The Cis / Privilege definition and intent discussion thread.


Off-Topic Discussions

651 to 700 of 892 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>

BigNorseWolf wrote:

So you're taking the weaker position because its politically correct. All of your "points" are a coin flip , they could go one way or the other to show either side. This makes your entire thought process arbitrary and random when you repeatedly select heads for no reason.

history of racism between that racial group and African Americans.- Goes for either white or hispanic.

One of his parents is white/hispanic Goes for both.

The fact he claims to be of hispanic heritage- which doesn't mean he picked up any racism from that

combined with the fact his neighborhood was inclusive enough to have some of Martin's family there- And was exclusive enough that he couldn't confuse martin with another kid who lived there more often.

Quote:
suggests to me that the racism in question was more along the lines of the hispanic type
Your exact same arguments work equally well for either side and his own actions and words greatly contradict you.

There was a comment here from the Legion aspect of my personality. There is... disagreement, but I ultimately won. If you saw it, please accept my apologies for it.

It's a long, complicated explanation behind that. Put it down to my mental state being abnormal.

Here's the thing... Martin did not introduce himself to the neighborhood watch. And by all accounts, Zimmerman knew the neighborhood kids and, due to a rash of recent burglaries, was looking for African Americans who were out to commit burglaries. That is his account and the account of several people in the neighborhood. The accounts of those other people also note that Zimmerman had African Americans and hispanics over to his house all of the time; the fact it wasn't unusual for him and only remarked on after the racism charges came up suggests the neighborhood was so inclusive that it wasn't abnormal.

So, he confronted Martin. Martin was hostile. Zimmerman threatened to, and did, call the cops. All Martin would have had to do was wait on the police. The entire mess would have been cleared up then and there.

Both people were idiots. But Martin was acting suspicious, Zimmerman had reason to be suspicious. And then Zimmerman pulled something extremely stupid in that he followed the kid... so, naturally, I don't think anyone here would blame Martin for thinking that Zimmerman may actually want to harm him. Thinking that does tend to lead to violence among those who are used to certain styles of life.

Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that Martin was acting suspicious, Zimmerman was neighborhood watch, they both acted like idiots, both turned out to be racist (check out the comments Martin made that were recorded), and one of them got killed. That could easily have happened in any neighborhood, regardless of the racial composition or economic level, and probably did happen a few times before.

After all, the police seemed to have a standard procedure for how they handled and investigated it... suggests they were familiar with that kind of incident.

So, yeah, the comments from Zimmerman prove nothing except that he was racist. His actions prove nothing except that he was an idiot. Do you have anything that actually supports your claim? Anything that shows that the neighborhood was not that inclusive? Anything to show he was anything other than a racist? Because so far, you can't even prove the neighborhood was that exclusive beyond your own biases.


GreyWolfLord wrote:


There's a LOT of BS on this thread. You just claimed many African American, Asian, and Hispanic judges are all part of white culture.

You realize that zimmerman's dad IS white right?

Quote:
What next, you going to say all lawyers have to be white as well...hence is why Obama is actually a white?

Culturally? More or less yes. He was raised by a granola hippy mother and in indonesia his white as the driven snow grandparents in hawaii. He went to lawschool and reads comic books. He's not a secret muslim he's a secret nerd.

AFAIK his first contact with black culture in america (as far as such a thing can be defined) was as a community organizer in chicago.

Quote:
Bet you'll next say Jesse Jackson and Al Franken are white as well.

And I don't have time for people that need to put words in my mouth. Good day.

If you're going to accuse a dead person of robbery, you might want to consider the other possibility that thieves might suddenly find an area where the neighborhood watch shot a guy and didn't even make him post bail to get out as somewhere they might want to avoid.


Fabius Maximus wrote:
pres man wrote:
@FAbius, I think you are purposefully not seeing the forest for the trees.

I think it's the other way around. The point is that denigrating a certain group of people because of a perceived shared attribute like phenotype, descent or religion is hostile. Pure and simple.

The label "race" is part of the problem because it is simply incorrect in relation to people. It's not even used in biology anymore.

If you keep on using "race", you're making it easier for people to denigrate people based on that term.

Good thing I didn't use race in that discussion and I wasn't denigrate anything.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Thank you Cain.

Again, its not that only white people can be racist but that the type or tone of zimmerman's racism seems more like "angry white guy racism" than "latino vs black" racism. Its sad that I live in a country with either much less both, but you can hardly fault me for pointing out whats there. When fox news is your biggest defender I think its a lock that its the former rather than the later.

Magus Janus wrote:
It's essentially an attempt at societal conditioning of entire races to make everyone think that being in power requires conforming to certain cultural expectations and that those cultural expectations are tied to being white.

I don't make the rules, I just point them out.

Quote:
Tendencies of groups do not make actualities of people. Your arguing tendency is, as I stated earlier, a case of fallacy of composition. Just like mine was.

Incorrect. I am arguing that Zimmerman in particular is a racist based off of what he said and what he did- which was namely to assume that a black kid walking in the neighborhood must be thief. I am not assuming that he's a racist because he's latino and or because he's white. For the TYPE of racism he's exibiting some of my points went into his background.

MAYBE...OR perhaps it was because Trayvon exhibited the attributes of the person that had been observed breaking and stealing previously.

Isn't it interesting (at least from some reports) that those breakins and stealing stopped when Trayvon was no longer around.

Coincidence? Or perhaps there was MORE to go on than simply racism in regards to Trayvon's actions?


BigNorseWolf wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:


There's a LOT of BS on this thread. You just claimed many African American, Asian, and Hispanic judges are all part of white culture.

You realize that zimmerman's dad IS white right?

