Pages

3/20/12

The murder of 17-year old trayvon martin has emerged as a huge news story this past weekend. I anticipate that it will incite further passions.

First, my heart goes out to this young man and his family. Zimmerman, the killer, should spend the rest of his life in prison without any hope of leaving prison walls.

However, the liberal media is once again distorting the nature of crime and race in this country. From their viewpoint, blacks are victims of menacing whites who are out to oppress them. Never mind that black-on-white crime, including murder, rape, and assault, are MUCH more common than white-on-black crime. Of course, you will never see the liberal media discuss this. And never mind that blacks, although 13% of the U.S. population, account for more than 50% of this nation's violent crimes. Do I think that it's wrong to automatically assume that a black male is a criminal? Absolutely. But liberals fail to realize that there is a reason why people fear blacks, especially in major cities. The insightful Chris Rock said in one of his monologues, "when i am withdrawing money from an ATM machine, i'm not scared of ted koppel. i'm scared of blacks!"
http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/rev...

Comments (581)

3/20/12


Is it just me or does he look like he's not exactly white?

What a joke though... neighborhood watch harassing a black kid cause he looks "suspicious". What a retard.

"I'm still waiting for the day that young black men (and women) can walk freely in any neighborhood without fearing for their lives."

What a nice quote though... as if the white neighborhoods with the occasional racist moron are more prevalent than the ghettos. Why does he have to split it up to just black men and women anyways?

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

"There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews.

3/20/12

this is a white guy? when they flashed the pictures i wasn't sure who was the perp and who was the victim. too bad for the kid though. this guy seems like a little busybody with a violent streak and it all ended badly.

3/20/12

I don't know what the so-called "liberal media" has been saying about this crime, but this is definitely a case of racism.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/19/justice/florida-teen...

Skip to 5:11. This Zimmerman guy didn't even get a background check. If Zimmerman was black and Trayvon was white, then do you think Zimmerman would've gotten one? I'm not pretending to understand the typical procedures of Florida's police department, but something seems very off.

The reason people (ok I can't speak for all the extreme articles from the "liberal media" that you somehow manage to find) are bitching isn't because of the racial profiling, it's because the Florida police has done absolutely nothing to bring this man to justice despite the fact that he shot an unarmed black kid.

3/20/12

Yes, I agree. Liberals are so evil. I saw one yesterday eating a baby before rounding up some commies to march on wall street.

3/20/12

Have you guys heard the 911 calls? They're chilling. A woman sees Zimmerman and White arguing outside so she calls the police. During the call you hear White let out a hideous scream, then there's one gunshot. Done.

Blatant case of racism here, and it's ridiculous that charges haven't been filed yet

3/20/12

I have never heard of a neighborhood watch outside of a retirement community doing anything but causing problems.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

3/20/12

Are you serious with your fucking first post, Brady? The kid was 17 and had an iced tea and a bag of skittles on him. The Zimmerman dude called 911 and said he "looked suspicious" and then pursued the kid (who had walked away from him) after the 911 operator told him to not pursue him. There are other 911 calls in which you can hear the kid screaming for help before being shot dead. This isn't a case of "liberal media bias," it's a case of a dumbass with a gun on some sort of power trip killing a kid for no reason, even after being told by the police that he didn't need to pursue.

Not to mention, this Zimmerman dude was the self-appointed "captain" of his neighborhood watch group and he had previously called 911 fucking 50 times since joining the neighborhood watch, and almost all of them were false alarms.

People are outraged because this fucking guy shot a kid dead and hasn't been charged for anything. He claimed self-defense, even though HE pursued the kid and the fucking 17 year old kid didn't have a weapon (unless you count skittles.)

Go work on your b-school apps, dude.

3/20/12

TheKing,

THE KID HAD SKITTLES!?!?! Tasting the rainbow would anger the lord so he had to shoot him.

Checkmate atheists.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

In reply to TheMasao
3/20/12
TheMasao:

Yes, I agree. Liberals are so evil. I saw one yesterday eating a baby before rounding up some commies to march on wall street.

LOL

Brady, focus on work/school. Current events / politics for the average person is like sports: it's good to know what's going on, and every once in a while there's a big event that everyone should go to, but for the most part it's a lot of observers and only a few real players.

Get busy living

3/20/12

Brady,

"fearing blacks" because they account for "50% of crime" does not justify murder. Are you somehow trying to justify this guy's actions? I'm not sure what you're really trying to get at here with this post. It seems to me the media is talking about a specific crime; one in which it appears that a 17 year old was killed by a racist white person . As someone mentioned above, the tapes are absolutely chilling and it would be hard to draw any other sort of conclusion other than that this guy straight up murdered a 17 year old. Also what exactly do you expect the media to say, "Although this appears to be cold-blooded murder, its ok because even Chris Rock is scared of black people. You stay classy San Diego."

I do not know what actually happened so I can't speak definitively, but as of now it seems like a pretty clear cut case of racism.

3/20/12

Yeah, I mean, if I turned on the news and they told the facts of the story and then went on a diatribe of how black people commit more crimes than white people, it would be so fucking out of whack. I assume Brady would be flipping his shit if they prefaced all stories about Asian people with a stereotype on how hard they study.

3/20/12

this guy is an ENORMOUS TOOL. apparently he called the cops 50 TIMES in the past year, most of which were false alarms. he called the cops when he saw Trayvon, and the cops told him to STOP FOLLOWING HIM, and he didn't.

Jesus, if this guy isn't put to death it would be some fucked up shit.

Money Never Sleeps? More like Money Never SUCKS amirite?!?!?!?

3/20/12

Go work on your b-school apps, dude.

Brady has agreed to go skydiving or hang gliding this weekend.

If I get back to Chicago and Brady is still sitting in front of his computer obsessing about b-school, I will ensure he falls out of that plane whether he wants to or not.

Weekend car rentals from Enterprise are $35/day, Brady. $35/day. You have no excuse.

3/20/12

I'd like to see links to where you got these statistics from. The more Brady posts, the more he seems like that nerd loser asian kid that even other asians don't want to hang out with.

p.s. lol at the racist post

3/20/12

Brady is a cool guy to grab a beer with. And he is a successful trader. Like many conservatives, he harbors suspicions about the liberal news media. That does not make him a racist.

In reply to sayandarula
3/20/12
sayandarula:

this guy is an ENORMOUS TOOL. apparently he called the cops 50 TIMES in the past year, most of which were false alarms. he called the cops when he saw Trayvon, and the cops told him to STOP FOLLOWING HIM, and he didn't.

Jesus, if this guy isn't put to death it would be some fucked up shit.

I'm not sure all of the facts and circumstances have come out yet, but I'm starting to agree. The guy seems like a psychopath.

3/20/12

I always have to laugh when I hear about the big bad liberal media bias.

1.) Major media companies are big businesses out to make money, first and foremost.

2.) Conservative media outlets more or less dominate their "liberal" counterparts. Fox News trounces the competition in ratings, the WSJ is one of the most widely circulated newspapers in America, and talk radio is almost entirely super far right conservative.

3.) The whole constant victim complex of the far right is tiresome and only makes those who share it look insecure.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

I always have to laugh when I hear about the big bad liberal media bias.

1.) Major media companies are big businesses out to make money, first and foremost.

2.) Conservative media outlets more or less dominate their "liberal" counterparts. Fox News trounces the competition in ratings, the WSJ is one of the most widely circulated newspapers in America, and talk radio is almost entirely super far right conservative.

3.) The whole constant victim complex of the far right is tiresome and only makes those who share it look insecure.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is...

"While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly."

Yes, news agencies are big business, but if the majority of them are liberal they have little competition. There is no drive or economic punishment for those who are not even handed. Fox is the only conservative media outlet.

