if they do not have evidence. They have now appointed a special prosecutor. Let’s let them do their work before we go off half-cocked and make accusations that may or may not be true.

Racial profiling goes on; it involves suspecting people of crime due to the color of their skin. huffingtonpost.com/jess-coleman/if-i-were-trayvon-martin_b_1376095.html

Do any of the people who think race was not at issue have to bear the burden of being profiled due to the color of their skin? Or are these people who do not have to pay the costs of experiencing racism saying that it doesn’t exist.I am not aware that anyone on this forum has stated that racism does not exist.

Blacks who shoot other blacks get plenty of attention from conservative outfits. There are MANY articles saying shut up about this case and pay attention to blacks who kill other blacks. Whites kill other whites too at near the same rate that blacks kill other blacks, but with a racial case where a black person kills a white person, the same people do not use the same argument to get the media to stop covering the case.

Personally, I think that Zimmerman’s past history has been completely and unjustly ignored in the media reporting of this case and is likely to be a very big factor.

You must know more about his past history than I do. If so, I bow to your superior knowledge. I just think it more prudent to let the investigation take its course before we throw out accusations that we cannot with the present evidence, support.

 

[HailStarofSea]

You must know more about his past history than I do. If so, I bow to your superior knowledge. I just think it more prudent to let the investigation take its course before we throw out accusations that we cannot with the present evidence, support.

We do have the evidence that this case was initially mishandled. That is why the Justice department and FBI are now handling the case with a special prosecutor.

The people who chose to pay attention to the case and exert public pressure saw that it was correctly handled. Wouldn’t it be prudent for them to continue examining the facts rather than “letting the investigation take its course” so that it is decided fairly? None of them are trying to stop the investigation from occurring.

 

[johnnyjones]

We do have the evidence that this case was initially mishandled. That is why the Justice department and FBI are now handling the case with a special prosecutor.

The people who chose to pay attention to the case and exert public pressure saw that it was correctly handled. Wouldn’t it be prudent for them to continue examining the facts rather than “letting the investigation take its course” so that it is decided fairly? None of them are trying to stop the investigation from occurring.

Wouldn’t it be prudent not to advocate civil disobedience or bounties on an individuals head . Wheres AG Holder on this outrageous act. “Leaders” jumping to premeditation with terms like “hunted down”. If you believe there is an injustice, and Zimmerman is getting a way with something you and those mentioned are entitled to it. Nothing excuses the aforementioned retaliatory or vigilante style statements. It should be condemned. Others could die unnecessarily . What was Spike Lees intentions by giving the supposed address of Zimmerman? For someone to be ripped out of there house and beaten. Or maybe just a few rocks thrown at the house, yeah right. If you or I did that during such high tensions who knows what consequences of the law we would face.

 

[Bocephus]

The powderkeg comes from the apparent lack of justice that initially happened, and the belief that this happens frequently but does not get justice - not the type of killing itself, but the police department’s refusal to fairly prosecute the case.

Police departments prosecute?

Racial profiling goes on; it involves suspecting people of crime due to the color of their skin.

Usually when people report a crime they say whether or not the criminal was white or black. There really would be no purpose in stopping white people of the criminal was black or stopping blacks if the criminal was reported to be white. Personally, I don’t want white people, especially police officers to be scared of the black community because they scream racial profiling every time they get a situation like this that makes such waves.

Do any of the people who think race was not at issue have to bear the burden of being profiled due to the color of their skin? Or are these people who do not have to pay the costs of experiencing racism saying that it doesn’t exist.

I’d almost bet that you couldn’t find one person in this country that says racism doesn’t exist. I don’t believe it exists on the level that Sharpton does though.

Blacks who shoot other blacks get plenty of attention from conservative outfits. There are MANY articles saying shut up about this case and pay attention to blacks who kill other blacks. Whites kill other whites too at near the same rate that blacks kill other blacks, but with a racial case where a black person kills a white person, the same people do not use the same argument to get the media to stop covering the case.