Quote:
What next, you going to say all lawyers have to be white as well...hence is why Obama is actually a white?

Culturally? More or less yes. He was raised by a granola hippy mother and in indonesia his white as the driven snow grandparents in hawaii. He went to lawschool and reads comic books. He's not a secret muslim he's a secret nerd.

AFAIK his first contact with black culture in america (as far as such a thing can be defined) was as a community organizer in chicago.

Quote:
Bet you'll next say Jesse Jackson and Al Franken are white as well.

And I don't have time for people that need to put words in my mouth. Good day.

Yes, I realize he was white. However, he was classified as Hispanic PRIOR to the Trayvon incident on at least one police report. In addition, his neighborhood could actually be considered a minority neighborhood, if you want to put labels on such things. In some ways more of an upscale minority neighborhood, with potentially those who are white, but with a lot of others of other backgrounds as well.

You don't know the area or the neighborhood. Reason I brought up the other two is because next thing we know, you'll be saying those who live in downtown Asian town are all white...because apparently that's what you think of the people who lived in Trayvon's and Zimmerman's neighborhoods.

One other thing you should be aware of...even though Trayvon had African American parents...since you are using CULTURE as a definition of what is white...you are also saying Trayvon Martin was white...as in essence in relation to his grandparents and parents...he'd be about as lily white as you could get in regards to some of the crowds and work that they did and hung out with.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Priviledge in action!


One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.


Magus, how much have you looked into this? There's a lot of misinformation or at least it looks that way from your post.

Quote:
Here's the thing... Martin did not introduce himself to the neighborhood watch.

Why would he? How would he even know there was a neighborhood watch? Zimmerman was some guy sitting in a car staring at him. He had no badge, no uniform, no markings, no signs, no anything to suggest that he was anything other than some random guy. Why on earth would Martin go up to him?

Quote:
So, he confronted Martin. Martin was hostile.

Uhm, yeah. Some creepy old dude starts staring at you from his car then follows you down the side walk isn't exactly asking for any other reaction.

Quote:
Zimmerman threatened to, and did, call the cops.

Zimmerman did that from his care and did not inform martin of that.

Quote:
All Martin would have had to do was wait on the police. The entire mess would have been cleared up then and there.

Martin is black. Zimmerman is white (or at least close enough on a dark night) Martin cannot call the police on zimmerman. Martin has no way of knowing that zimmerman has called the cops.

Quote:
Both people were idiots.

I have much higher expectations from the 30 year old man that has decided to carry a gun and initiated hostilities than a 16 year old kid reacting to someone in a dark alley.

Quote:
But Martin was acting suspicious.Zimmerman had reason to be suspicious.

There is no evidence for this except what zimmerman said, and zimmerman appears to be completely projecting in his phone call to police, again, scared white dude behavior. All of zimmermans allegations were subjective.

Quote:
. Thinking that does tend to lead to violence among those who are used to certain styles of life.

And what exactly would that be?

Quote:
That could easily have happened in any neighborhood, regardless of the racial composition or economic level, and probably did happen a few times before.

There is no way you can shoot a white kid walking home with skittles in his pocket and not go to jail. There is no way you can see a white kid walking home and say "ahah! it must be a thief! Get him!"

Quote:
So, yeah, the comments from Zimmerman prove nothing except that he was racist.

Latino vs black strife tends to have more bravado and less pants wetting over the fact that a black person is there, and less police involvement.


pres man wrote:
One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.

Be careful what you wish for.

Guy calls cops because son went on a joyride. Cops shoot son to death


Why couldn't Martin call the cops on Zimmerman? As you say, some creep old guy is following you, why shouldn't the cops investigate? If this was a kid who grew up in the "white culture" (regardless of their actual racial description), that would have seemed a reasonable option.

As for expecting more from a 30 year old. Keep in mind, there is no evidence that Zimmerman every struck Martin. The only injuries Martin received prior to the gun wound was Zimmerman's face beating on Martin's hands. Maybe Zimmerman was trained in the Wimp Lo fighting style.


Caineach wrote:
pres man wrote:
One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.

Be careful what you wish for.

Guy calls cops because son went on a joyride. Cops shoot son to death

Did the kid call the cops? Then it was not what I wished for.


pres man wrote:
Why couldn't Martin call the cops on Zimmerman? As you say, some creepy old guy is following you, why shouldn't the cops investigate?

Because martin is black. If he calls the cops the cops are going to take zimmerman's side and then he's going to get in trouble.

Quote:
If this was a kid who grew up in the "white culture" (regardless of their actual racial description), that would have seemed a reasonable option.

No one's claiming that martin grew up in white culture.

Quote:
As for expecting more from a 30 year old. Keep in mind, there is no evidence that Zimmerman every struck Martin.

It doesn't matter. Zimmerman made it seem like he was after martin. Martin isn't the one who started the fight after that no matter what. ZImmerman has put martin in reasonable threat of his life, is the aggressor, and martin can go to pound town on him.... or not, because he's black and stand your ground doesn't apply to blacks. Its an effective defense less than 1% of the time.

Carrying a gun is a great deal of power. With it comes the responsibility not to act like a total moron and not to get yourself into situations that can turn deadly.

Quote:
The only injuries Martin received prior to the gun wound was Zimmerman's face beating on Martin's hands.

So Zimmerman is either reaaaaly bad at fighting or didn't even try anything else before getting his gun.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Magus, how much have you looked into this? There's a lot of misinformation or at least it looks that way from your post.

A lot, actually. Remember those hispanics I keep referencing? I've been arguing with them about it since the case first came up.