The media is Left biased, but I fail to see how that has any bearing on this story. The town has a history of covering up shit and this guy was a bully and shot a kid.

FYI - the kid is Hispanic, not black.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

I always have to laugh when I hear about the big bad liberal media bias.

1.) Major media companies are big businesses out to make money, first and foremost.

2.) Conservative media outlets more or less dominate their "liberal" counterparts. Fox News trounces the competition in ratings, the WSJ is one of the most widely circulated newspapers in America, and talk radio is almost entirely super far right conservative.

3.) The whole constant victim complex of the far right is tiresome and only makes those who share it look insecure.

spot on

3/20/12
3/20/12

Fox news dominates its competition, talk radio is almost entirely super far right. These points are still correct despite your WSJ study (which im sure is soon to change with newscorp running it.

3/20/12

If Drudge leans left, then I'm not sure what isn't considered liberal. By the looks of the methodology that was used, I'm not sure that the media outlets are "liberal" so much as "not overtly conservative." There is a difference.

In reply to BigBucks
3/20/12
BigBucks:

Fox news dominates its competition, talk radio is almost entirely super far right. These points are still correct despite your WSJ study (which im sure is soon to change with newscorp running it.

Wow. Where to start.

Fox news has higher ratings. That doesn't mean the liberal media with more than one outlet doesn't trounce Fox when they are combined. Fox is the only conservative news TV outlet.

And the research was done by a UCLA professor.

Hahaha wow man, pick up the pace a little.

3/20/12

I mean, shit, Drudge right now has a link on his site which he titled "POSTMAN CLAIMS: Ayers family put 'foreigner' Obama through school..." while simultaneously having a picture of Paul Ryan looking stately as his headline picture. He is almost constantly pushing Romney while making Obama and his administration look foolish. But, yeah, he's left leaning!

If he's left leaning than what is a guy like Ed Schultz? Karl Marx himself?

3/20/12

This is pretty funny: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa...

"None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace."

Apparently the study also found the following to be true:

NRA - barely conservative

RAND Corporation - Liberal

The ACLU - Conservative.

If you're going to cite that study, then I guess you love the ACLU!

3/20/12

The study used the ADA (http://www.adaction.org/) ,which is a liberal organization that tracks Democratic voting on issues, as the bench mark. It found Drudge to be SLIGHTY liberal or left of moderate Democrats.

The issue with media bias is not so much with the news, but the people who opine on the news and present it. Journalists tend to be more liberal than conservative (http://www.journalism.org/node/2304) and this internal preference is projected into the news.

Why is it that Fox can be labeled as being conservative, but nothing else can be liberal? I freely admit Fox is right leaning and I think CNN/MSNBC tend to lean left. Bloomberg news is pretty middle ground though. WSJ tends to be fiscally conservative, but all in all, center or slightly left.

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews.

3/20/12

Way to turn a tragedy into a straw man argument about the "liberal media" and your masked attempts at justifying this. Sickening. I'm about to get some credits just to throw MS at you.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

This is pretty funny: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa...

"None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace."

Apparently the study also found the following to be true:

NRA - barely conservative

RAND Corporation - Liberal

The ACLU - Conservative.

If you're going to cite that study, then I guess you love the ACLU!

NRA is about protecting the 2nd amendment. Not sure how that is liberal or conservative. Members of the NRA probably are conservative, but the organization is pretty singular in its focus.

As for the other two I am not sure, would have to read the study. Once again, they used at ADA as a benchmark which tracks liberal voting. Maybe the ACLU is supporting things that liberals don't like. Civil Liberties are for both right and left.

In reply to IBTeaching
3/20/12
IBTeaching:

Way to turn a tragedy into a straw man argument about the "liberal media" and your masked attempts at justifying this. Sickening. I'm about to get some credits just to throw MS at you.

I really hope this isn't directed towards me. Especially when I clearly admit that this was a case of bias and the dude was a thug. Guess people can't interject fact or opposite opinions into a discussion.

In reply to sayandarula
3/20/12
sayandarula:

this guy is an ENORMOUS TOOL. apparently he called the cops 50 TIMES in the past year, most of which were false alarms. he called the cops when he saw Trayvon, and the cops told him to STOP FOLLOWING HIM, and he didn't.

Jesus, if this guy isn't put to death it would be some fucked up shit.

this is some real insight?... lol

3/20/12

The issue is how the study defines "liberal." Here: http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2005/12/the_prob...

"In short, the underlying assumption is that, if the press is unbiased, then media outlets will cite think tanks in news reporting in a fashion that is "balanced" with respect to the scores assigned to the groups based on Congressional citations. Any deviation from the mean ADA score of Congress is defined as "bias." But is that a fair assumption?

In particular, the paper's methodology doesn't allow for two important potential differences between the processes generating news citations and floor speech citations:

(1) Technocratic centrist to liberal organizations like Brookings and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities tend to have more credentialed experts with peer-reviewed publications than their conservative counterparts. This may result in a greater number of citations by the press, which seeks out expert perspectives on the news, but not more citations by members of Congress, who generally seek out views that reinforce their own.

(2) The Groseclose/Milyo methodology doesn't allow for differential rates of productivity in producing work of interest to the media or Congress between organizations. To the extent that a think tank is better at marketing itself to the press than Congress (or vice versa), it could skew the results. For instance, the Heritage Foundation is extremely close to conservative members of Congress and has an elaborate operation designed to put material into their hands. But the fact that these members end up citing Heritage more than the press does is not ipso facto proof that the media is liberal."

Obviously MSNBC is liberal, they market themselves that way. CNN is just a worthless dump. Fox News is extremely conservative save for a couple hosts. Talk Radio is almost entirely ANT-level far right. The New York Times is center / center-left, save for their opinion pages, and the WSJ is fiscally conservative and uber-conservative on their opinion pages. I don't find their general news articles to have any bias. I don't think citing think tank studies where appropriate is necessarily the best way to determine liberal / conservative.

My greater point, however, was that the constant "woe is me" of the far right is tiresome. You aren't victims. In fact, if you're wealthy and on the far right, you're doing fucking incredibly well.

3/20/12

Wasn't directed at you ANT.

3/20/12

I didn't even want to address the fact that Fox News is overtly right whereas a liberal CNN will at least attempt neutrality (as other "liberal" news outlets do), I thought that wasn't worth stating and was obvious.

p.s. lol at citing a study you didn't even bother to read

In reply to IBTeaching
3/20/12
IBTeaching:

Wasn't directed at you ANT.

Ok cool. We Kosher then haha

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

The issue is how the study defines "liberal." Here: http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2005/12/the_prob...

"In short, the underlying assumption is that, if the press is unbiased, then media outlets will cite think tanks in news reporting in a fashion that is "balanced" with respect to the scores assigned to the groups based on Congressional citations. Any deviation from the mean ADA score of Congress is defined as "bias." But is that a fair assumption?

In particular, the paper's methodology doesn't allow for two important potential differences between the processes generating news citations and floor speech citations:

(1) Technocratic centrist to liberal organizations like Brookings and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities tend to have more credentialed experts with peer-reviewed publications than their conservative counterparts. This may result in a greater number of citations by the press, which seeks out expert perspectives on the news, but not more citations by members of Congress, who generally seek out views that reinforce their own.

(2) The Groseclose/Milyo methodology doesn't allow for differential rates of productivity in producing work of interest to the media or Congress between organizations. To the extent that a think tank is better at marketing itself to the press than Congress (or vice versa), it could skew the results. For instance, the Heritage Foundation is extremely close to conservative members of Congress and has an elaborate operation designed to put material into their hands. But the fact that these members end up citing Heritage more than the press does is not ipso facto proof that the media is liberal."