Are you saying that if Martin shot Zimmerman, we would have a big media blowup about a black guy killing a white guy? Somehow, I don’t think so.

Personally, I think that Zimmerman’s past history has been completely and unjustly ignored in the media reporting of this case and is likely to be a very big factor.

Really? Why do you want them to condemn Zimmerman even more? The man is already looking at an uphill battle just to get a fair trial. If the media wanted him prosecuted, they should have shut up a long time ago. If this ends up thrown out of court, a lot of the blame will be on them.

 

[EasterJoy]

seekerz seems to want, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, Zimmerman to make a statement to the press either personally or through his attorney. She wants to know why he thought Martin was on drugs. Why did he think that Martin was acting suspiciously.

Simply saying that someone was acting suspiciously isn’t enough. She wants to know why. Otherwise she doesn’t believe there was any reason for his phone call to 911 (or the non-emergency number) other than racial profiling. Forget the fact that he didn’t seem to know Martin’s race when he first called. Unless he can give concrete reasons, or better yet, have already given those reasons to the police, she believes he was using racial profiling.

And because he was using racial profiling…I am not sure what that means.

She can think what she wants and believe what she wants, but if she were a juror and Mr. Zimmerman were the accused, she would be instructed to draw no conclusion from his decision not to appear as a witness in his own defense, if Mr. Zimmerman wanted that. In 1981, the Supreme Court decided (Carter vs. Kentucky) that, upon request, a defendant in a state criminal trial has a right under the 5th Amendment to a jury instruction on the meaning of the privelege against self-incrimination.

This seems elementary to me. Let us not suppose that people who do their best to tell the truth can be sure their own words will not be used against them. The decisions of the courts are not handed down by inerrant beings or beings that may not be swayed by bias, either on the jury or on the bench. This is why we have a 5th Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Mr. Zimmerman is still subject to arrest, conviction, and considerable jail time if convicted. If Zimmerman is allowed to make any statements to the public, whether directly or indirectly, either he should fire his attorney or his attorney should fire him. There will be time after legal proceedings have played out to be making statements and give explanations, but not now. His life depends on observing this common-sense boundary. What the courts of public opinion think about that simply must be ignored for the time being.

 

[EasterJoy]

The powderkeg comes from the apparent lack of justice that initially happened, and the belief that this happens frequently but does not get justice - not the type of killing itself, but the police department’s refusal to fairly prosecute the case.

Racial profiling goes on; it involves suspecting people of crime due to the color of their skin. huffingtonpost.com/jess-coleman/if-i-were-trayvon-martin_b_1376095.html

Do any of the people who think race was not at issue have to bear the burden of being profiled due to the color of their skin? Or are these people who do not have to pay the costs of experiencing racism saying that it doesn’t exist.

Blacks who shoot other blacks get plenty of attention from conservative outfits. There are MANY articles saying shut up about this case and pay attention to blacks who kill other blacks. Whites kill other whites too at near the same rate that blacks kill other blacks, but with a racial case where a black person kills a white person, the same people do not use the same argument to get the media to stop covering the case.

Personally, I think that Zimmerman’s past history has been completely and unjustly ignored in the media reporting of this case and is likely to be a very big factor.

Since Zimmerman’s past history would probably not be admissible in court, how can anyone assume that it unjust to ignore it? While we can’t help but be curious, it is more likely that justice requires us to ignore what we hear of it!

Personally, I think the media could only be just by admitting that they are grossly handicapped because of the amount of pertinent information that cannot prudently or ethically be released by those with first-hand knowledge of it before there is a trial, such that the media is stuck with inference, second-hand rumors, and explanations of possibly applicable case law.