We looked into the neighborhood; it's a high-end minority neighborhood with posted signs about a neighborhood watch, and the neighborhood is actually tight-knit. It's also a neighborhood with a lot of wealth, and most of the people there interact with areas of what you would call the white culture.

An examination of Martin's family showed they ran in circles that also included what you would call the white culture. Martin grew up in most of the same socio-economic circles that Zimmerman did years earlier.

Quote:
Why would he? How would he even know there was a neighborhood watch? Zimmerman was some guy sitting in a car staring at him. He had no badge, no uniform, no markings, no signs, no anything to suggest that he was anything other than some random guy. Why on earth would Martin go up to him?

There were signs posted, everyone in the neighborhood knew Zimmerman and knew he was part of the watch, and he outright asked Martin why the kid was in the neighborhood when he confronted Martin (this last according to both Martin, in his call to his girlfriend, and Zimmerman).

Plus, Martin had family living there, so that family would have known of Zimmerman.

Quote:
Uhm, yeah. Some creepy old dude starts staring at you from his car then follows you down the side walk isn't exactly asking for any other reaction.

That's true. Martin's reaction of defensiveness was not unreasonable. How hostile he was definitely was.

Quote:
Zimmerman did that from his care and did not inform martin of that.

I just checked; you're right. He called before he confronted Martin directly, and was on the phone during it. Which Martin would probably have seen, given that his own girlfriend (who was on the phone with him at the time) testified that he could easily see the person following him... to the point that Martin even tossed out a racial slur about the person, but got the race wrong.

Quote:
Martin is black. Zimmerman is white (or at least close enough on a dark night) Martin cannot call the police on zimmerman. Martin has no way of knowing that zimmerman has called the cops.

According to both Zimmerman and Martin's girlfriend, Martin lost Zimmerman. He could have called the cops then. And given he could see enough of Zimmerman to toss out a racial slur, he could also see whether or not the man was holding something up to his ear and talking.

Quote:
I have much higher expectations from the 30 year old man that has decided to carry a gun and initiated hostilities than a 16 year old kid reacting to someone in a dark alley.

Except that, according to the phone calls, Zimmerman didn't initiate hostilities. Martin's own girlfriend testified that Martin lost Zimmerman, then confronted him when Zimmerman caught up. The testimony does not show that Zimmerman got violent first; in fact, it doesn't even show Zimmerman starting the confrontation.

Quote:
There is no evidence for this except what zimmerman said, and zimmerman appears to be completely projecting in his phone call to police, again, scared white dude behavior. All of zimmermans allegations were subjective.

Again, your racial biases on what is and what is not white behavior. You are proving what GreyWolfLord said to you, that you called putting words in your mouth, accurate through your continual usage of racial biases without any evidence to support those biases.

As for the evidence: Police reports on the robberies back up Zimmerman's account on there having been robberies. Martin's own call, according to his girlfriend, has him confronting Zimmerman and confirms that Zimmerman was asking why he was in the neighborhood. So, on this, neither side is disagreeing that Zimmerman was acting in a manner that was risky, but also goes on to show that he didn't start the confrontation. Despite my earlier saying he did.

And while all of Zimmerman's allegations were subjective (I'm ignoring your misuse of projecting in this case), the fact remains that he was on the phone to the police, Martin lost him at one point, and Martin also had the capacity to call the police... and Martin had family in the neighborhood, which means he belonged there as well.

Quote:
And what exactly would that be?

They found marijuana in Martin's system and copies of his facebook posts can still be found online. Martin was pretty much headed for a thug's life and was adopting the lifestyle.

Quote:
There is no way you can shoot a white kid walking home with skittles in his pocket and not go to jail. There is no way you can see a white kid walking home and say "ahah! it must be a thief! Get him!"

Depends on how the kid is dressed, what neighborhood he's in, and how he acts. If you think otherwise, you need to get out more. If the kid is dressed like a thug, police treat them like one.

Quote:
Latino vs black strife tends to have more bravado and less pants wetting over the fact that a black person is there, and less police involvement.

Since Zimmerman isn't a latino, I fail to see what your point is. Remember, there's a difference between latinos and hispanics.

Also, racial biases again.


BigNorseWolf wrote:


One of his parents is white/hispanic Goes for both.

The fact he claims to be of hispanic heritage- which doesn't mean he picked up any racism from that

I'd still love to see any evidence that he claimed Hispanic heritage before this blew up.

It's certainly possible, but it just reads to me like an attempt to deflect.


thejeff wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


One of his parents is white/hispanic Goes for both.

The fact he claims to be of hispanic heritage- which doesn't mean he picked up any racism from that

I'd still love to see any evidence that he claimed Hispanic heritage before this blew up.

It's certainly possible, but it just reads to me like an attempt to deflect.

Here's the relevant proof:

Quote:
On voter registration forms, George Zimmerman identified himself as Hispanic, as did his mother. His father, Robert, listed himself as white on voter registration forms. Zimmerman's mother, Gladys, is originally from Peru.

Source


Magus wrote:
There were signs posted, everyone in the neighborhood knew Zimmerman and knew he was part of the watch

Martin was less than a part time resident. He had no way of knowing zimmerman. How many times as a kid did you go to your cousins house and ask "Hey by the way, are there any gun toting vigilante nutcases I need to show the handsign to if i see them?"

Quote:
and he outright asked Martin why the kid was in the neighborhood when he confronted Martin

Which is none of zimmerman's gotterdamnrung business. You don't need to say who you are and what you're doing when walking down a street to the police, much less to some yahoo following you down a dark alley.

You can also hear martin saying "who the hell are you". Why is martin's question less valid?

Quote:
Plus, Martin had family living there, so that family would have known of Zimmerman.

