Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

The shooting in Florida


Off-Topic Discussions

101 to 150 of 920 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Burning down the White House does not count as occupation. ;)


I believe there was a problem with the British once upon a time, there was a bit of a war over it, something about the French getting involved too... Something about Independence?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Obo the all seeing. wrote:

They are more reasonable options but under stand your ground you don't have to run. It seems that Trayvon initially tried to create distance, but George was not trying to have it.

Trayvon was close to the house he was trying to get to, or so I have heard. If I was him there is no way I lead that guy back to where I live.

In any event I would never expect to be able to keep following someone without provoking a response. If George does not have that much common sense then he does not need to have a gun.

Bolding is mine.

That was my first thought on reading up on this story.

Mr. Zimmerman has been brought out by certain pro-gun advocates as an example of applicable force. They've done so without fully getting into the details, where the devil lives. Zimmerman actually hurts the right to bear arms argument, he shot an unarmed kid after being told to basically stand down. The anti gun crowd have seen this and pounced sensing a weakness. All of which blurs the reality of the events that happened and whether there was a possibility that justice was potentially being subverted.

That's why I stated earlier that gun control is off topic here, it's an unnecessary diversion from facts.


Shifty wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
It may have something to do with the fact that we've neverbeen occupied by a foreign government.

You haven't? erm... ok... history disagrees with you.

Us on the other hand, no, no we haven't.

Oh see this is where "History is Subjective".

In our mind the War of 1812, was just a really late battle in the Revolutionary War.
In the minds of the average Brit, the War of Insurection was an aggravating chapter where the Empire didn't so much lose as choose the path of least resistance.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Zagnabbit here is where we disagree, see I would posit that Mr Zimmerman placed himself in a very precarious position following suspicious people around at night, and I would ask WHY he felt confident enough to do this... because he was armed? mentally ill?

Now either he was mentally ill, or pretty stupid, both reasons enough not to be granted possession of a weapon. Sadly he did get a gun, sadly he was allowed to carry one around, sadly someone is now dead.

Now I'm not suggesting that every gun everywhere should be turned into paperclips, thats just stupid (see I'm actually quite pro-gun, but pro gun control).

So its not an unneccesary diversion, because right or wrong, he shot someone. This whole thing would not have happened had he not had a gun.
You can't have a shooting without a gun, so yes talking about how to control them is relevant. I'm not sure what you are seeing here that suggests it isn't.


I am pretty sure he would not be confronting anyone if he did not have the gun either. Instead of avoiding a confrontation he took the gun with him in case there was one.

I am sure that will be brought up in the hearings if not in the trial itself.

People trying to get rid of guns will also mention that guns give people courage to do things they would not normally do. I don't have a gun myself, but I do believe in the right to carry. I just wish we had a way to evaluate people to better determine who should and should not get one.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@Shifty

I see your point. Unfortunately I doubt that banning guns or restricting access would have alleviated this situation. Zimmerman could just as easily carried an illegal handgun, the event would have gone down just like it did, save for the added permutation of him "disarming the assailant" and shooting the youth with the gun. This happens all the rime in America.

Zimmerman is an overzealous Community Watch Captain. Which is very similar to an overzealous Security Guard. There is a ridiculous Seth Rogen film, Observe and Report, that pretty well lays out the personality type that Im getting at here. I have friends who thought that movie was hysterical, others thought it was horrible. Me I found it uncomfortably close to the truth.

I live in an independant suburb of a small city. We have a small police force. It has several experienced full timers and then some part timers that are young and with less experience. The younger ones work part time until they get hired by the County Sherrif's office or the City Police. Unfortunately there are a couple who can't seem to get hired by those two organizations, because they can't pass the psyche qualifications. These guys are still working in law enforcement, armed, but in a place where they are far less likely to get into mischief.

About 10 years ago I watched a private "Rent a Cop", pull a gun on a mouthy teenager.

I closed my bar on a Wednesday night, my security guard ( a deputy sherrif on injury leave) and my bartender joined me for breakfast at our local Waffle House, a 24 hour eatery. When we arrived the 3 contract security personnell were escorting a young black guy out of the restaurant followed by two late teen girls. The 3 kids were leaving, but the kid was being quite caustic in his mockery of the contract security personell. One of the Rent a Cops just lost his cool and pulled his gun, a Desert Eagle (huge hand gun) and pointed it at the kid. The kid was standing between the gun and the two young girls and my group of coworkers.
This would have been bad enough but then "Superfuzz" took the gun and moved forward to put it to the teens head while his buddies grabbed the kid's arms. This was amazingly stupid on it's face but then it went to 11, the kid pulled free of the guy on his left instinctually. That guy,"Superfuzz#2" bumped into the gun and Superfuzz#1 dropped the giant hand cannon on the ground. All 4 participants started rolling around on the ground. The kid was the only one seemingly aware of the gun laying on the ground, and methodically kicked it under a car.

