Zimmerman/Trayvon Debate

[jack grebe]

Both sides claim responsability for the voice on the 911 call

Why don't they do a voice print to determine if it is
Zimmerman on the tape?

[Phillip Allen]

it may yet happen

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I've just listened to the 911 tapes.

There isn't really any doubt, is there?

[jack grebe]

I've just listened to the 911 tapes.

Got a link? In your opinion, who's voice is it?

[Horace]

I've just listened to the 911 tapes.

There isn't really any doubt, is there?

No.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Got a link? In your opinion, who's voice is it?

Should be here: there are iirc 34 minutes of tape:


http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-grio/46771333/#46771333

[Horace]

Not willing to point to a particular moment in the tapes or circumstances that has convinced you? Or not able?

[John Smith]

It was quite obvious, seeing the videos of Zimmerman at the police station that he was both in handcuffs and had been severely beaten by Trayvon. All that blood and those bandages makes it all quite clear, no?

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Not willing to point to a particular moment in the tapes or circumstances that has convinced you? Or not able?

I would prefer to leave people to listen to the recordings and to form their own conclusions.

[Horace]

How about a brief narrative of what you think you saw, or didn't see, in the police bay video. What would you have liked to have seen? Somebody needs to start, and it should be a true believer.

[Horace]

Sorry, Andrew: that was directed at John. But a similar thought is prompted by your posts so far.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I saw two policemen get out of a car, together with a man who appeared to have his hands behind his back.

[Horace]

Maybe we need a brief time out for everyone to get back in synch: we seem to be posting at cross-purposes.

[Donn]

It's probably a good idea to wait until all the facts are in, rather than leaping to confusion.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I have a solution - its my bed time, so I'll stop posting!

[Horace]

Alas! Well, 'night.

[Mrleft8]

What I see is Jack Grebe, whom I have met, and like quite a lot both in real life, and here in fantasy land, titling a thread with one person's surname, and another person's given name, which unfortunately gives authority, and superiority subconsciously to one, and not the other.
I'm sure that Jack didn't intend to do so on purpose... It is after all the way the media is putting forth the names of the people involved in most cases...
But if the thread were titled "The Martin/George Debate" would it feel the same?

[bobbys]

What I see is Jack Grebe, whom I have met, and like quite a lot both in real life, and here in fantasy land, titling a thread with one person's surname, and another person's given name, which unfortunately gives authority, and superiority subconsciously to one, and not the other.
I'm sure that Jack didn't intend to do so on purpose... It is after all the way the media is putting forth the names of the people involved in most cases...
But if the thread were titled "The Martin/George Debate" would it feel the same?

.

So thats why Glenn always sez the...

Longion/Bobbys debates!.

That SOB always covers all the angles!

[Horace]

Or you could see it as the non-Hispanic, white surname and the sympathy-invoking ethnic given name of slain adolescent. Try again, Ml8.

[David G]

Or you could see it as the non-Hispanic, white surname and the sympathy-invoking ethnic given name of slain adolescent. Try again, Ml8.

One could spin it sixteen ways from Sunday... but not plausibly. C'mon.

[bobbys]

If i never heard about this incident i would google it looking for Jewish lawyer/Young Black person case.

[Mrleft8]

....How about "Bob Dylan's evil twin brother/misspelled cosmetics company Debate"?

[Todd D]

To me the whole thing is cut and dried. Zimmerman has admitted to killing Martin. Killing is wrong. Zimmerman should be jailed for life.

I hold the old fashioned belief that killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case. I do not want to have killers living in my community. Since Zimmerman is an admitted killer, he should be separated from society. That means life in prison as far as I am concerned.

End of discussion for me.

[Horace]

To me the whole thing is cut and dried. Zimmerman has admitted to killing Martin. Killing is wrong. Zimmerman should be jailed for life.

I hold the old fashioned belief that killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case. I do not want to have killers living in my community. Since Zimmerman is an admitted killer, he should be separated from society. That means life in prison as far as I am concerned.

End of discussion for me.

Hopefully not so much of an end of discussion that you can't respond to a few questions.