Which does not transfer the knowledge into martin's head.

Quote:
That's true. Martin's reaction of defensiveness was not unreasonable. How hostile he was definitely was.

Best defense...

Quote:
I just checked; you're right. He called before he confronted Martin directly, and was on the phone during it. Which Martin would probably have seen, given that his own girlfriend (who was on the phone with him at the time)

Do you detect radio waves or something? Do you expect most people to? He would have been lucky to see something in his hand, you expect him to read the screen to see 911 ?

Quote:
According to both Zimmerman and Martin's girlfriend, Martin lost Zimmerman. He could have called the cops then. And given he could see enough of Zimmerman to toss out a racial slur, he could also see whether or not the man was holding something up to his ear and talking.

I can't track your through process, at all.

I see person A at point A well enough to see that they're white (ish)

Therefore at point B 3? minutes later i see them I must still see them well enough to see if they've got a phone to their head.

Quote:
Except that, according to the phone calls, Zimmerman didn't initiate hostilities.

This is not disputable. This is not subjective. This is not "from a certain point of view".

Zimmerman went chasing after martin down a side street. THAT initiates the hostilities. If martin had gone around a corner and close lined zimmerman as he came past martin would have had every legal right to do that.

Quote:
They found marijuana in Martin's system

For one, they (the amounts of thc) are so low as to almost certainly not be connected to recent intoxication: 1.5 nanograms of THC were found as well as 7.3 nanograms of THC-COOH, a metabolite of THC that can stay in the system for weeks after cannabis has been smoked.

Linky

Now, either Martin is a drug sniffing dog, can read body language like the mentalist, or he shot a teen who, like most teenagers, had smoked some pot sometime in the last month.

If you have 1.5 nanograms of pot in your system you are officially out of pot.

So on this point Zimmerman was officially wrong. The kid wasn't high.

Quote:
Depends on how the kid is dressed, what neighborhood he's in, and how he acts. If you think otherwise, you need to get out more. If the kid is dressed like a thug, police treat them like one.

I don't know where you're getting out, but ALL The kids are wearing the "gangsta" look these days. Either that or emo.

So show me a case where someone got off for shooting a white kid like this.


pres man wrote:
One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.

If your kid is white, that's a decent plan. Though getting less so with time. If your kid is black and especially male, avoiding contact with the police is by far the better option from early teens at least through your 20s.

There's a whole set of protocols for dealing with the police as a young black male and the consequences are a lot more likely to be worse for breaking them than for a white kid. Because cops tend to have the "young black male == dangerous thug" attitude as much as anyone else, but they're more likely to act on it.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Martin was less than a part time resident. He had no way of knowing zimmerman. How many times as a kid did you go to your cousins house and ask "Hey by the way, are there any gun toting vigilante nutcases I need to show the handsign to if i see them?"

Every single time. I grew up lower class in bad neighborhoods. One of the first survival skills I learned by the time I was 15 was to identify who in a neighborhood was most likely to shoot me and how to prevent it.

But, my experiences and the experiences Martin had are nothing alike, so I see your point. And I did say that Martin was justified on being defensive.

Quote:

Which is none of zimmerman's gotterdamnrung business. You don't need to say who you are and what you're doing when walking down a street to the police, much less to some yahoo following you down a dark alley.

You can also hear martin saying "who the hell are you". Why is martin's question less valid?

I never said Martin's question was invalid. But given that Zimmerman was part of the neighborhood watch... actually, yes, it was his business. Read up on the neighborhood watches sometime. Knowing whether or not someone is going to commit a crime in their neighborhood is actually part of their business and why they are formed. So is knowing who belongs in the neighborhood and who doesn't if they have to call the cops.

Quote:
Which does not transfer the knowledge into martin's head.

But which also gives him no justification for not knowing.

Quote:
Best defense...

... is not to be in a situation where you need to use violence in the first place. Martin was not in that situation. Neither was Zimmerman. So neither one was justified for what they did.

Quote:
Do you detect radio waves or something? Do you expect most people to? He would have been lucky to see something in his hand, you expect him to read the screen to see 911 ?

The only time you need radio waves to recognize when someone is on a cell phone is if they they are using an ear bud that is hard to see (which Zimmerman didn't have) or if you lack the reasoning capacity to understand what the action means. And someone chasing an intruder while talking to the cops on the phone is a common-enough part of media that the action is a reasonable assumption.

So, now you're defending Martin by saying he was too stupid to realize the obvious.

All Martin would have had to do, upon seeing Zimmerman was on the phone, was hang up the call to his girlfriend, dial 911, and then tell Zimmerman he was on the phone with the police. Police dispatcher would have heard that and talked them both down. And even not knowing he was on the phone with the police, it's not an unreasonable assumption and it actually gives you a level of protection... and even without seeing the phone call, it still would have afforded a level of protection and forced someone intending to do harm to reconsider.

And then, if violence became necessary, you have cops as witnesses in your favor. Ultimate win.

Quote:

I can't track your through process, at all.

I see person A at point A well enough to see that they're white (ish)

Therefore at point B 3? minutes later i see them I must still see them well enough to see if they've got a phone to their head.

If you can see someone well enough to see their skin color, you can also see the position of their arms in most cases. Martin was not in one of those cases where he couldn't once Zimmerman was out of the vehicle, and he was followed by Zimmerman on foot for some time.

So, my thought process is that Martin wasn't blind and, given he lost Zimmerman for a bit, capable of observing the person following him reasonably well.

Quote:

For one, they (the amounts of thc) are so low as to almost certainly not be connected to recent intoxication: 1.5 nanograms of THC were found as well as 7.3 nanograms of THC-COOH, a metabolite of THC that can stay in the system for weeks after cannabis has been smoked.