About that time the real cops showed up. The total event so far took about 40 seconds. The local deputies and patrolmen split the participants up and got the various stories. The rent a cops were laughing about the whole episode, the kid was sullen and quiet and his girlfriends were in an uproar.
My bouncer took the senior sherrif deputy aside and explained the situation. The kid and his girlfriends were sent home. The rent a cop retrieved his firearm. The cops dispersed and we had breakfast.

This was the last weekend this security firm was contracted by Waffle House to do security.

Now, this long story looks like a brilliant reason not to allow firearms to private citizens.
Not so.
The contract security firm was bonded, insured and theoretically trained in the proper handling of fire arms. All of that failed in a spectacular fashion that night. However that firm was licensed to provide armed asset protection. No gun control would prevent that.

Moreover Superfuzz#1 was also armed with a Tazer, collapsible baton, tonfa style patrol baton, a tactical knife and, I kid you not, shurikens. All nearly arranged on his Batman style utility belt.

The guy would have been no less dangerous without a gun.


2 pages in and already getting admins attention...I think I will hide this thread...


Wow Zagnabbit, that sounds crazy!

Mind you I worked with some fairly unbalanced security guards back in the day too - guys with wild fantasies of joining Police/Military, with requisite ambitions to join some kind of Special Forces branch... and these guys were just about every flavour of unhinged one could imagine.

How they were given jobs was truly beyond me, I was only ever thankful they weren't given guns.

Anyhow, the long and the short of it is that we have a bad situation has obvioulsy gone very much to worse, and sadly there is one kid dead and another life ruined. A lot of bad decisions all 'round, and nothing good will come of any of it.

Why can't people just have huggy bears and rainbows and get along?

Paizo Employee Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed a post. The post that was removed contained a fairly offensive slur, and while you all are being civil (thank you!), that particular post could easily be taken out of context.

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Shifty wrote:

I believe there was a problem with the British once upon a time, there was a bit of a war over it, something about the French getting involved too... Something about Independence?

I could be making this up entirely, but I'm pretty sure the U.S. was part of the British Empire at the time of the War of Independence. I'd even go so far as to say that the people rebelling in the U.S. were themselves British citizens, and thus weren't occupied by a foreign government. They were occupied by their own government, which they decided to overthrow (at least locally).

Not that any of this is relevant in any way, but if you're going to cite an example of the U.S. being occupied by a foreign government, you might want to try citing an example in which the U.S. government actually existed in the occupied territory (that example being, at best, Canada/England in the War of 1812). By your logic, Mexico occupied the U.S. because Texas was part of Mexico prior to declaring its own independence and joining the U.S., Russia occupied the U.S. via Alaska, the French occupied the U.S. via New Orleans and Detroit, etc.

Or, if you'd prefer a different disingenuous argument, you could claim the U.S. is currently occupied by foreign governments due to the diplomatic immunity/special privileges received by embassies. That makes almost as much sense as claiming the U.S. was occupied by a foreign government during the Revolutionary War.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Something else occurred to me in regards to my story above and the event in Florida.

I have a Concealed Carry permit, I have for several years. Virtually all of my local constables are at least slightly aware of this fact. Now I find that carrying even a small PPK around is a hassle most of the time so I normally only do so when I'm transporting large amounts of cash or the local cops have warned me that there are potential criminals that target my type of buisness floating around.

If I were to have called 911, and reported a strange dude wandering around my neighborhood and told the dispatcher that I was shadowing the guy, I feel pretty confident that it would have gone out that an armed citizen was tailing a suspicious perp. That would have gotten at least 3 cruisers out to my area pretty quick.

I wonder if the cops in Fla. Knew that Zimmerman was armed?


Sebastian wrote:
Not that any of this is relevant in any way, but if you're going to cite an example of the U.S. being occupied by a foreign government, you might want to try citing an example in which the U.S. government actually existed in the occupied territory (that example being, at best, Canada/England in the War of 1812).

Well you could go down that path, or if you were following the whole conversation you'd have noted that it wa a response to a poster, and once you understand that what he stated was 100% incorrect, and that if anything, the US has been closer to being 'occupied' than we ever have (no revolutionary wars here) then it would all make sense. Helps to follow a whole conversation in full before jumping in with clever arguments.


Just because you hate our freedom, Shifty, doesn't mean you have to be snide.

Spoiler:
I am, of course, kidding.