Is there no room in your ethos for killing in self-defense? On what do you base your belief that "killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case?" Are you a Friend, by any chance?

[SamSam]

From what I see working with Blacks and Latinos here in the US, is that in general whites are at the top of the heap and there is basically nothing Latinos and Blacks can do about it, the structure is built to favor whites. So in the three way tangle of racism/frustration/cultural animosity between the three, the Black - Latino portion that is not able to be vented at whites is turned between themselves with an extra vehemence, and in my experience the Latino racism against Blacks can sometimes be very intense. I figure the driving force of that is the subconscious desire to curry the favor of and align themselves with the whites who generally control the system and basically dislike both Latinos and Blacks, and to at least put themselves in the number two position and not be holding the **** end of the stick.

The theme of this story is racism, paranoia, the twisted sense of righteous authority a loaded gun can give. I'll bet Zimmerman sort of imagined himself as a Dirty Harry type of character, but now painfully sees the gulf between the horse**** Clint Eastwood spins and the reality of actually killing someone for no phucking reason. I can imagine the world of problems he now has but I have no sympathy for him.

[Durnik]

It's a 'debate' you want.. Two points, a 'back n forth' - with statements which can be qualified & substantiated. Hmm..

I found this somewhere on the web..

3. A man who pursues another man lawfully minding his own business on a public street and then provokes a confrontation resulting in death, is not guilty of either murder nor manslaughter, but is, in fact, a patriot defending the constitutional freedoms of all Americans. However, an American citizen lawfully minding his own business on a public street who is confronted by an armed man has no right to either stand his ground, defend himself, or meet force with like force. He is, by simple nature of his appearance, a thug who deserves what he gets.

I think that's a start.. (& yes, the #3 is a hint..)

Now, let's try this..

If you’re tired of being afraid of a thug in a hoodie, then the root causes that gave rise to that image have to be addressed. The solution isn’t a law that lets you shoot down people in the f_ing ^{note 1} street, the solution is education, healthcare, development, access, opportunity, rule of law, and citizens who give a good goddamn about each other.

The solution is inclusion instead of exclusion.

The solution is long and difficult and it requires sustained effort and organization and resources.

If it could be solved by killing people, well we wouldn’t be having this problem, would we?

Here’s the thing, so pay attention: You can not leave the root causes of this situation behind, sooner or later they will catch up to you – even if you move into a gated community.

Liberal, Conservative, Black, White, Left, Right, do you really, really, want to live in a community where the law allows a man to shoot another down in the street with impunity? Really? Do you really want to live in an armed camp? Hemmed in by armed patrols? Do you really want your kids to have to answer to armed civilian militia? Really?

If you do, if you think armed patrols and gunning people down in the street is the answer, then you’re insane.

And where do you go when that isn’t enough? A castle? A fortress? Where?
And after that, what?

I’ll tell you what comes after that, because I’ve been in countries where it all finally hit the wall.

What comes next?

Genocide

Now, whose voice _is_ it.. and what is it asking of us..

enjoy
bobby

Note 1: Edited for Scot..

FWIW, the author appears to have read Gibran.

[Peerie Maa]

Is there no room in your ethos for killing in self-defense? On what do you base your belief that "killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case?" Are you a Friend, by any chance?

There is a principle of disproportionate force.
Shooting someone who is armed with nothing more threatening than a can of pop is hardly self defence.

[Phillip Allen]

To me the whole thing is cut and dried. Zimmerman has admitted to killing Martin. Killing is wrong. Zimmerman should be jailed for life.

I hold the old fashioned belief that killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case. I do not want to have killers living in my community. Since Zimmerman is an admitted killer, he should be separated from society. That means life in prison as far as I am concerned.

End of discussion for me.

you include, by your phrasing, all cops who kill while on duty. I only mention this to indicate that your expressed thinking is simplistic from my point of view

[BrianW]

Wow. Latino on Black violence, or Black on Latino violence, is Whitey's fault.

Damn it's hard, just to be a decent Cracker.