Linky

Now, either Martin is a drug sniffing dog, can read body language like the mentalist, or he shot a teen who, like most teenagers, had smoked some pot sometime in the last month.

If you have 1.5 nanograms of pot in your system you are officially out of pot.

So on this point Zimmerman was officially wrong. The kid wasn't high.

Zimmerman isn't the one who claimed the kid was high. That was the police. The prosecution actually tried to get the police report detailing the full results of Martin's autopsy tossed out because of the marijuana.

Yeah, this is one of those weird cases where the defense was submitting the findings of the police to support their case. Considering the prosecutor ended up being investigated for misconduct, that says how badly the case went for the prosecution.

Quote:

I don't know where you're getting out, but ALL The kids are wearing the "gangsta" look these days. Either that or emo.

So show me a case where someone got off for shooting a white kid like this.

Roderick Scott. For bonus points, Scott is African American.


MagusJanus wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Which is none of zimmerman's gotterdamnrung business. You don't need to say who you are and what you're doing when walking down a street to the police, much less to some yahoo following you down a dark alley.

You can also hear martin saying "who the hell are you". Why is martin's question less valid?

I never said Martin's question was invalid. But given that Zimmerman was part of the neighborhood watch... actually, yes, it was his business. Read up on the neighborhood watches sometime. Knowing whether or not someone is going to commit a crime in their neighborhood is actually part of their business and why they are formed. So is knowing who belongs in the neighborhood and who doesn't if they have to call the cops.

Which he'd done. His part as a neighborhood watch guy was done. Every neighborhood watch manual I've seen says "Call the police. Don't follow. Don't confront. Don't get out of the vehicle, if you're in one. Don't go on foot alone. Don't carry a gun"

Though identifying himself as neighborhood watch might have helped,

Zimmerman was way off any neighborhood watch protocol I've ever seen.


thejeff wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Which is none of zimmerman's gotterdamnrung business. You don't need to say who you are and what you're doing when walking down a street to the police, much less to some yahoo following you down a dark alley.

You can also hear martin saying "who the hell are you". Why is martin's question less valid?

I never said Martin's question was invalid. But given that Zimmerman was part of the neighborhood watch... actually, yes, it was his business. Read up on the neighborhood watches sometime. Knowing whether or not someone is going to commit a crime in their neighborhood is actually part of their business and why they are formed. So is knowing who belongs in the neighborhood and who doesn't if they have to call the cops.

Which he'd done. His part as a neighborhood watch guy was done. Every neighborhood watch manual I've seen says "Call the police. Don't follow. Don't confront. Don't get out of the vehicle, if you're in one. Don't go on foot alone. Don't carry a gun"

Though identifying himself as neighborhood watch might have helped,

Zimmerman was way off any neighborhood watch protocol I've ever seen.

I did state, at the top of this page, that Zimmerman doing that was stupid.

That Zimmerman is a racist and that he did stupid things is not disputed; what is disputed, and the source of argument between BNW and I, is why he was racist. Was he racist because of the racial problems between hispanics and African Americans, or was he racist because of the racial problems between whites and African Americans?

So, that's what we've been arguing about this entire time.

It's pretty safe to say that, in general, there's a large agreement that Zimmerman should have acted far differently than he did. And I am saying Martin should have also acted differently. If either one or both had, this entire tragedy would never had happened.


MagusJanus wrote:


Every single time. I grew up lower class in bad neighborhoods. One of the first survival skills I learned by the time I was 15 was to identify who in a neighborhood was most likely to shoot me and how to prevent it.

And you usually did that by....?

Quote:
But given that Zimmerman was part of the neighborhood watch...

Stop that.

You cannot retroactively add facts to Martins head and then blame him for not acting on them. Zimmerman had no uniform. ZImmerman had no badge. When prompted with "who the BLEEP are you" he had more than ample opportunity to say "Neighborhood watch"

Quote:
actually, yes, it was his business.

No, its not.

You don't have to tell the cops who you are and what you're doing, much less someone with NO legal qualifications or any identification what so ever. BLEEP you is a perfectly valid and legal response, especially from a group that is frequently harassed by people for doing nothing.

Quote:
Knowing whether or not someone is going to commit a crime in their neighborhood is actually part of their business and why they are formed. So is knowing who belongs in the neighborhood and who doesn't if they have to call the cops.

And having done that his job was done. He saw someone he didn't think belonged. He was wrong.

Its the neighborhood watch.

It is not the neighborhood chase.

It is not the neighborhood catch

And it most certainly is not the neighborhood shoot.

Quote:
But which also gives him no justification for not knowing.

It gives him all the justification in the world for not knowing. He's 16 and he went to the store for some damned candy you don't need to get a scorecard of the local nutcases that are going to shoot you, assuming anything along those lines was available.

If anyone did know, or should have known, that Zimmerman was that far off his rocker why did he still have his pistol permit? You want martin to have information that the cops who knew him didn't have. It is off your rocker ridiculous.

Quote:
... is not to be in a situation where you need to use violence in the first place. Martin was not in that situation. Neither was Zimmerman. So neither one was justified for what they did.

Zimmerman gave martin little choice about that. He could have kept running, but that would mean being in a shooting alley with an assailant of unknown speed and intent behind him, possibly learning where he lived.

Quote:

So, my thought process is that Martin wasn't blind and, given he lost Zimmerman for a bit, capable of observing the person following him reasonably well.

Or you see a white guy at point A. At point be you still see someone following you. Might be the same person.

Quote:
Zimmerman isn't the one who claimed the kid was high.

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something.