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Shifty wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
Not that any of this is relevant in any way, but if you're going to cite an example of the U.S. being occupied by a foreign government, you might want to try citing an example in which the U.S. government actually existed in the occupied territory (that example being, at best, Canada/England in the War of 1812).

Well you could go down that path, or if you were following the whole conversation you'd have noted that it wa a response to a poster, and once you understand that what he stated was 100% incorrect, and that if anything, the US has been closer to being 'occupied' than we ever have (no revolutionary wars here) then it would all make sense. Helps to follow a whole conversation in full before jumping in with clever arguments.

Bah. The last thing I want to do is read the whole conversation - I came here to sniff glue and jump in with clever arguments, and, as previously mentioned I'M ALL OUT OF GLUE!!!!

Plus, not only do I object to being well-informed, taking things in context reduces the opportunity for clever arguments!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't argue with that. 100% all round sensibility! :)


What happens if Zimmerman makes his call to the police and doesn't follow the kid? For me, that's all it comes down to. If he just lets the cops do their job, then I have to believe that nobody dies.

/ you may feel safe while carrying a concealed gun, but I don't share your sentiment.


zagnabbit wrote:
I wonder if the cops in Fla. Knew that Zimmerman was armed?

I get the distinct feeling that they knew him as a very active neighborhood watch captain. As for being armed, how could they not know based on that relationship?

sub-question: did his neighborhood watch group know that he was armed?

/ - if there is no relief in criminal court, look for the family to proceed to civil court. That makes these questions extremely important.


loaba wrote:
If he just lets the cops do their job, then I have to believe that nobody dies.

Quite so.

Make the observations, report them in.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian wrote:

Bah. The last thing I want to do is read the whole conversation - I came here to sniff glue and jump in with clever arguments, and, as previously mentioned I'M ALL OUT OF GLUE!!!!

Plus, not only do I object to being well-informed, taking things in context reduces the opportunity for clever arguments!

Ponies really shouldn't be so quick to point out glue shortages.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ponies really shouldn't be so quick to point out glue shortages.

How many ponies does it take to make a gelatinous cube?

Shadow Lodge

Shifty wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ponies really shouldn't be so quick to point out glue shortages.
How many ponies does it take to make a gelatinous cube?

Lick. "One..."

Lick "two..."

*CRUNCH* "three"

"Three."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't worry everyone, this issue will go away very soon. Obama told me a secret, he said.....

"This is my last election, and after my election I have more flexibility"

I told him I will transmit this to my people in Chicago.

Shadow Lodge

Zimmerman's father was white. We live in a patriarchal society. His neighbors seem to be mostly white. He may have a latino mother but he appears to have been raised in a mostly white culture. It wouldn't surprise me if he also inherited the prejudices of said culture. - considering what was clearly mumbled in his 911 call (it does not say punks or goons - who says goons?).

However, that does not matter. I have been on the losing end of a fist fight and I have been stomped much worse than Zimmerman. Never did the idea of blasting my assailant in the chest come to my mind as an appropriate reaction. I wanted to hurt him...but not kill him. Zimmerman could have shot him in the leg if he had to.

Edit: As a plus, if Zimmerman is never arrested it teaches me that I can kill someone in Florida by either:

1. Shooting them away from witnesses, afterwards breaking my nose by bashing it against he pavement.

2. Whispering horrible things to them until I coax them into attacking me, then shoot them and claim self defense.


Asphere wrote:

Zimmerman's father was white. We live in a patriarchal society. His neighbors seem to be mostly white. He may have a latino mother but he appears to have been raised in a mostly white culture. It wouldn't surprise me if he also inherited the prejudices of said culture. - considering what was clearly mumbled in his 911 call (it does not say punks or goons - who says goons?).

However, that does not matter. I have been on the losing end of a fist fight and I have been stomped much worse than Zimmerman. Never did the idea of blasting my assailant in the chest come to my mind as an appropriate reaction. I wanted to hurt him...but not kill him. Zimmerman could have shot him in the leg if he had to.

Edit: As a plus, if Zimmerman is never arrested it teaches me that I can kill someone in Florida by either:

1. Shooting them away from witnesses, afterwards breaking my nose by bashing it against he pavement.

2. Whispering horrible things to them until I coax them into attacking me, then shoot them and claim self defense.

Hold on, White people are not inherently racist! Also, lots of people say Goons. I play Hockey so its a popular term. Its like saying Thug.

You say he grew up in a mostly White culture. If you have not noticed you and I live and thrive due to the White culture your blasting.

You and I do NOT KNOW THE DETAILS. Its seriously irresponsible of you to state your opinion as fact.

Stop being a usefull idiot friend. Your being had!


Aretas, I'm not trying trying to be a jerk, but "white" shouldn't be capitalized like that; it's not a nationality.