Obviously MSNBC is liberal, they market themselves that way. CNN is just a worthless dump. Fox News is extremely conservative save for a couple hosts. Talk Radio is almost entirely ANT-level far right. The New York Times is center / center-left, save for their opinion pages, and the WSJ is fiscally conservative and uber-conservative on their opinion pages. I don't find their general news articles to have any bias. I don't think citing think tank studies where appropriate is necessarily the best way to determine liberal / conservative.

My greater point, however, was that the constant "woe is me" of the far right is tiresome. You aren't victims. In fact, if you're wealthy and on the far right, you're doing fucking incredibly well.

ANT level far right huh, oh please.

All I am saying is that in the research out there it tends to show a bias, both in stories and actual people in the media. I personally don't think there is a huge bias, other than the fact that Fox is the only TV news station with a conservative tilt.

As far as radio is concerned, you might be correct. Other than catching my boy Limbaugh on the radio I don't listen to much else.

3/20/12

I "might be correct" about talk radio? Turn on WABC or whatever your equivalent is in your neck of the woods any day from noon - 9pm. Do that every day and you'd assume that Obama was about to nuke half the country.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

I "might be correct" about talk radio? Turn on WABC or whatever your equivalent is in your neck of the woods any day from noon - 9pm. Do that every day and you'd assume that Obama was about to nuke half the country.

As I said, you might be correct. I don't listen to anything by L-dog sending truth directly to the cortex.

3/20/12

I caught the first few posts only. But this site has become like the CNN comments page. What is all this crap about liberalism, racism, and conservatives that every thread Brady, ANT, and TheKing comment on? Guess what, no one wins these arguments. Everyone has his/her own opinions, everything ends up being name calling. Let's just focus on the story. It's sad and unfortunate, and there will be a backlash.

Every media is bias, unless all you want to watch is C-Spann and numerical data on display and interpret all the information yourself.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hug It Out

In reply to Ari_Gold
3/20/12
Ari_Gold:

unless all you want to watch is...numerical data on display and interpret all the information yourself.

That's actually what I do. Matrix news.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

Are you serious with your fucking first post, Brady? The kid was 17 and had an iced tea and a bag of skittles on him. The Zimmerman dude called 911 and said he "looked suspicious" and then pursued the kid (who had walked away from him) after the 911 operator told him to not pursue him. There are other 911 calls in which you can hear the kid screaming for help before being shot dead. This isn't a case of "liberal media bias," it's a case of a dumbass with a gun on some sort of power trip killing a kid for no reason, even after being told by the police that he didn't need to pursue.

Not to mention, this Zimmerman dude was the self-appointed "captain" of his neighborhood watch group and he had previously called 911 fucking 50 times since joining the neighborhood watch, and almost all of them were false alarms.

People are outraged because this fucking guy shot a kid dead and hasn't been charged for anything. He claimed self-defense, even though HE pursued the kid and the fucking 17 year old kid didn't have a weapon (unless you count skittles.)

Go work on your b-school apps, dude.

Wow. Are you struggling with reading comprehension, bro? I said EXPLICITLY in my post that the death of martin was tragic and that zimmerman should spend the rest of his life in prison. I too heard the 911 tapes, and it's obviously clear that he was out to get martin because he was a black guy walking around in a gated neighborhood.

My point is that whenever these types of events happen, self-righteous liberal buffoons like al shaprton, jesse jackson, and the rest of their cohort at MSNBC go buck wild and use such an incident to preach to us about "racial equality" and "justice." Of course I have never heard Al Sharpton once reprimand black teens, for example, when they assault non-black students in philly high schools simply because of their race. The broader issue here is that there is a double standard in the way the media covers inter-racial crime. That is what I am objecting to, not whether or not zimmerman is guilty. Go back and read what I actually wrote. For someone whose moniker is "TheKing," you sound more like an idiotic court jester.

3/20/12

What are they supposed to do? "Young Trayvon was killed tragically, but on another note, black people are suspicious!"

You are creating an issue in your own mind and then getting outraged over it. It's absurd.

In reply to TheKing
3/20/12
TheKing:

What are they supposed to do? "Young Trayvon was killed tragically, but on another note, black people are suspicious!"

You are creating an issue in your own mind and then getting outraged over it. It's absurd.

No. I'm just saying that it would be helpful if the media were not so one-sided in their coverage of inter-racial crime.

Did MSNBC or CNN ever cover the story of asian high school students in philly getting ruthlessly attacked by their black classmates? Did they ever cover the mass random attacks on whites in Chicago by black teens last summer? Those stories were published in the local papers but not shown on national TV. Meanwhile, everytime there's a tragedy like the death of martin, in which the victim is black and the culprit is non-black, the liberals in the media go buck wild, expressing bouts of indignation while trying to impose their views of "racial and social justice" on the rest of America.

3/20/12
In reply to Brady4MVP
3/20/12
Brady4MVP:
TheKing:

What are they supposed to do? "Young Trayvon was killed tragically, but on another note, black people are suspicious!"

You are creating an issue in your own mind and then getting outraged over it. It's absurd.

No. I'm just saying that it would be helpful if the media were not so one-sided in their coverage of inter-racial crime.

Did MSNBC or CNN ever cover the story of asian high school students in philly getting ruthlessly attacked by their black classmates? Did they ever cover the mass random attacks on whites in Chicago by black teens last summer? Those stories were published in the local papers but not shown on national TV. Meanwhile, everytime there's a tragedy like the death of martin, in which the victim is black and the culprit is non-black, the liberals in the media go buck wild, expressing bouts of indignation while trying to impose their views of "racial and social justice" on the rest of America.

Brady does have a point. A white kid was attached in Philly, while being called racial slurs and yelling racist things and no hate crime charges were filed. Very apparent double standard. Asian kids have been attacked in schools countless times also.

3/20/12

Paul Blart: Neighborhood Watch?

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

"There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

In reply to TNA
3/20/12
ANT:
Brady4MVP:
TheKing:

What are they supposed to do? "Young Trayvon was killed tragically, but on another note, black people are suspicious!"

You are creating an issue in your own mind and then getting outraged over it. It's absurd.

No. I'm just saying that it would be helpful if the media were not so one-sided in their coverage of inter-racial crime.

Did MSNBC or CNN ever cover the story of asian high school students in philly getting ruthlessly attacked by their black classmates? Did they ever cover the mass random attacks on whites in Chicago by black teens last summer? Those stories were published in the local papers but not shown on national TV. Meanwhile, everytime there's a tragedy like the death of martin, in which the victim is black and the culprit is non-black, the liberals in the media go buck wild, expressing bouts of indignation while trying to impose their views of "racial and social justice" on the rest of America.

Brady does have a point. A white kid was attached in Philly, while being called racial slurs and yelling racist things and no hate crime charges were filed. Very apparent double standard. Asian kids have been attacked in schools countless times also.

true. the media seems to care about certain victims and not at all about others.

3/20/12

It is because of the liberal bias in the lame stream media . . .

3/20/12

It's not all that biased.

Fox: clear right wing bias.
MSNBC: clear left wing bias
CNBC: very slight libertarian/business bias.
CNN: generally factual reporting with a lot of sensationalism.

I think throwing out the label "lamestream" is a good indication that you may have drunk a little too much of the Palin kool-aid. (Yes, there is Obama kool-aid too.)

Running this country like it is a football game between a bunch of teams in red jerseys and blue jerseys is not good for the country, nor is it good for the Republican party. We need to come up with an alternative message that stands on its own rather than in opposition to Obama and also short-circuits a number of liberal concerns.