Quote:
The prosecution actually tried to get the police report detailing the full results of Martin's autopsy tossed out because of the marijuana.

Yes, because some people will say he was smoking pot so therefore he must have been smoking pot at the time of the incident and must be a thug.

Quote:
Roderick Scott.

Christopher Cervini was actually breaking into the cars. Had been seen breaking into Rodericks car, and was in the process of breaking into another neighbors car.

The Exchange

thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.

If your kid is white, that's a decent plan. Though getting less so with time. If your kid is black and especially male, avoiding contact with the police is by far the better option from early teens at least through your 20s.

There's a whole set of protocols for dealing with the police as a young black male and the consequences are a lot more likely to be worse for breaking them than for a white kid. Because cops tend to have the "young black male == dangerous thug" attitude as much as anyone else, but they're more likely to act on it.

If there is a "protocol" difference you think there might be an actual reason for that? That maybe they ARE more likely to resist/ assault an officer.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
And you usually did that by....?

Asking those I knew who lived in the neighborhood and then making discrete inquiries if they didn't know.

Quote:

Stop that.

You cannot retroactively add facts to Martins head and then blame him for not acting on them. Zimmerman had no uniform. ZImmerman had no badge. When prompted with "who the BLEEP are you" he had more than ample opportunity to say "Neighborhood watch"

Where did I say that Martin knew it? I was address your comment, not what Martin knew, with that bit. In fact, I said that Martin's question was valid; that indicates that I think he did not know.

Quote:

No, its not.

You don't have to tell the cops who you are and what you're doing, much less someone with NO legal qualifications or any identification what so ever. BLEEP you is a perfectly valid and legal response, especially from a group that is frequently harassed by people for doing nothing.

And cops are free to arrest you for acting suspicious if you refuse to tell them. Whether or not you get convicted of anything is another matter.

Quote:

And having done that his job was done. He saw someone he didn't think belonged. He was wrong.

Its the neighborhood watch.

It is not the neighborhood chase.

It is not the neighborhood catch

And it most certainly is not the neighborhood shoot.

And where have I said Zimmerman was not an idiot for it? Where have I said that the chase itself was justified? I said Zimmerman had reason to be suspicious... but I also said Zimmerman, and I quote "pulled something extremely stupid in that he followed the kid."

Quote:

It gives him all the justification in the world for not knowing. He's 16 and he went to the store for some damned candy you don't need to get a scorecard of the local nutcases that are going to shoot you, assuming anything along those lines was available.

If anyone did know, or should have known, that Zimmerman was that far off his rocker why did he still have his pistol permit? You want martin to have information that the cops who knew him didn't have. It is off your rocker ridiculous.

And I can sit here and list the neighborhoods I know of where your line of reasoning on not needing to know that scorecard would earn you a chalk outline and a permanent residence in a grave.

Yes, you most certainly do need to know. Because it is your life on the line. If you don't make any effort to find out, you can't properly protect yourself and you will likely just become another dead body on their list of victims if they encounter you. So if you don't make it a point to find out, you probably deserve a Darwin Award.

Simply asking who is on the neighborhood watch and making some effort to meet them would have told him everything. Add to that asking who owned a gun among them would have told him what he needed to know about who to be leery around. And this is just basic legwork; it doesn't require knowing any more than the cops already knew.

So, no, he had no excuse. He should have done the basic legwork.

Quote:
Zimmerman gave martin little choice about that. He could have kept running, but that would mean being in a shooting alley with an assailant of unknown speed and intent behind him, possibly learning where he lived.

Except Martin didn't know Zimmerman had a gun. So the shooting alley bit isn't relevant. And the assailant's speed was known from the fact that Martin had already been running from him by that point. Plus, the running he had already done had demonstrated that Zimmerman wasn't likely to shoot him. So, no, that is not logical.

Quote:
Or you see a white guy at point A. At point be you still see someone following you. Might be the same person.

And unless you're legally blind or racist, you can tell whether or not it's the same white guy. Same with African Americans, hispanics, asians, Native Americans, or any other race.

Quote:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something.

Right. Now where's the point where he claimed the kid was on marijuana? Or that the kid was high on it? "On drugs" generally means a lot of things.

Quote:
Yes, because some people will say he was smoking pot so therefore he must have been smoking pot at the time of the incident and must be a thug.

Considering the kid's own facebook page claimed he was a thug (this was also presented as evidence at trial), that is pretty shaky grounds for dismissing the marijuana evidence. Especially since it didn't actually help Zimmerman that much. After all, shooting a pothead in cold blood is still murder.

Quote:
Christopher Cervini was actually breaking into the cars. Had been seen breaking into Rodericks car, and was in the process of breaking into another neighbors car.

Scott didn't shoot Cervini over breaking into the car. He shot Cervini because the kid rushed towards him.

At the same time, Zimmerman says he didn't shoot Martin because of Martin being suspicious. He says he shot Martin because the kid was attacking him.

Two different people, two shootings, two thugs died, both called the cops, both found innocent for reasons of self defense. Both confronted the suspect in a way police advise against. The parallels between them are pretty obvious.

You asked for a similar case. I found one for you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Its Martins fault for not getting a list of nuts with guns before stepping outside his door..

Ok, I'm done. Nothing I can say can possibly disprove your side any more than you've already done.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

BNW, thank you for putting words in my mouth. I never said that, did I? I cast both of them at fault for the actions they took. No more.

And before you accuse me of disproving my own argument, keep in mind your entire argument has been racist from the very moment you started making it. I'm not the one who implied that African Americans and hispanics are badly-spoken crime lovers; you did. And you outright defined such as being integral to their culture. So I've been dealing with an argument that is based on assumptions that pretty much amount to saying two entire races cannot gain any position of authority without becoming white.