Hitdice wrote:
Aretas, I'm not trying trying to be a jerk, but "white" shouldn't be capitalized like that; it's not a nationality.

For me white & black is just a color. White & Black refers to people.

I know your no trying to be a jerk but the post I initially commented on really makes you sound like one.
What can I say Sir, you said that Zimmerman inhereted the prejudices of the White culture.


Now I clearly do not know all the details, nobody here does.

So I'm just going to make some hypotheticals that may or may not be what really happened.

If Zimmerman was following Martin, and then turned back to go to his truck and at that point Martin attacked him, then I would agree that the stand your ground doesn't apply. That is because in that case he would have been actually trying to leave when he was attacked.

A suppose of witness said that they saw two people fighting on the ground, one on top of the other before the shot. And that after Martin was dead from getting shot in the chest, and was face down. Now consider if this is true, how did he end up face down if they were fighting on top of each other? If Martin was on bottom when he got shot, he would be dead face up, unless Zimmerman purposefully rolled him over. Which I find a little hard to believe that Zimmerman was that clever. Now if Martin was on top when he was shot, then he might end up face down by Zimmerman dragging himself out from underneath, or by pushing him off and Martin rolling at that point.

Now of course if Martin was actually shot while he was standing then ending up face down is very possible, but the likelihood that he was on the bottom of fight and shot and ended up face down isn't large, IMO of course.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Zimmerman guy is obviously in the right. I was disturbed by him following Martin and frankly getting into people's business too much. I think he probably wants to see himself as a hero and has been looking for a chance to prove it. There was a story from another homeowner where the homeowner was talking about how Zimmerman saw someone trying to break into the guy's house and Zimmerman was able to scare the thief off so unfortunately the cops didn't get the person. Makes you wonder if the whole thief thing might not have been concocted by Zimmerman to build his "rep" in the neighborhood.

So, I think there is a good chance Zimmerman is in the wrong here, but I just hope that this doesn't become another Duke Lacrosse rape case situation. I want to hear from the paramedic that treated Zimmerman, and the cop in the video that looks at his head. I think we need to realize that we will have high emotions to something like this, but we also need to realize that until we know more FACTS we should not let our emotions dictate our actions.


pres man wrote:

Now I clearly do not know all the details, nobody here does.

So I'm just going to make some hypotheticals that may or may not be what really happened.

If Zimmerman was following Martin, and then turned back to go to his truck and at that point Martin attacked him, then I would agree that the stand your ground doesn't apply. That is because in that case he would have been actually trying to leave when he was attacked.

A suppose of witness said that they saw two people fighting on the ground, one on top of the other before the shot. And that after Martin was dead from getting shot in the chest, and was face down. Now consider if this is true, how did he end up face down if they were fighting on top of each other? If Martin was on bottom when he got shot, he would be dead face up, unless Zimmerman purposefully rolled him over. Which I find a little hard to believe that Zimmerman was that clever. Now if Martin was on top when he was shot, then he might end up face down by Zimmerman dragging himself out from underneath, or by pushing him off and Martin rolling at that point.

Now of course if Martin was actually shot while he was standing then ending up face down is very possible, but the likelihood that he was on the bottom of fight and shot and ended up face down isn't large, IMO of course.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Zimmerman guy is obviously in the right. I was disturbed by him following Martin and frankly getting into people's business too much. I think he probably wants to see himself as a hero and has been looking for a chance to prove it. There was a story from another homeowner where the homeowner was talking about how Zimmerman saw someone trying to break into the guy's house and Zimmerman was able to scare the thief off so unfortunately the cops didn't get the person. Makes you wonder if the whole thief thing might not have been concocted by Zimmerman to build his "rep" in the neighborhood.

So, I think there is a good chance Zimmerman is in the wrong here, but I just hope that...

Can you send this email to Al Sharpton, Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson, Obama!

I wish they let the investigation take its course and not allow the Black Panthers & Spike "in the brain" Lee to incite hate among the races.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aretas wrote:
Asphere wrote:

Zimmerman's father was white. We live in a patriarchal society. His neighbors seem to be mostly white. He may have a latino mother but he appears to have been raised in a mostly white culture. It wouldn't surprise me if he also inherited the prejudices of said culture. - considering what was clearly mumbled in his 911 call (it does not say punks or goons - who says goons?).

However, that does not matter. I have been on the losing end of a fist fight and I have been stomped much worse than Zimmerman. Never did the idea of blasting my assailant in the chest come to my mind as an appropriate reaction. I wanted to hurt him...but not kill him. Zimmerman could have shot him in the leg if he had to.