IlliniProgrammer's moderate libertarian planks:

1.) Electrify our federal highways. We've already spent billions of dollars building the darned things; find an area with lots of excess electrical supply (the midwest) and make it possible to run your car on electricity while it drives down the interstate. Run a pilot project in Chicago and if it succeeds- and everyone adds an electric drivetrain option to their car- license it to regulated utilities free of charge. End the oil addiction, replace it with energy manufactured here, and oops, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by accident.

2.) Replace the federal mandate in Obamacare with funding for states to implement their own systems if they so choose.

3.) Raise the social security and medicare retirement age to 70 and cut medicare coverage to outpatient and hospice care.

4.) Impose a 50 cent/bushel export tariff on grain to China until they let the Yuan float and stop providing massive manufacturing subsidies.

5.) Fund research on nuclear fusion, space elevators, and geoengineering so we don't have to be held hostage to the green lobby every time someone shouts "global warming" in a crowded theater.

3/20/12

Oh C'mon, Lame Stream is an epic word. If The Anointed one himself said it I would use it.

3/20/12

Just have to throw this in here: Drudge isn't "liberal" or "conservative" by either of the definitions. While he's obviously fiscally conservative and (I believe) he's pro-life, I don't think he's this uber-neocon or whatever that a lot of people think he is.

"You stop being an asshole when it sucks to be you." -IlliniProgrammer
"Your grammar made me wish I'd been aborted." -happypantsmcgee

3/20/12
In reply to IlliniProgrammer
3/20/12
IlliniProgrammer:

It's not all that biased.

...

CNBC: very slight libertarian/business bias.
...

That was good for a laugh. Those guys would sell their own mother's blood for kiss-up time with anyone worth more than USD 100 M.

3/20/12

So a Hispanic guy kills a black kid. *yawn*.

This shit happens every day. The only reason that anyone gives a shit is because the hispanics guys last name is Zimmerman. Without that specific tidbit there is *zero* story.

3/21/12
melvvvar:

this is a white guy? when they flashed the pictures i wasn't sure who was the perp and who was the victim. too bad for the kid though. this guy seems like a little busybody with a violent streak and it all ended badly.

Exactly -That guy IS NOT white. Jeeze, this is obvious by just looking at the picture itself.

LA Times: "Police identified Zimmerman as white, but his family says he's Hispanic."
Now the mainstream media is running with the white-on-black crime story...I guess Hispanic-on-black doesn't catch as much attention.

Impossible is nothing

3/21/12

Cliff notes.

Hispanic man kills black kid

Clearly racism involved

Police call him white

family calls him Hispanic

News media disregard what the family said and report the man is White.. then proceed to make a national story.. "White man kills black kid" Meanwhile a reporter asks the mother of the kid who died does he eat chicken.

/thread.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee

WSO is not your personal search function.

3/21/12

I'm confused. Were the Skittles before or after the chicken?

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton appearances in 3... 2... 1...

3/21/12

I'm quite surprised this thread has turned into a political debate (again).

1. Zimmerman has criminal history. I'm not even sure why he is allowed to carry a firearm. http://opnateye.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Zim...

2. All else aside, being black and walking in a gated neighborhood does not justify confrontation.
3. Zimmerman is playing cop. He was ordered by dispatch to stand down and yet pursued anyway.
4. From a gun owner's perspective and from firearms training courses, you are taught to always be a witness and take action ONLY if required. This was not the case here.
5. As for the self defense argument... He is the aggressor here.

3/21/12

Maybe if every murder said the person they killed was suspicious then they wouldnt go to jail.

The Four E's of investment
"The greatest Enemies of the Equity investor are Expenses and Emotions."- Warren Buffet

3/21/12

the murder of this kid is a tragedy. full stop.

the second order consequence is that CCW rights, which do save lives, will become further endangered because of stupid fuckwitted cocksuckers like this zimmerman piece of shit.

i say lynch this motherfucker, liquidate his assets to pay the kid's mother, and move on.

In reply to EPS
3/21/12
EPS:
melvvvar:

this is a white guy? when they flashed the pictures i wasn't sure who was the perp and who was the victim. too bad for the kid though. this guy seems like a little busybody with a violent streak and it all ended badly.

Exactly -That guy IS NOT white. Jeeze, this is obvious by just looking at the picture itself.

LA Times: "Police identified Zimmerman as white, but his family says he's Hispanic."
Now the mainstream media is running with the white-on-black crime story...I guess Hispanic-on-black doesn't catch as much attention.

Hispanic is an ethnicity, not a race. Both white and black Hispanics exist.

In reply to melvvvar
3/21/12
melvvvar:

the murder of this kid is a tragedy. full stop.

the second order consequence is that CCW rights, which do save lives, will become further endangered because of stupid fuckwitted cocksuckers like this zimmerman piece of shit.

i say lynch this motherfucker, liquidate his assets to pay the kid's mother, and move on.

lol HEY GUISE LIQUIDATE HIS ASSETS~~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dibs on earingz

3/21/12
In reply to TNA
3/21/12
ANT:

The kid was Hispanic, not black.

No, kid was black. Killer dude was hispanic.

In reply to tico
3/21/12
tico:
EPS:
melvvvar:

this is a white guy? when they flashed the pictures i wasn't sure who was the perp and who was the victim. too bad for the kid though. this guy seems like a little busybody with a violent streak and it all ended badly.

Exactly -That guy IS NOT white. Jeeze, this is obvious by just looking at the picture itself.

LA Times: "Police identified Zimmerman as white, but his family says he's Hispanic."
Now the mainstream media is running with the white-on-black crime story...I guess Hispanic-on-black doesn't catch as much attention.

Hispanic is an ethnicity, not a race. Both white and black Hispanics exist.

Take a look at the motherfucker. He doesn't look the slightest bit European.

3/21/12

How the fuck can u "look European"? Do Spaniards look like Swedes? Do Englishmen look like Italians?

3/21/12
3/21/12

Saw a (local) news spot on this last night that would make OP and others' heads explode. The "distortion" was unbelievable.

"That dude is so haole, he don't even have any breath left."

3/21/12

Yo, regardless of anything else, the reporter asking "chicken?" blew my fucking mind.

In reply to TheKing
3/21/12
TheKing:

Yo, regardless of anything else, the reporter asking "chicken?" blew my fucking mind.

How has no one else said anything about this? Then the people in the background start laughing? Unbelievable.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee

WSO is not your personal search function.

In reply to BigBucks
3/21/12
BigBucks:

How the fuck can u "look European"? Do Spaniards look like Swedes? Do Englishmen look like Italians?

If you don't know how the fuck someone can look "European" then I don't know what the fuck to say to you. Do you think Chinese people and Europeans can't be separated by looks? How about sub-Saharan Africans? Use some common fucking sense.

The guy looks mestizo. He doesn't look like a 'white' Hispanic.

In reply to blastoise
3/21/12
blastoise:
melvvvar:

the murder of this kid is a tragedy. full stop.

the second order consequence is that CCW rights, which do save lives, will become further endangered because of stupid fuckwitted cocksuckers like this zimmerman piece of shit.

i say lynch this motherfucker, liquidate his assets to pay the kid's mother, and move on.

lol HEY GUISE LIQUIDATE HIS ASSETS~~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dibs on earingz

you didn't hear? volunteer neighborhood watchmen are KILLING IT.

3/21/12

yeah Big Bucks, you're sounding retarded in this thread

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

"There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

In reply to TheKing
3/21/12
TheKing:

Yo, regardless of anything else, the reporter asking "chicken?" blew my fucking mind.

They found out he wasn't killed for eating skittles so the reporter figured "Hey maybe it was because he ate chicken".

"Sincerity is an overrated virtue" - Milton Friedman

In reply to PetEng
3/21/12
PetEng:
tico:
EPS:
melvvvar:

this is a white guy? when they flashed the pictures i wasn't sure who was the perp and who was the victim. too bad for the kid though. this guy seems like a little busybody with a violent streak and it all ended badly.