So how can you sit there and say I'm disproving my side when your's has been based on being ridiculous from the moment you started?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
One thing I think that we could get out of the Martin-Zimmerman situation and the discussion of police is that if Martin had felt like he could have trusted the police, he could have called them instead of talking to his girlfriend about some creepy a**-*****er following him. I can't say if it is the police's fault for not being trustworthy or the people's fault who influenced Martin. I would ask that if you have contact with underage folk, whether your own kids or ones you know, you don't instill in them a sense of fear from the police so that when they are in danger they don't feel like they can seek help from them.

If your kid is white, that's a decent plan. Though getting less so with time. If your kid is black and especially male, avoiding contact with the police is by far the better option from early teens at least through your 20s.

There's a whole set of protocols for dealing with the police as a young black male and the consequences are a lot more likely to be worse for breaking them than for a white kid. Because cops tend to have the "young black male == dangerous thug" attitude as much as anyone else, but they're more likely to act on it.

If there is a "protocol" difference you think there might be an actual reason for that? That maybe they ARE more likely to resist/ assault an officer.

I know I get into fistfights with police at least once a week. It's around the same time I knock over liquor stores to prove you right.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
GreyWolfLord wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Thank you Cain.

Again, its not that only white people can be racist but that the type or tone of zimmerman's racism seems more like "angry white guy racism" than "latino vs black" racism. Its sad that I live in a country with either much less both, but you can hardly fault me for pointing out whats there. When fox news is your biggest defender I think its a lock that its the former rather than the later.

Magus Janus wrote:
It's essentially an attempt at societal conditioning of entire races to make everyone think that being in power requires conforming to certain cultural expectations and that those cultural expectations are tied to being white.

I don't make the rules, I just point them out.

Quote:
Tendencies of groups do not make actualities of people. Your arguing tendency is, as I stated earlier, a case of fallacy of composition. Just like mine was.

Incorrect. I am arguing that Zimmerman in particular is a racist based off of what he said and what he did- which was namely to assume that a black kid walking in the neighborhood must be thief. I am not assuming that he's a racist because he's latino and or because he's white. For the TYPE of racism he's exibiting some of my points went into his background.

MAYBE...OR perhaps it was because Trayvon exhibited the attributes of the person that had been observed breaking and stealing previously.

Isn't it interesting (at least from some reports) that those breakins and stealing stopped when Trayvon was no longer around.

Coincidence? Or perhaps there was MORE to go on than simply racism in regards to Trayvon's actions?

Tin foil hat's on a bit tight there, sir.


MagusJanus wrote:

Scott didn't shoot Cervini over breaking into the car. He shot Cervini because the kid rushed towards him.

At the same time, Zimmerman says he didn't shoot Martin because of Martin being suspicious. He says he shot Martin because the kid was attacking him.

Two different people, two shootings, two thugs died, both called the cops, both found innocent for reasons of self defense. Both confronted the suspect in a way police advise against. The parallels between them are pretty obvious.

You asked for a similar case. I found one for you.

Well you failed then. Cervini didn't lay a single hand on Scott and the prosecution claimed Cervini was shot in the back.

Neither of those match up to the Zimmerman/Martin case. In that case Martin left wounds on Zimmerman and only after that did Zimmerman shoot Martin and that was point-blank facing each other, with witness supported testimony, Zimmerman claiming Martin was on top of him hitting him.

That case is nothing like the Scott-Cervini case.


pres man wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:

Scott didn't shoot Cervini over breaking into the car. He shot Cervini because the kid rushed towards him.

At the same time, Zimmerman says he didn't shoot Martin because of Martin being suspicious. He says he shot Martin because the kid was attacking him.

Two different people, two shootings, two thugs died, both called the cops, both found innocent for reasons of self defense. Both confronted the suspect in a way police advise against. The parallels between them are pretty obvious.

You asked for a similar case. I found one for you.

Well you failed then. Cervini didn't lay a single hand on Scott and the prosecution claimed Cervini was shot in the back.

Neither of those match up to the Zimmerman/Martin case. In that case Martin left wounds on Zimmerman and only after that did Zimmerman shoot Martin and that was point-blank facing each other, with witness supported testimony, Zimmerman claiming Martin was on top of him hitting him.

That case is nothing like the Scott-Cervini case.

It's the closest one I could find. When doing that kind of search, what you find is a depressing number of stories of one (or more!) African American(s) attacking whites and either beating them, killing them, torturing them, any combination of the three, or all three.

There are surprisingly very few stories that show African Americans defending themselves against whites.

So, it's pretty much the only one I could post that didn't paint African Americans in a bad light.

Edit: And just confirmed a suspicion. If I replace "white" with "hispanic," the results are more even. But replacing "black" or "African American" with hispanic has the same ratio of results... basically, if those other races are defending themselves against whites, they're either not claiming self-defense in court or the stories are not even getting reported.


meatrace wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:

Andrew R, I have to agree as well with the cameras!

I think this topic may end in agreement ^^ At least, I hope.

Except that some of us think cops are basically good and cameras help stop the bad ones and others think they are basically all corrupt and need this to keep them in line

I think most cops are good. Or at least not bad (Lawful Neutral)

I think the question is to how many are bad, and what's an acceptable level of badness.

I have a very low tolerance for bullshiznit within a police force. One bad apple spoils the whole barrel for me. They should be held to a higher standard, if for no other reason than to justify their ridiculous pay.

I'd say maybe 4% of cops are just terrible people gaming the system and extorting money or favors, and another 15-20% are probably too lazy or stupid to be reasonably considered for the position.