Edit: As a plus, if Zimmerman is never arrested it teaches me that I can kill someone in Florida by either:

1. Shooting them away from witnesses, afterwards breaking my nose by bashing it against he pavement.

2. Whispering horrible things to them until I coax them into attacking me, then shoot them and claim self defense.

Hold on, White people are not inherently racist! Also, lots of people say Goons. I play Hockey so its a popular term. Its like saying Thug.

You say he grew up in a mostly White culture. If you have not noticed you and I live and thrive due to the White culture your blasting.

You and I do NOT KNOW THE DETAILS. Its seriously irresponsible of you to state your opinion as fact.

Stop being a usefull idiot friend. Your being had!

I didn't say whites were inherently racist. I said I wouldn't be surprised if he inherited the type of racism found in white culture. It IS found in white culture. I know this because I am white and I live in the south. Don't put words into my mouth. I also did not bash white culture. There can be good and bad things found in every culture. White culture, especially in America, has a long history with racism against blacks and supporting a system that promotes institutionalized racism. There is no need to ignore that. It doesn't mean that all whites are racist, or, that there is nothing good about white culture. Who is the one seeing what they want to see?

Okay so maybe hockey players say goon. As someone from the south that has lived in Florida that is roughly the same age as Zimmerman - I have never heard that term used and I would like to point out that we don't have many hockey fans down here. However, I have heard the word "coon" thrown around many times and that is what I can clearly hear in the audio of the 911 call.

Why weren't there photographs of Zimmerman's injuries taken? Why wasn't evidence collected at the crime scene? This stuff happens even in situations where there is a justified homicide. Why didn't it happen here? Was Zimmerman's father some retired Florida judge or something...oh...wait...he was.

By the way...when you called me a useful idiot...you spelled "useful" wrong.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aretas wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Aretas, I'm not trying trying to be a jerk, but "white" shouldn't be capitalized like that; it's not a nationality.

For me white & black is just a color. White & Black refers to people.

I know your no trying to be a jerk but the post I initially commented on really makes you sound like one.
What can I say Sir, you said that Zimmerman inhereted the prejudices of the White culture.

No he didn't. That was me. And I said I wouldn't be surprised if he had...try to keep up Aretas.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aretas wrote:

Don't worry everyone, this issue will go away very soon. Obama told me a secret, he said.....

"This is my last election, and after my election I have more flexibility"

I told him I will transmit this to my people in Chicago.

Wait...your sardonic tone makes me think that you think this is odd behavior for a president. Every president waits until re-election to push their agendas. Obama is no different. After all he is just a left wing member of the corporate party and he represents the same private interests that Bush and Romney and the rest of the sillies represent. They are all a bunch of corrupt war mongers.


And the Race & Hate Card just keep moving forward. I'm done.

Good night everyone & dream of confirming crits.


Aretas wrote:

Can you send this email to Al Sharpton, Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson, Obama!

I wish they let the investigation take its course and not allow the Black Panthers & Spike "in the brain" Lee to incite hate among the races.

None of them are inciting hate. Many people did not even hear them speak until recently, which was after the media took the story and ran with it. Once the tapes were released of Zimmerman being told to not follow anyone, and the Martin ending up dead, that was all that was needed.

I don't even know who Bobby Rush is.

Qadira

Asphere wrote:
what was clearly mumbled in his 911 call

You realize this is an oxymoron, yes? Mumbling, by definition, is unclear. Tell someone what those words are, then play the tape, and chances are they'll hear the words simply by power of suggestion. I'll wait for audio experts to go over the tape before making any judgements there.

As for your examples of killing someone in Florida and claiming self defense, you've got a better plan than Zimmerman. The video of him walking into the station clearly shows he doesn't have a broken nose. Even if he were treated by paramedics at the scene before being taken into custody, he'd have swelling, not to mention a large amount of blood on his shirt. If he shot Martin at point blank range during a struggle, as he says he did, he'd likely have blood on him from that as well. The evidence coming to light doesn't jibe very well with his version of events.

Shadow Lodge

Aretas wrote:
pres man wrote:

Now I clearly do not know all the details, nobody here does.

So I'm just going to make some hypotheticals that may or may not be what really happened.

If Zimmerman was following Martin, and then turned back to go to his truck and at that point Martin attacked him, then I would agree that the stand your ground doesn't apply. That is because in that case he would have been actually trying to leave when he was attacked.

A suppose of witness said that they saw two people fighting on the ground, one on top of the other before the shot. And that after Martin was dead from getting shot in the chest, and was face down. Now consider if this is true, how did he end up face down if they were fighting on top of each other? If Martin was on bottom when he got shot, he would be dead face up, unless Zimmerman purposefully rolled him over. Which I find a little hard to believe that Zimmerman was that clever. Now if Martin was on top when he was shot, then he might end up face down by Zimmerman dragging himself out from underneath, or by pushing him off and Martin rolling at that point.