Exactly -That guy IS NOT white. Jeeze, this is obvious by just looking at the picture itself.

LA Times: "Police identified Zimmerman as white, but his family says he's Hispanic."
Now the mainstream media is running with the white-on-black crime story...I guess Hispanic-on-black doesn't catch as much attention.

Hispanic is an ethnicity, not a race. Both white and black Hispanics exist.

Take a look at the motherfucker. He doesn't look the slightest bit European.

since he's from Florida, i would assume that maybe he's of Cuban origin?

in Cuba and other parts of the latin-american world, the word "white" is used to describe anyone who has one drop of european blood. over here it's the opposite, where if you have a drop of any other ethnicity, you're not "white".

like most latinos, i would guess this guy is a mix of european and native american blood. don't believe me? George Lopez (the comedian) took a DNA test which showed that he was of mostly European origin, mixed with Native American and some African blood.

Money Never Sleeps? More like Money Never SUCKS amirite?!?!?!?

3/21/12

^^^oh, and people from Southern Italy and Southern Spain tend to have that "middle-eastern" esque look... so he does look a little European.

Money Never Sleeps? More like Money Never SUCKS amirite?!?!?!?

3/21/12

I think the point some people are trying to make here is that the media likes to sensationalize things, often at the expense of their credibility.

I haven't followed the case closely at all, but most of what I've heard is that a racist white man shot and killed an unarmed black teenage. Then, come to find out that the white man isn't exactly white and that he may have been assaulted (I read a report that said he had or possibly had a bloody nose or face...but I don't know if that is actually true) by the teenager.

PLEASE...I am NOT saying that the guy was justified in killing this kid...it seems very unlikely that he was but as I previous stated, I haven't followed the facts of the case and I don't know what happened. I'm merely trying to point out that people on the left love going on witch hunts when it suits their cause...similar to what TheKing said, but the exact opposite.

As others pointed out, other violent crimes have occurred recently that were known to be motivated by race, not just assumed to be, and they weren't ran with by the national media (at least, not to my knowledge). One distinct difference was the crimes they didn't heavily report...and that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were, as far as I know, dead silent about, where black-on-white crime. Now that there is a "white-on-black" crime the media is all over it right along with the two swindlers mentioned above.

This guy called the cops 50 times in the last year and was the self appointed 'captain' of the neighborhood watch. Might it be possible he is just an over eager, paranoid asshat? Were all 50 of the previous calls to report a black person in the neighborhood?

Shooting an unarmed, presumably law abiding, black teenager doesn't make you racist, it makes you an asshat...unless you specifically shot him because he is black...which none of you could possibly know unless the guy just admitted it.

Take some of the emotion out of the analysis to at least look at the known facts. As far as the police are concerned, an article I read said it was difficult to hear who was actually screaming before the shots were fired and that the police believed it was the 'white' guy as he was being attacked. AGAIN, that may not be the case or you may feel differently...I'm just trying to point out that this might not be some department wide conspiracy to release a known racist murderer back onto the streets.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan

In reply to analyst-therapist
3/21/12
analyst-therapist:

Brady,

"fearing blacks" because they account for "50% of crime" does not justify murder. Are you somehow trying to justify this guy's actions? I'm not sure what you're really trying to get at here with this post. It seems to me the media is talking about a specific crime; one in which it appears that a 17 year old was killed by a racist white person . As someone mentioned above, the tapes are absolutely chilling and it would be hard to draw any other sort of conclusion other than that this guy straight up murdered a 17 year old. Also what exactly do you expect the media to say, "Although this appears to be cold-blooded murder, its ok because even Chris Rock is scared of black people. You stay classy San Diego."

I do not know what actually happened so I can't speak definitively, but as of now it seems like a pretty clear cut case of racism.

+1 Good Point.

But I'd expect nothing less from the worlds first Anal-Rapist

I'm like one of them marriage counselors. Charge by the hour to tell some fool he needa bring some flowers home. Then charge another hour telling the bitch she oughta suck some cock every little once in a while. Keep a marriage strong like that. -Prop Joe

3/21/12

If you look at the articles that discuss how Martin was on the phone with his girlfriend at the time he was being followed by the asshole Zimmerman, his girlfriend talks about how he told her that he was being followed and he was alarmed.

Zimmerman's car didn't have any insignia or indication that he was anything other than a civilian. If you were walking alone and someone was following you in a car, got out of the car, brandished a gun and tackled you to the ground, you would have reacted with screaming for help as well.

Zimmerman had a 100 pound advantage, not to mention a gun on him. This 17-year-old had a pack of skittles on him. That's all! What is even more disgusting is that Zimmerman was not even a real cop. He was just some "neighborhood watchman." He was told by the dispatcher to stand the fuck down. Instead, he goes "vigilante" and goes after Martin anyway. He can't even argue self defense. If anything, Martin had the right to utilize self defense since he was followed, tackled to the ground and then shot to death.

Why is this asshole not behind bars?

In reply to TraderDaily
3/21/12
TraderDaily:

If you look at the articles that discuss how Martin was on the phone with his girlfriend at the time he was being followed by the asshole Zimmerman, his girlfriend talks about how he told her that he was being followed and he was alarmed.

Zimmerman's car didn't have any insignia or indication that he was anything other than a civilian. If you were walking alone and someone was following you in a car, got out of the car, brandished a gun and tackled you to the ground, you would have reacted with screaming for help as well.

Zimmerman had a 100 pound advantage, not to mention a gun on him. This 17-year-old had a pack of skittles on him. That's all! What is even more disgusting is that Zimmerman was not even a real cop. He was just some "neighborhood watchman." He was told by the dispatcher to stand the fuck down. Instead, he goes "vigilante" and goes after Martin anyway. He can't even argue self defense. If anything, Martin had the right to utilize self defense since he was followed, tackled to the ground and then shot to death.

Why is this asshole not behind bars?

Just to play devil's advocate here...where is the evidence (reports, pictures, video etc.) that the guy jumped out of his vehicle brandishing his weapon?

I realize this seems super cut and dry for some folks but from a legal standpoint I don't know that it is. Florida has a 'right to defend' law that would allow the gun with the gun to defend himself, arguably, even if he initially approached the kid that was shot. I realize the guy with the gun appears to be the aggressor but everyone is questioning the one set of people that actually have first and second hand knowledge of the incident/crime (Zimmerman and the police).

Also, I'm pretty sure the dispatcher has no authority over anyone but themselves. The guy wasn't breaking the law by following the kid. Lastly, what does the 100 lbs difference have to do with anything? The guy either broke the law or he didn't...his weight isn't likely to change that.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan

3/21/12

Typically when a person asserts self defense as the reason for their actions, it must be true that they meet the reasonable person standard in that Zimmerman must have reasonably believed that he faced an imminent threat to himself and it also must be true that the amount of force that he used must have been reasonable.

Here, it is highly unlikely that Zimmerman thought that it there was an imminent threat to himself and that his response was reasonable given that threat. In other words, it must be true that he believed that his life was in danger and that under the circumstances, his response was also reasonable.

Here, Martin did is the one that can be heard screaming for help, hardly the sign of someone who had the potential upper hand and who could strike fear in someone else like Zimmerman. Zimmerman also pursued him and as Martin's girlfriend indicates, Martin did not feel comfortable with this and because of this, he ran. This is indeed the behavior of someone who felt threatened and afraid, rather than someone who was an aggressor of a situation.

Also, we have to remember that even before Zimmerman got out of the car, he said to the dispatcher that Martin had "something" in his hand. This "something" was likely the pack of Skittles that he had in his possession. Would a reasonable person have used deadly force under this scenario without even knowing what he had in his hand? Absolutely not.