[Phillip Allen]

There is a principle of disproportionate force.
Shooting someone who is armed with nothing more threatening than a can of pop is hardly self defence.

how about an old man with some physical disability and a youngish man who works out and is in better than average physical shape... that is certainly disproportionate but I see no way to legislate flabby muscles for the younger man

[jack grebe]

What I see is Jack Grebe, whom I have met, and like quite a lot both in real life, and here in fantasy land, titling a thread with one person's surname, and another person's given name, which unfortunately gives authority, and superiority subconsciously to one, and not the other.
I'm sure that Jack didn't intend to do so on purpose... It is after all the way the media is putting forth the names of the people involved in most cases...
But if the thread were titled "The Martin/George Debate" would it feel the same?

The thread was titled as such simply because that is how both are commonly refered to down here. It
was for no other reason on my part. If I would have titled the thread Martin/George Debate, no one
would have know what I was talking about.....Exactly who gets authority and superiority with the
way the thread was titled?

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I may be out on a limb here, but I see a big difference between one seventeen year old on his own and a group of seventeen year olds. I certainly don't expect a single seventeen year old boy to show agression to a twenty-something man.


Or are American teenagers different?

[Todd D]

For those of you who questioned my position. I believe that it is wrong to kill a person. I do not believe in any dieties. Yes, I include ALL people that kill for any reason. That includes police and soldiers. I simply believe that it is wrong to take another person's life for any reason. I do not want to live around people that are/were willing to kill someone. It is a simple statement of morality as I see it.

For those of you that consider yourselves christians, ho do you resolve killing with your holy book's prohibition of it?

[Donn]

I certainly don't expect a single seventeen year old boy to show agression to a twenty-something man.

Don't look now, but your generalities are glittering.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Indeed so, Donn.

Human beings operate by generalising from our experiences. Our species has been doing this for a couple of million years, now.

My experiences have left me with the very distinct impression that whilst a group of teenagers are quite likely to show aggression to a single older male, a single teenager is very much less likely to do so.

Is your experience similar, or different?

[Donn]

I've seen lone teens assault older well-armed police.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I have not seen that. Our experiences therefore differ, and we draw different generalisations from them.

[Donn]

I avoid generalizing whenever possible, and especially when it serves no purpose. In this case, it seems wiser to wait for the facts than to postulate based upon generalities.

[John Smith]

I saw two policemen get out of a car, together with a man who appeared to have his hands behind his back.

True. I believe some 30 minutes or so after the shot. This man hardly looked like he needed or had received any medical attention.

The bigger question is how does Zimmerman get a fair trial? Where do you find 12 jurors anywhere in the country who have no opinion before they sit in the box? Who've heard nothing about this case?

Maybe this is the whole plan; the police screwed up intentionally to poison the waters. Who the hell knows? I did learn something last night, if it's true, that the fact this man was in cuffs says he was arrested. This starts a clock of, I believe, 173 days. If he is not officially charged in that time,he can never be charged.

[Mrleft8]

I dunno John. Seems to me that the police can "Detain" a person and cuff them, without arresting them. (For the safety of the individual being detained, of course. ) I guess the detention can't be prolonged, but as far as I know, Zimmerman wasn't in custody for very long at all.

[John Smith]

To me the whole thing is cut and dried. Zimmerman has admitted to killing Martin. Killing is wrong. Zimmerman should be jailed for life.

I hold the old fashioned belief that killing a person is ALWAYS wrong in every case. I do not want to have killers living in my community. Since Zimmerman is an admitted killer, he should be separated from society. That means life in prison as far as I am concerned.

End of discussion for me.

I think you miss the whole point of the national debate: Zimmerman is walking around free with that gun. He is protected by the Stand your Ground law, and whatever happens to Zimmerman moving forward will not be driven by Florida's police department in that city, but by the public outcry, which seems to be taking sides based on race.


Once again the media, much with its own agenda, is keeping this story going, as are the crowds, but the media is presenting the case based on a lot of speculation. Why, for example, would any media outlet interview Zimmerman's brother or father, neither of whom witnessed anything. I can see Judge Judy asking, "Where you there?" "No" "Then sti down. You didn't see anything."