Now of course if Martin was actually shot while he was standing then ending up face down is very possible, but the likelihood that he was on the bottom of fight and shot and ended up face down isn't large, IMO of course.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Zimmerman guy is obviously in the right. I was disturbed by him following Martin and frankly getting into people's business too much. I think he probably wants to see himself as a hero and has been looking for a chance to prove it. There was a story from another homeowner where the homeowner was talking about how Zimmerman saw someone trying to break into the guy's house and Zimmerman was able to scare the thief off so unfortunately the cops didn't get the person. Makes you wonder if the whole thief thing might not have been concocted by Zimmerman to build his "rep" in the neighborhood.

So, I think there is a good chance Zimmerman is in the wrong here, but

...

While I agree that the profit seeking media has latched on to the more popular story line to turn a profit, and has gone as far as presenting photographs of Zimmerman that make him look like a cave troll, there wasn't going to be and investigation until the crazies pressured the state. The ironic thing is that the police sort of screwed Zimmerman because it will be hard for him to get a fair trial when this inevitably does go to court. As of now, no charges have been filed and there is no official investigation that I am aware of. Because of this, there needs to be media attention - even if it is biased and over the top.

Shadow Lodge

Aretas wrote:

And the Race & Hate Card just keep moving forward. I'm done.

Good night everyone & dream of confirming crits.

Oh brother. /rolleyes

Shadow Lodge

Shadowborn wrote:
Asphere wrote:
what was clearly mumbled in his 911 call

You realize this is an oxymoron, yes? Mumbling, by definition, is unclear. Tell someone what those words are, then play the tape, and chances are they'll hear the words simply by power of suggestion. I'll wait for audio experts to go over the tape before making any judgements there.

As for your examples of killing someone in Florida and claiming self defense, you've got a better plan than Zimmerman. The video of him walking into the station clearly shows he doesn't have a broken nose. Even if he were treated by paramedics at the scene before being taken into custody, he'd have swelling, not to mention a large amount of blood on his shirt. If he shot Martin at point blank range during a struggle, as he says he did, he'd likely have blood on him from that as well. The evidence coming to light doesn't jibe very well with his version of events.

Alright...but as far as mumbles go...it was relatively clear. I first heard the 911 tape before I knew what it was about. I don't have cable and my antenna only picks up the Spanish Christian channel. In fact, that 911 call and the enhanced audio is what made me start reading about it. The funny thing is that most of my colleagues who are also southern also immediately heard "coons" because nobody here calls anyone a goon. Maybe he said "poon" but then the whole thing gets really weird...


I must admit, I had to read the 'transcript' while listening to make out that he 'used' the racial slur.


Also, please don't forget that it took public protests and the direct involvement of the mayor to get the 911 tape released. For whatever reason, it sounds like the "thin blue line/code of silence" went up around this case. I doubt we'll hear from the cops at the scene anytime soon.

Communist Propaganda Alert!


Regardless of how unwise it was, Zimmerman's following Martin didn't get Martin killed. Martin doubling back after Zimmerman lost him and assaulting Zimmerman got him killed.

I'm glad to have woken up today to see an article by an AP journalist acknowledging that the media (specifically their posting a picthre of Trayvon as a child and Zimmerman not only particularly white looking, but in county orange) had responsibility for whipping up the frothing herd of dumbasses shouting "racism" before the trial.

Which is not to say that there wasn't a racist angle. Its only to say that jumping to that conclusion before all the facts emerge in the trial is race baiting.


Darkwing Duck wrote:


Regardless of how unwise it was, Zimmerman's following Martin didn't get Martin killed. Martin doubling back after Zimmerman lost him and assaulting Zimmerman got him killed.

I'm glad to have woken up today to see an article by an AP journalist acknowledging that the media (specifically their posting a picthre of Trayvon as a child and Zimmerman not only particularly white looking, but in county orange) had responsibility for whipping up the frothing herd of dumbasses shouting "racism" before the trial.

Which is not to say that there wasn't a racist angle. Its only to say that jumping to that conclusion before all the facts emerge in the trial is race baiting.

Two points:

1) Do we actually have any evidence, besides Zimmerman's testimony that he lost Martin and Martin followed him back and attacked him?
Zimmerman obviously has motive to make Martin look like the aggressor.

We do have some evidence (witness statements) that there was a fight and that Martin was winning (on top, hitting him or slamming him into pavement), but that doesn't mean Martin started it. Or wasn't justified in starting it.