Even if Zimmerman did not have his weapon out when he exited his car, which by the way was unmarked, the mere confrontation with Martin surely would've alarmed Martin. A total stranger asking questions without a badge and uniform and who had already followed you without identifying himself would alarm anyone. Plus, this was late in the evening, adding to the likely alarm. When he exited his vehicle, it will be very difficult to show that given his aggression towards Martin, how he could've feared for his life and how he acted in self defense.

If this case is ever brought to trial, Florida's self defense law will also come into debate. A good attorney representing Martin's family will likely argue for the court to consider not just the law in its blanket black letter reading. But also consider it's rationale. Here is where Zimmerman's case would likely further collapse. Self defense laws are written to protect one from being in fear of protecting oneself when faced with imminent danger. However, Florida legislators surely did not enact the law to allow for vigilante killings or for deadly force to be used unnecessarily without just cause. If Martin had a means of applying deadly force and the state of mind to do so, surely he would've at least attempted to do so. Remember earlier, I said that Zimmerman stated that Martin had something in his hand. This "something" was not a gun/knife or any other weapon.

So, instead, he sought to run and when that failed, he was tackled and screamed for someone to help. This is inconsistent with someone who meant to do harm. Zimmerman's behavior is therefore inconsistent with the "spirit of the law", although many may look to the mere black letter of the law. The spirit of it was grossly violated however based on the facts that we have so far. I was not there, but this will be something that will be the core of many subarguments of the family attorney's case.

3/21/12

So note to self: if you want to kill somebody, just get them alone with you, challenge them to a fight, shoot them after they rough you up a little bit, then claim self defense.

If this guy doesn't even go to trial then this would make that^ seem wayyyy too easy especially considering the idiot's the one who followed him... He was looking for a reason to be a hero and become a humongous piece of shit in the process.

And I realize that this is speculation, but how much can you really be fearing for your life when the guy you're fighting with is screaming for help? Fuck that guy. I hope he goes to prison and runs into a guard that takes his job way over the top like he did.

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

"There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

3/21/12

What is really disgusting is that Martin, in the last moments of his life, screams for help. Yet he was shot anyway.

Zimmerman needs to be brought to justice.

3/21/12

Breaking News:

Florida Lawmakers say that Zimmerman Unprotected by Self Defense Law:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/21/george-zi...

In reply to TraderDaily
3/21/12
TraderDaily:

Typically when a person asserts self defense as the reason for their actions, it must be true that they meet the reasonable person standard in that Zimmerman must have reasonably believed that he faced an imminent threat to himself and it also must be true that the amount of force that he used must have been reasonable.

Here, it is highly unlikely that Zimmerman thought that it there was an imminent threat to himself and that his response was reasonable given that threat. In other words, it must be true that he believed that his life was in danger and that under the circumstances, his response was also reasonable.

Here, Martin did is the one that can be heard screaming for help, hardly the sign of someone who had the potential upper hand and who could strike fear in someone else like Zimmerman. Zimmerman also pursued him and as Martin's girlfriend indicates, Martin did not feel comfortable with this and because of this, he ran. This is indeed the behavior of someone who felt threatened and afraid, rather than someone who was an aggressor of a situation.

Also, we have to remember that even before Zimmerman got out of the car, he said to the dispatcher that Martin had "something" in his hand. This "something" was likely the pack of Skittles that he had in his possession. Would a reasonable person have used deadly force under this scenario without even knowing what he had in his hand? Absolutely not.

Even if Zimmerman did not have his weapon out when he exited his car, which by the way was unmarked, the mere confrontation with Martin surely would've alarmed Martin. A total stranger asking questions without a badge and uniform and who had already followed you without identifying himself would alarm anyone. Plus, this was late in the evening, adding to the likely alarm. When he exited his vehicle, it will be very difficult to show that given his aggression towards Martin, how he could've feared for his life and how he acted in self defense.

If this case is ever brought to trial, Florida's self defense law will also come into debate. A good attorney representing Martin's family will likely argue for the court to consider not just the law in its blanket black letter reading. But also consider it's rationale. Here is where Zimmerman's case would likely further collapse. Self defense laws are written to protect one from being in fear of protecting oneself when faced with imminent danger. However, Florida legislators surely did not enact the law to allow for vigilante killings or for deadly force to be used unnecessarily without just cause. If Martin had a means of applying deadly force and the state of mind to do so, surely he would've at least attempted to do so. Remember earlier, I said that Zimmerman stated that Martin had something in his hand. This "something" was not a gun/knife or any other weapon.

So, instead, he sought to run and when that failed, he was tackled and screamed for someone to help. This is inconsistent with someone who meant to do harm. Zimmerman's behavior is therefore inconsistent with the "spirit of the law", although many may look to the mere black letter of the law. The spirit of it was grossly violated however based on the facts that we have so far. I was not there, but this will be something that will be the core of many subarguments of the family attorney's case.

You still haven't provided any proof supporting your statements of how this went down. First you claim that Zimmerman exited the vehicle brandishing his weapon, but then dismiss it as if it's unimportant. Then you claimed that Zimmerman tackled Martin to the ground but the police reports stated that Zimmerman was bleeding from his nose and from the back of the head and that his jacket had wet grass stains on it, as if he was on his back in the grass. Additionally, two people claimed to witness the acts that would support Zimmerman's claim of self defense...although one has stated that statement the police said she gave, that supports Zimmerman's story, is incorrect and that she never said the things the police claim.

Additionally, Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Martin had his hand in his waist...not that he had something in his hand...two entirely different things when you think about it. Furthermore, you don't need to have a knife or a gun or any other weapon for someone to feel threatened...which could, upon convincing articulation, grant someone the legal right to shoot and kill you.

Also, I'm not aware that you have to have any sort of marker on your vehicle or uniform or badge to speak to someone...that isn't, in and of itself illegal. I will admit that it starts to diminish the ability to put together a self defense argument...but that's up to a jury, so it's rather subjective.

You also haven't really mentioned the situation (something a defense attorney will do for Zimmerman). It was pointed out that Zimmerman had called the cops nearly 50 times in the prior year but it wasn't pointed out that (1) it was actually 'only' 46 and (2) that only 9 of those 46 calls to police were about a suspicious person with the rest being about "disturbances, break-ins, windows left open and other incidents"...now all of a sudden Zimmerman looks much less like a racist, cold-blooded murderer and much more like a very concerned citizen that cares about the safety of his neighbors and the community, which is also supported by the testimony of neighbors that 'knew' him...and (3) that, while on his self-imposed neighborhood watch, Zimmerman supposedly stopped a burglary from occurring and (4) that the community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year and (5) that they had phoned the police 402 times within that same time period...so, subtracting out Zimmerman's call...that would leave you averaging just about 1 call per day.

Also factor in it's dark, the self proclaimed neighborhood watchman doesn't recognize a guy that's walking around out in the rain. All of that seems reasonably suspicious and, even if it doesn't seem important, it seems like it's enough to cast doubt on a murder charge.

Finally, you have an eye witness that said he saw and heard what happened, as mentioned above...how does that stand up to the other 'eye witness' testimony from the person that appears to have recanted her original statement? Not to mention that she reportedly didn't see what happened, just heard the 'young voice' crying for help, then heard a shot, then saw the Zimmerman standing over the body. Question there is how much time elapsed and is it possible that Zimmerman shot Martin...possibly from his back, while on the ground...then got up/moved over to the body?