YMMV, of course, but every cop I run into always wants to rub his balls in my face (metaphorically) and be the alpha dog.

Wait, what? I thought patrol cops and detectives were making really bad wages.


MagusJanus wrote:
Considering that hispanics are a different racial group from whites, that is a pretty serious case of sheer racism.

A bit of a nitpick, since it doesn't effect your analysis too much, but that's not the case. Hispanic is a cultural group derived from Spanish colonialism, not a race. Hispanics can be Amerindian, White, Black, Asian, or a mixture of these. There are a great many white Hispanics.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
Considering that hispanics are a different racial group from whites, that is a pretty serious case of sheer racism.
A bit of a nitpick, since it doesn't effect your analysis too much, but that's not the case. Hispanic is a cultural group derived from Spanish colonialism, not a race. Hispanics can be Amerindian, White, Black, Asian, or a mixture of these. There are a great many white Hispanics.

Technically, "Caucasian," "African," and "Asian" are not races either; they're racial groups defined by a combination of regional origin and cultural similarity. The fact that "hispanic" covers several races but generally has a similar cultural and regional origin pretty much means it qualifies. The quibbling that it doesn't qualify is mostly originating in people steadfastly ignoring the fact that the entire idea of racial classification as it currently exists is pretty much BS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MagusJanus wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
Considering that hispanics are a different racial group from whites, that is a pretty serious case of sheer racism.
A bit of a nitpick, since it doesn't effect your analysis too much, but that's not the case. Hispanic is a cultural group derived from Spanish colonialism, not a race. Hispanics can be Amerindian, White, Black, Asian, or a mixture of these. There are a great many white Hispanics.
Technically, "Caucasian," "African," and "Asian" are not races either; they're racial groups defined by a combination of regional origin and cultural similarity. The fact that "hispanic" covers several races but generally has a similar cultural and regional origin pretty much means it qualifies. The quibbling that it doesn't qualify is mostly originating in people steadfastly ignoring the fact that the entire idea of racial classification as it currently exists is pretty much BS.

Whether or not the racial classification system is logical (I think it ignores a lot of very important Anthropological facts, personally), Hispanic is not a race under the classification system used in the US. It is an ethnicity that applies regardless of race.


Both Zimmerman and Martin were out looking for trouble...and they both found it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Looking for skittles, not trouble.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
Considering that hispanics are a different racial group from whites, that is a pretty serious case of sheer racism.
A bit of a nitpick, since it doesn't effect your analysis too much, but that's not the case. Hispanic is a cultural group derived from Spanish colonialism, not a race. Hispanics can be Amerindian, White, Black, Asian, or a mixture of these. There are a great many white Hispanics.
Technically, "Caucasian," "African," and "Asian" are not races either; they're racial groups defined by a combination of regional origin and cultural similarity. The fact that "hispanic" covers several races but generally has a similar cultural and regional origin pretty much means it qualifies. The quibbling that it doesn't qualify is mostly originating in people steadfastly ignoring the fact that the entire idea of racial classification as it currently exists is pretty much BS.
Whether or not the racial classification system is logical (I think it ignores a lot of very important Anthropological facts, personally), Hispanic is not a race under the classification system used in the US. It is an ethnicity that applies regardless of race.

I can't argue with that ^^


Texas Police Admit Officer Shot & Killed Unarmed Woman Over the Weekend


Turning a Wedding Into a Funeral: U.S. Drone Strike in Yemen Killed as Many as 12 Civilians


Kryzbyn's already beat me to the coppers attack headphones-wearing, jaywalking white girl, I see.


Cops hit my car, then arrested me: suit


Girl Scout Sets Up Outside of Local Weed Shop, Sells Lots of Cookies


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Girl Scout Sets Up Outside of Local Weed Shop, Sells Lots of Cookies

Beat you to that one with a thread.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Wait, what? I thought patrol cops and detectives were making really bad wages.

Starting wage in madison is 45 with a bump to 50 after 6 months. 37.5 hour work weeks. Vacation, insurance, pension.

My gf has a masters and is barely making 40k as a bioinformaticist.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Girl Scout Sets Up Outside of Local Weed Shop, Sells Lots of Cookies
Beat you to that one with a thread.

[bubble bubble bubble]?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Girl Scout Sets Up Outside of Local Weed Shop, Sells Lots of Cookies
Beat you to that one with a thread.
[bubble bubble bubble]?

Musical interlude for DBug

Frenzal Rhomb - Bucket Bong....

"She only wants me because I got the drugs"

The Exchange

meatrace wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Wait, what? I thought patrol cops and detectives were making really bad wages.

Starting wage in madison is 45 with a bump to 50 after 6 months. 37.5 hour work weeks. Vacation, insurance, pension.

My gf has a masters and is barely making 40k as a bioinformaticist.

With the daily threat of death, injury and disease i do not call that too much pay at all.


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

As you might imagine, it was difficult to decide which thread to troll with this delightful little video from RT.

EDIT: There are many delights in this video, but my fave is that they have the wrong state highlighted for Utah.

I'm shocked, shocked!, that The Resident lied.

Cossacks?!?


And over in the Unions Are Awesome thread, nobody has favorited this old AFSCME commercial, which I can only assume means it needs more exposure.

The f@!@in' union that works for you!


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Kryzbyn's already beat me to the coppers attack headphones-wearing, jaywalking white girl, I see.

indeed, this happened in Texas. What say you, Barcas?


No offense to little toe-finger-wearin' white girl, but, uh...

Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Texas Police Admit Officer Shot & Killed Unarmed Woman Over the Weekend

651 to 700 of 892 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / The Cis / Privilege definition and intent discussion thread. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.