2) As others have said here, without the media "whipping up the frothing herd" there might not have been a trial. The outside investigations and the grand jury only started due to public pressure. Maybe the Sanford police were still investigating and an arrest would have been made or a grand jury convened anyway, but I haven't seen any evidence suggesting it. Near as I can tell, before the media pressure kicked in, it was a closed case, self defense.

Shadow Lodge

Darkwing Duck wrote:


Regardless of how unwise it was, Zimmerman's following Martin didn't get Martin killed. Martin doubling back after Zimmerman lost him and assaulting Zimmerman got him killed.

I'm glad to have woken up today to see an article by an AP journalist acknowledging that the media (specifically their posting a picthre of Trayvon as a child and Zimmerman not only particularly white looking, but in county orange) had responsibility for whipping up the frothing herd of dumbasses shouting "racism" before the trial.

Which is not to say that there wasn't a racist angle. Its only to say that jumping to that conclusion before all the facts emerge in the trial is race baiting.

Again, without the media whipping up the "frothing herd" there wouldn't have been a trial. Zimmerman was never charged and witnesses say that the police were on his side from the moment they arrived. As of now there is not going to be a trial because Zimmerman has not been charged with anything.

Also, you are repeating Zimmerman's story as fact - we don't know whether Zimmerman caught up with Trayvon or Trayvon "doubled back". The doubling back angle is unraveling with witness accounts and the 911 call and it sounds more likely that Zimmerman caught up with Trayvon.


thejeff wrote:


Two points:
1) Do we actually have any evidence, besides Zimmerman's testimony that he lost Martin and Martin followed him back and attacked him?
Zimmerman obviously has motive to make Martin look like the aggressor.

We do have some evidence (witness statements) that there was a fight and that Martin was winning (on top, hitting him or slamming him into pavement), but that doesn't mean Martin started it. Or wasn't justified in starting it.

2) As others have said here, without the media "whipping up the frothing herd" there might not have been a trial. The outside investigations and the grand jury only started due to public pressure. Maybe the Sanford police were still investigating and an arrest would have been made or a grand jury convened anyway, but I haven't seen any evidence suggesting it. Near as I can tell, before the media pressure kicked in, it was a closed case, self defense.

We have a statement by the police department that Zimmerman's statement is consistent with the evidence.

I've seen no evidence that there might not have been a trial without the frothing herd. What there might not have been is a threatened kidnapping by the Black Panthers, death threats to Zimmerman's family, and more support for Zimmerman (including potential witnesses).

Shadow Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:


Regardless of how unwise it was, Zimmerman's following Martin didn't get Martin killed. Martin doubling back after Zimmerman lost him and assaulting Zimmerman got him killed.

I'm glad to have woken up today to see an article by an AP journalist acknowledging that the media (specifically their posting a picthre of Trayvon as a child and Zimmerman not only particularly white looking, but in county orange) had responsibility for whipping up the frothing herd of dumbasses shouting "racism" before the trial.

Which is not to say that there wasn't a racist angle. Its only to say that jumping to that conclusion before all the facts emerge in the trial is race baiting.

Two points:

1) Do we actually have any evidence, besides Zimmerman's testimony that he lost Martin and Martin followed him back and attacked him?
Zimmerman obviously has motive to make Martin look like the aggressor.

We do have some evidence (witness statements) that there was a fight and that Martin was winning (on top, hitting him or slamming him into pavement), but that doesn't mean Martin started it. Or wasn't justified in starting it.

2) As others have said here, without the media "whipping up the frothing herd" there might not have been a trial. The outside investigations and the grand jury only started due to public pressure. Maybe the Sanford police were still investigating and an arrest would have been made or a grand jury convened anyway, but I haven't seen any evidence suggesting it. Near as I can tell, before the media pressure kicked in, it was a closed case, self defense.

Actually the only evidence of a fight, unless this changed this morning, is the video from the station of a cop momentarily looking at the back of Zimmerman's head which appears to be clean of any cuts or bruises. He certainly didn't appear to have a broken nose, dirt on his clothes, blood on his clothes, and nobody took photographs of his injuries. There hasn't been any official word from EMTs about what they say or treated when they arrived. Also, the funeral director didn't find any evidence on Trayvon's body that there had been a fight. This is odd because it suggests that if Zimmerman's story is true that he didn't first attempt to punch/kick/push Trayvon before he pulled his gun and shot him. Imagine every fist fight ended like that.

Shadow Lodge

Darkwing Duck wrote:
thejeff wrote:


Two points:
1) Do we actually have any evidence, besides Zimmerman's testimony that he lost Martin and Martin followed him back and attacked him?
Zimmerman obviously has motive to make Martin look like the aggressor.