 

[jen_fla]

i am glad the legal system is examining this case further. we should all be glad this is happening. in fact i’d like to see more resources go towards investigating all violent crimes and less (if any) on our failed war on drugs but that is another topic.

my gut tells me george is responsible for trayvon’s death, but throughout these threads i’ve tried to remind us all that we can’t jump to conclusions and that we have to be able to prove what happened and coldly look at the facts.

i will say this though, after looking at the map and seeing where trayvon’s body was found, we now do know that george followed him after he said ok when the dispatcher said they didn’t need him doing that. that still doesn’t prove he’s guilty, but i bring it up because we were discussing the issue thoroughly before.

i think what is going to decide this case, is if audio forensic specialists can determine if the screams match gz or not.

 

[seekerz]

She can think what she wants and believe what she wants, but if she were a juror and Mr. Zimmerman were the accused, she would be instructed to draw no conclusion from his decision not to appear as a witness in his own defense, if Mr. Zimmerman wanted that. In 1981, the Supreme Court decided (Carter vs. Kentucky) that, upon request, a defendant in a state criminal trial has a right under the 5th Amendment to a jury instruction on the meaning of the privelege against self-incrimination.

This seems elementary to me. Let us not suppose that people who do their best to tell the truth can be sure their own words will not be used against them. The decisions of the courts are not handed down by inerrant beings or beings that may not be swayed by bias, either on the jury or on the bench. This is why we have a 5th Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Mr. Zimmerman is still subject to arrest, conviction, and considerable jail time if convicted. If Zimmerman is allowed to make any statements to the public, whether directly or indirectly, either he should fire his attorney or his attorney should fire him. There will be time after legal proceedings have played out to be making statements and give explanations, but not now. His life depends on observing this common-sense boundary. What the courts of public opinion think about that simply must be ignored for the time being.

Thanks for discussing my desires in this case. Mr Zimmerman has two choices: speak up or be quiet. He seems to want it both ways. No go.

 

[seekerz]

i am glad the legal system is examining this case further. we should all be glad this is happening. in fact i’d like to see more resources go towards investigating all violent crimes and less (if any) on our failed war on drugs but that is another topic.

my gut tells me george is responsible for trayvon’s death, but throughout these threads i’ve tried to remind us all that we can’t jump to conclusions and that we have to be able to prove what happened and coldly look at the facts.

i will say this though, after looking at the map and seeing where trayvon’s body was found, we now do know that george followed him after he said ok when the dispatcher said they didn’t need him doing that. that still doesn’t prove he’s guilty, but i bring it up because we were discussing the issue thoroughly before.

i think what is going to decide this case, is if audio forensic specialists can determine if the screams match gz or not.

Glad to see we’re making progress.

Where are we now? Zimmerman followed Trayvon after he was told not to…

Perhaps by tomorrow we’ll get to the explanation of why Zimmerman’s kin would have us believe he stopped when he was asked to.

Oh well, baby steps will get us somewhere I suppose…

 

[seekerz]

The reason for the suspicious behavior was given… I mean .how many times do you have to say it? As well, when or why is it necessary to have someone standing next to you on phone to corroborate the behavior. You simply report what you see. If someone else sees the behavior that you did , your lucky. Many times thats not the case. It comes down to refusing to believe Zimmerman on the behavior. Thats shows bias towards one view.

However many times you say it, you can’t get an adjective to become a verb. Sorry.

 

[johnnyjones]

However many times you say it, you can’t get an adjective to become a verb. Sorry.

Try reading the rest of the post. It appears sarcasm is your only defense.

 

[seekerz]

I agree with the part about bias opinion. However, if 75% of the American people believe anything about this case at this point in time, we are in serious trouble. All the facts are not in, we do not know what actually happened yet we are going on the supposition that we do know. Those who do that are no more fair than the likes of Sharpton, Jackson and the Black Panthers. Why not let the situation run it’s course lawfully. There will be plenty of time to affix blame after we have all the facts.

Likes of Sharpton and Jackson? What are they like? If Trayvon were my son, I’d have them on speed dial. Otherwise there’s a chance of the system ‘running’ right over his memory without even stopping to apologize.

Last I heard ‘civil’ disobedience was just that: ‘civil’ - introduced by the likes of Gandhi and MLK. Any more objections?