Again, I'm not here trying to defend the guy because I don't know what really happened, but all this garbage about him being a racist appears to be unfounded and even the notion that he was some sort of vigilante has really been unproven. So it's still seems to be a question as to whether or not this guy will even be put on trial and if he is, whether or not the state will be able to meet the burden of proof to charge this guy with anything more than voluntary manslaughter...maybe stretch it to 2nd degree murder, but seems very unlikely since it would be my guess the state would have a hard time proving there was malice on the part of Zimmerman.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan

In reply to cphbravo96
3/21/12
cphbravo96:
TraderDaily:

Typically when a person asserts self defense as the reason for their actions, it must be true that they meet the reasonable person standard in that Zimmerman must have reasonably believed that he faced an imminent threat to himself and it also must be true that the amount of force that he used must have been reasonable.

Here, it is highly unlikely that Zimmerman thought that it there was an imminent threat to himself and that his response was reasonable given that threat. In other words, it must be true that he believed that his life was in danger and that under the circumstances, his response was also reasonable.

Here, Martin did is the one that can be heard screaming for help, hardly the sign of someone who had the potential upper hand and who could strike fear in someone else like Zimmerman. Zimmerman also pursued him and as Martin's girlfriend indicates, Martin did not feel comfortable with this and because of this, he ran. This is indeed the behavior of someone who felt threatened and afraid, rather than someone who was an aggressor of a situation.

Also, we have to remember that even before Zimmerman got out of the car, he said to the dispatcher that Martin had "something" in his hand. This "something" was likely the pack of Skittles that he had in his possession. Would a reasonable person have used deadly force under this scenario without even knowing what he had in his hand? Absolutely not.

Even if Zimmerman did not have his weapon out when he exited his car, which by the way was unmarked, the mere confrontation with Martin surely would've alarmed Martin. A total stranger asking questions without a badge and uniform and who had already followed you without identifying himself would alarm anyone. Plus, this was late in the evening, adding to the likely alarm. When he exited his vehicle, it will be very difficult to show that given his aggression towards Martin, how he could've feared for his life and how he acted in self defense.

If this case is ever brought to trial, Florida's self defense law will also come into debate. A good attorney representing Martin's family will likely argue for the court to consider not just the law in its blanket black letter reading. But also consider it's rationale. Here is where Zimmerman's case would likely further collapse. Self defense laws are written to protect one from being in fear of protecting oneself when faced with imminent danger. However, Florida legislators surely did not enact the law to allow for vigilante killings or for deadly force to be used unnecessarily without just cause. If Martin had a means of applying deadly force and the state of mind to do so, surely he would've at least attempted to do so. Remember earlier, I said that Zimmerman stated that Martin had something in his hand. This "something" was not a gun/knife or any other weapon.

So, instead, he sought to run and when that failed, he was tackled and screamed for someone to help. This is inconsistent with someone who meant to do harm. Zimmerman's behavior is therefore inconsistent with the "spirit of the law", although many may look to the mere black letter of the law. The spirit of it was grossly violated however based on the facts that we have so far. I was not there, but this will be something that will be the core of many subarguments of the family attorney's case.

You still haven't provided any proof supporting your statements of how this went down. First you claim that Zimmerman exited the vehicle brandishing his weapon, but then dismiss it as if it's unimportant. Then you claimed that Zimmerman tackled Martin to the ground but the police reports stated that Zimmerman was bleeding from his nose and from the back of the head and that his jacket had wet grass stains on it, as if he was on his back in the grass. Additionally, two people claimed to witness the acts that would support Zimmerman's claim of self defense...although one has stated that statement the police said she gave, that supports Zimmerman's story, is incorrect and that she never said the things the police claim.

Additionally, Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Martin had his hand in his waist...not that he had something in his hand...two entirely different things when you think about it. Furthermore, you don't need to have a knife or a gun or any other weapon for someone to feel threatened...which could, upon convincing articulation, grant someone the legal right to shoot and kill you.

Also, I'm not aware that you have to have any sort of marker on your vehicle or uniform or badge to speak to someone...that isn't, in and of itself illegal. I will admit that it starts to diminish the ability to put together a self defense argument...but that's up to a jury, so it's rather subjective.

You also haven't really mentioned the situation (something a defense attorney will do for Zimmerman). It was pointed out that Zimmerman had called the cops nearly 50 times in the prior year but it wasn't pointed out that (1) it was actually 'only' 46 and (2) that only 9 of those 46 calls to police were about a suspicious person with the rest being about "disturbances, break-ins, windows left open and other incidents"...now all of a sudden Zimmerman looks much less like a racist, cold-blooded murderer and much more like a very concerned citizen that cares about the safety of his neighbors and the community, which is also supported by the testimony of neighbors that 'knew' him...and (3) that, while on his self-imposed neighborhood watch, Zimmerman supposedly stopped a burglary from occurring and (4) that the community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year and (5) that they had phoned the police 402 times within that same time period...so, subtracting out Zimmerman's call...that would leave you averaging just about 1 call per day.

Also factor in it's dark, the self proclaimed neighborhood watchman doesn't recognize a guy that's walking around out in the rain. All of that seems reasonably suspicious and, even if it doesn't seem important, it seems like it's enough to cast doubt on a murder charge.

Finally, you have an eye witness that said he saw and heard what happened, as mentioned above...how does that stand up to the other 'eye witness' testimony from the person that appears to have recanted her original statement? Not to mention that she reportedly didn't see what happened, just heard the 'young voice' crying for help, then heard a shot, then saw the Zimmerman standing over the body. Question there is how much time elapsed and is it possible that Zimmerman shot Martin...possibly from his back, while on the ground...then got up/moved over to the body?

Again, I'm not here trying to defend the guy because I don't know what really happened, but all this garbage about him being a racist appears to be unfounded and even the notion that he was some sort of vigilante has really been unproven. So it's still seems to be a question as to whether or not this guy will even be put on trial and if he is, whether or not the state will be able to meet the burden of proof to charge this guy with anything more than voluntary manslaughter...maybe stretch it to 2nd degree murder, but seems very unlikely since it would be my guess the state would have a hard time proving there was malice on the part of Zimmerman.

Regards

See my link above to how the FL lawmakers say that Zimmerman cannot use the self defense law to claim immunity.
Zimmerman followed Martin. You cannot argue self defense when you follow somone. Look at the article that I linked to. Lawmakers intended for the law to be for innocent civilians who are themselves attacked, not for someone who follows someone and then uses deadly force.
Take a look at the article referencing Martin's gf's account. She should know. She was on the phone with Martin.
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-20/justice/justice...

Also, Zimmerman's racism is evident given this:
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/317086/20120320/tr...

3/21/12

The second tragedy in this story is the police handling of it. The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet is absolutely incredible. There's no way the Sanford police chief survives this.

3/21/12

I think zimmerman is in the wrong but don't see enough evidence to suggest that he is a racist.

Did any witness actually see the confrontation from beginning to end?

In reply to TraderDaily
3/21/12
TraderDaily:
cphbravo96:
TraderDaily:

Typically when a person asserts self defense as the reason for their actions, it must be true that they meet the reasonable person standard in that Zimmerman must have reasonably believed that he faced an imminent threat to himself and it also must be true that the amount of force that he used must have been reasonable.

Here, it is highly unlikely that Zimmerman thought that it there was an imminent threat to himself and that his response was reasonable given that threat. In other words, it must be true that he believed that his life was in danger and that under the circumstances, his response was also reasonable.

Here, Martin did is the one that can be heard screaming for help, hardly the sign of someone who had the potential upper hand and who could strike fear in someone else like Zimmerman. Zimmerman also pursued him and as Martin's girlfriend indicates, Martin did not feel comfortable with this and because of this, he ran. This is indeed the behavior of someone who felt threatened and afraid, rather than someone who was an aggressor of a situation.

Also, we have to remember that even before Zimmerman got out of the car, he said to the dispatcher that Martin had "something" in his hand. This "something" was likely the pack of Skittles that he had in his possession. Would a reasonable person have used deadly force under this scenario without even knowing what he had in his hand? Absolutely not.