Public opinion is formed in great measure by the media. Fox viewers see this event totally differently than those who view other networks.

The FACTS as known is a 17 year old black man is dead. He wore a hoody and was armed with tea and candy. The man who shot him had called 911 about this "suspicious" kid. He followed the kid inspite of the 911 operating suggesting he doesnt. The man had a gun.

We've seen a video of that man taken a short time after this event and the man seems not to have any injuries, which would likely be quite visisible if his account is accurate. The young man cannot give his account.

My problem with all of this, and I doubt that I'm alone, is proper procedure, as I view it, would be to arrest and charge this man. Allow him to use the Stand your Ground law as his defense, and let the jury decide. Let him produce medical records and expert testimony. Let us consider the possibility it was Trayvon who was standing his ground under that same law. Being followed by a man with a gun might well have made him feel threatened.

Arresting and holding Zimmerman would also protect HIM until trial.

Meanwhile, the jury pool is being poisoned.

[John Smith]

There is a principle of disproportionate force.
Shooting someone who is armed with nothing more threatening than a can of pop is hardly self defence.

Sorry, but the Stand your Ground laws change that. If one feels threatened, deadly force is okay.

That's why, in my previous post I ask who felt threatened: the guy with the gun following the "suspicious" kid, or the kid that was being followed. If we accept, totally, Zimmeran's description of the events, the Trayvon was the one standing his ground.

Insane laws pushed by the gun addicts.

[John Smith]

Wow. Latino on Black violence, or Black on Latino violence, is Whitey's fault.

Damn it's hard, just to be a decent Cracker.

Let's see, the white man hates the black man because he is black.

The black man hates the white man because the white man hates the black man because he is black.

Which one is more justified?

[John Smith]

For those of you who questioned my position. I believe that it is wrong to kill a person. I do not believe in any dieties. Yes, I include ALL people that kill for any reason. That includes police and soldiers. I simply believe that it is wrong to take another person's life for any reason. I do not want to live around people that are/were willing to kill someone. It is a simple statement of morality as I see it.

For those of you that consider yourselves christians, ho do you resolve killing with your holy book's prohibition of it?

to a large extent I agree, but I see some exceptions. Let's suppose a bad guy is holding your wife or child as a hostage, and the cop has to shoot the bad guy to prevent him from killing your wife or child. I think that killing would be justified.

[John Smith]

I dunno John. Seems to me that the police can "Detain" a person and cuff them, without arresting them. (For the safety of the individual being detained, of course. ) I guess the detention can't be prolonged, but as far as I know, Zimmerman wasn't in custody for very long at all.

That's why I added the "if it's true". Just because some head on tv makes a statement does not automatically validate it.

I'd like your thoughts of the kid being the one standing his ground under Zimmerman's description of events, or as to how we find an unbiased jury.

[Donn]

Go John Smith, go John Smith, go.

[Paul Pless]

LOL iii

[Mrleft8]

If some guy was following me I would do my best to give him the slip, especially if I thought he had a gun. If confrontation was unavoidable, I'd do my best to talk my way out of it. If I felt that my best efforts at a peaceful resolution were in vain, I'd do my best to subdue my pursuer with as little damage as possible. If that meant punching a guy in the throat, and kicking him in the balls, I'd do it. If I could take the gun from his hand while he was on the ground, I probably would, but I don't think I'd keep it. I guess I'd probably unload it if I knew how..... But you know, in a situation like that, the adrenaline must be rushing, and who knows what could happen..... In my experience, common sense disappears in a flash when threat to self is imminent.
I've been threatened with weapons by people that I thought were clearly out of their minds, and decision making just doesn't happen. Physical action takes over from mental action. Clearly I didn't die (yet) so who knows what would have happened if I'd done something different?...... Hopefully we'll never know.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Does everyone agree that Zimmerman followed Martin?

[Shang]

Does everyone agree that Zimmerman followed Martin?

According to the 911 recording, yes, that is what happened.