We do have some evidence (witness statements) that there was a fight and that Martin was winning (on top, hitting him or slamming him into pavement), but that doesn't mean Martin started it. Or wasn't justified in starting it.

2) As others have said here, without the media "whipping up the frothing herd" there might not have been a trial. The outside investigations and the grand jury only started due to public pressure. Maybe the Sanford police were still investigating and an arrest would have been made or a grand jury convened anyway, but I haven't seen any evidence suggesting it. Near as I can tell, before the media pressure kicked in, it was a closed case, self defense.

We have a statement by the police department that Zimmerman's statement is consistent with the evidence.

I've seen no evidence that there might not have been a trial without the frothing herd. What there might not have been is a threatened kidnapping by the Black Panthers, death threats to Zimmerman's family, and more support for Zimmerman (including potential witnesses).

We also have a history of shotty police work from the same police department.

Also, how would there be a trial without charges filed against Zimmerman? The police agreed with Zimmerman's story and let him go without filing charges. It appeared to be a close case. Even the lead investigator told the police department that they needed to file charges - they still didn't.

Please refer to them as "The New Black Panther Party (NBPP)". These are not the same guys as "The Black Panthers" from the 70's with members like Huey Newton. Two totally different groups. The former wants a race war - they are similar to the Klan. The latter wanted equality. Huge difference.

Also, saying that the witnesses support Zimmerman's story seems to me to be dishonest. There seems to be 1-2 that do and then 1-2 that don't and all of their accounts are muddled. In the end it doesn't matter because you are not allowed to shoot somebody that you were following/harassing because you got into a fist fight with them. If you could do that it would be simple to stage a murder in Florida. You could just whisper into the ear of you enemy things about their mother, get them to punch you in the face, and the blast them in the chest and claim self defense.


Quote:


Actually the only evidence of a fight, unless this changed this morning, is the video from the station of a cop momentarily looking at the back of Zimmerman's head which appears to be clean of any cuts or bruises. He certainly didn't appear to have a broken nose, dirt on his clothes, blood on his clothes, and nobody took photographs of his injuries. There hasn't been any official word...

The video is not high resolution. Honestly, when I see the video, I do see something which may be signs of a scuffle. I can't say if what I'm seeing is really there and I do look forward to the results of the forensic analysis of the video.

But there is also statements by two independent witnesses (one of which is a minor, so I doubt will show up in court) that there was a fight.


Asphere wrote:


We also have a history of shotty police work from the same police department.

Also, how would there be a trial without charges filed against Zimmerman? The police agreed with Zimmerman's story and let him go without filing charges. It appeared to be a close case. Even the lead investigator told the police department that they needed to file charges - they still didn't.

Please refer to them as "The New Black Panther Party (NBPP)". These are not the same guys as "The Black Panthers" from the 70's with members like Huey Newton. Two totally different groups. The former wants a race war - they are similar to the Klan. The latter wanted equality. Huge difference....

No doubt that there was shotty police work here. It seems to me that they messed up in favor of both sides (for example, they should have required that Zimmerman be treated at a hospital for his wounds so that there was an evidence trail). Which is why I'm glad that there will be a grand jury. Letting Zimmerman go at the scene is Florida law. So is the grand jury.

I have a lot of respect for the Black Panthers from the 70s. I thought it was the same group and had just changed with the times. Thanks for pointing out that they are distinctly different groups.

Shadow Lodge

Darkwing Duck wrote:


Quote:


Actually the only evidence of a fight, unless this changed this morning, is the video from the station of a cop momentarily looking at the back of Zimmerman's head which appears to be clean of any cuts or bruises. He certainly didn't appear to have a broken nose, dirt on his clothes, blood on his clothes, and nobody took photographs of his injuries. There hasn't been any official word...

The video is not high resolution. Honestly, when I see the video, I do see something which may be signs of a scuffle. I can't say if what I'm seeing is really there and I do look forward to the results of the forensic analysis of the video.

But there is also statements by two independent witnesses (one of which is a minor, so I doubt will show up in court) that there was a fight.

If there were signs of a fight, that warranted killing in self defense, there should be clear signs of injury. Not a few tiny paper cuts. Zimmerman said that his nose was broken. No blood on his shirt. A witness heard the shot and saw Zimmerman get off of Trayvon and didn't see any blood. She tried to tell the police but they wouldn't even take her statement. If his nose was broken it would be easy to prove it. And YES they do have to. The police must defend why they are not filing charges with the evidence they collected. The problem is that they didn't collect any.


Darkwing Duck wrote:
I have a lot of respect for the Black Panthers from the 70s.

Really? I find that a little surprising.

101 to 150 of 920 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / The shooting in Florida All Messageboards

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.