Even if Zimmerman did not have his weapon out when he exited his car, which by the way was unmarked, the mere confrontation with Martin surely would've alarmed Martin. A total stranger asking questions without a badge and uniform and who had already followed you without identifying himself would alarm anyone. Plus, this was late in the evening, adding to the likely alarm. When he exited his vehicle, it will be very difficult to show that given his aggression towards Martin, how he could've feared for his life and how he acted in self defense.

If this case is ever brought to trial, Florida's self defense law will also come into debate. A good attorney representing Martin's family will likely argue for the court to consider not just the law in its blanket black letter reading. But also consider it's rationale. Here is where Zimmerman's case would likely further collapse. Self defense laws are written to protect one from being in fear of protecting oneself when faced with imminent danger. However, Florida legislators surely did not enact the law to allow for vigilante killings or for deadly force to be used unnecessarily without just cause. If Martin had a means of applying deadly force and the state of mind to do so, surely he would've at least attempted to do so. Remember earlier, I said that Zimmerman stated that Martin had something in his hand. This "something" was not a gun/knife or any other weapon.

So, instead, he sought to run and when that failed, he was tackled and screamed for someone to help. This is inconsistent with someone who meant to do harm. Zimmerman's behavior is therefore inconsistent with the "spirit of the law", although many may look to the mere black letter of the law. The spirit of it was grossly violated however based on the facts that we have so far. I was not there, but this will be something that will be the core of many subarguments of the family attorney's case.

You still haven't provided any proof supporting your statements of how this went down. First you claim that Zimmerman exited the vehicle brandishing his weapon, but then dismiss it as if it's unimportant. Then you claimed that Zimmerman tackled Martin to the ground but the police reports stated that Zimmerman was bleeding from his nose and from the back of the head and that his jacket had wet grass stains on it, as if he was on his back in the grass. Additionally, two people claimed to witness the acts that would support Zimmerman's claim of self defense...although one has stated that statement the police said she gave, that supports Zimmerman's story, is incorrect and that she never said the things the police claim.

Additionally, Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Martin had his hand in his waist...not that he had something in his hand...two entirely different things when you think about it. Furthermore, you don't need to have a knife or a gun or any other weapon for someone to feel threatened...which could, upon convincing articulation, grant someone the legal right to shoot and kill you.

Also, I'm not aware that you have to have any sort of marker on your vehicle or uniform or badge to speak to someone...that isn't, in and of itself illegal. I will admit that it starts to diminish the ability to put together a self defense argument...but that's up to a jury, so it's rather subjective.

You also haven't really mentioned the situation (something a defense attorney will do for Zimmerman). It was pointed out that Zimmerman had called the cops nearly 50 times in the prior year but it wasn't pointed out that (1) it was actually 'only' 46 and (2) that only 9 of those 46 calls to police were about a suspicious person with the rest being about "disturbances, break-ins, windows left open and other incidents"...now all of a sudden Zimmerman looks much less like a racist, cold-blooded murderer and much more like a very concerned citizen that cares about the safety of his neighbors and the community, which is also supported by the testimony of neighbors that 'knew' him...and (3) that, while on his self-imposed neighborhood watch, Zimmerman supposedly stopped a burglary from occurring and (4) that the community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year and (5) that they had phoned the police 402 times within that same time period...so, subtracting out Zimmerman's call...that would leave you averaging just about 1 call per day.

Also factor in it's dark, the self proclaimed neighborhood watchman doesn't recognize a guy that's walking around out in the rain. All of that seems reasonably suspicious and, even if it doesn't seem important, it seems like it's enough to cast doubt on a murder charge.

Finally, you have an eye witness that said he saw and heard what happened, as mentioned above...how does that stand up to the other 'eye witness' testimony from the person that appears to have recanted her original statement? Not to mention that she reportedly didn't see what happened, just heard the 'young voice' crying for help, then heard a shot, then saw the Zimmerman standing over the body. Question there is how much time elapsed and is it possible that Zimmerman shot Martin...possibly from his back, while on the ground...then got up/moved over to the body?

Again, I'm not here trying to defend the guy because I don't know what really happened, but all this garbage about him being a racist appears to be unfounded and even the notion that he was some sort of vigilante has really been unproven. So it's still seems to be a question as to whether or not this guy will even be put on trial and if he is, whether or not the state will be able to meet the burden of proof to charge this guy with anything more than voluntary manslaughter...maybe stretch it to 2nd degree murder, but seems very unlikely since it would be my guess the state would have a hard time proving there was malice on the part of Zimmerman.

Regards

See my link above to how the FL lawmakers say that Zimmerman cannot use the self defense law to claim immunity.
Zimmerman followed Martin. You cannot argue self defense when you follow somone. Look at the article that I linked to. Lawmakers intended for the law to be for innocent civilians who are themselves attacked, not for someone who follows someone and then uses deadly force.
Take a look at the article referencing Martin's gf's account. She should know. She was on the phone with Martin.
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-20/justice/justice...

Also, Zimmerman's racism is evident given this:
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/317086/20120320/tr...

Unfortunately the FL lawmaker isn't going to be the one that judges whether or not that law applies in this case. He can state his opinion, which is fine...and valid...but the jury will have to decide whether it applies. He followed Martin, but the defense could still establish that the right to defend yourself remains since Zimmerman wasn't out looking to create problems...maybe he was just approaching this young man and Martin lashed out and attacked him. Of course, that probably isn't the case, but it doesn't mean that the defense won't try to persuade a jury otherwise. Besides, Zimmerman claimed that he got out of his vehicle to check the street name and was essentially jumped from behind. If that was the case, and maybe it's not, but assuming that is what he will tell a jury, it's reasonable that your right to defend yourself is reestablished. Even beyond that, the defense could convince the jury this was just a case of imperfect self-defense because Zimmerman feared for his life and responded accordingly, even if he wasn't within the confines of the law. Here again, there is no malice and therefore the state will be unable to carry a murder charge/conviction and it's still 'just' voluntary manslaughter...not that being convicted of voluntary manslaughter would be fun or anything.

From my understanding, the slur that is purported to be on the 911 dispatch tape is mumbled at best and people have reported hearing several different things...even the article clearly says that he "may" have said that...so again, you have to convince a jury to sentence a man to life in prison or possibly death because he may have said a racial slur that may prove that he was racist that may prove he had malice. The defense will ask the state to point to any other incident where Zimmerman was known to hold racist feelings and when they try to say what the neighbors said about Zimmerman and watching out for black people...the defense will yell, "Objection, hearsay!" and the judge will say "Sustained"...unless the person on the stand is the person that was actually told to watch out for black people.

It's sad how everyone had ran with this whole situation. Everybody is out to convict a man because the news media thinks he is guilty. Everywhere I look I see "the murder of Trayvon Martin" despite there being no conviction...hell, there aren't even charges filed! We all saw with the Casey Anthony trial how the media can warp people's perceptions...and I realize that not being found guilty doesn't actually make you innocent, but it goes to show what happened and what you can proved happened are two entirely different things.

I will admit the police seemed to fumble this case pretty well and that is unacceptable.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan

3/22/12

Guesses on what happens to this movie?

In reply to Brady4MVP
3/22/12
Brady4MVP:

I think zimmerman is in the wrong but don't see enough evidence to suggest that he is a racist.

Did any witness actually see the confrontation from beginning to end?

Go practice your GMAT, and maybe, maybe you might get into B-school.

Power and Money do not change men; they only unmask them

Pages

What's Your Opinion? Comment below:

Login or register to get credit (collect bananas).
All anonymous comments are unpublished until reviewed. No links or promotional material will be allowed. Most comments are published within 24 hours.
WallStreet Prep Master Financial Modeling