Members Eric83 Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 I just read an article that George Zimmerman's defense is obtaining access to Trayvon Martin's twitter and facebook to see if he had violent tendencies (because a status or tweet will prove what happened that night ) It made me realize the case wasn't discussed here. What are you guys' opinion? I feel Zimmerman racially profiled him but didn't mean to kill him. He needs to go to prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 I disagree with putting a victim on trial. If the defense is that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor then it makes sense that they would try to gather evidence that would enable them to paint him in a negative light. I don't agree with it but the system is more the problem. My contention is that whatever took place after George Zimmerman left his car is completely his responsibility and even if his version of events is true then he still bears the responsibility of setting the chain of events in motion. He should serve a prison sentence no matter what. IA with you that I don't think he meant to kill him but I don't think he racially profiled him. I think he was overzealous and went way too far. The un-doctored 9-1-1 tape indicates that he was initially unsure of race and that the operator first brought it up. I don't believe that if you see someone from a distance at night and his head is covered by a hood that your first thought is that he must be a black crook and I'm going to kill him. I'm not saying it is impossible but it's improbable and highly illogical. The major issue is the law. The Sanford Police Department may have failed to arrest George Zimmerman because of the race of the victim--that's for the Justice Department to investigate and determine. It's too bad that so much time was devoted to debating the dangers of hoodies instead of focusing on the Stand Your Ground Laws and how they are interpreted. If wearing hoodies is such a threat and danger to one segment of the population then why not devote as much or not more energy to getting rid of them as wad devoted to protesting the Adidas "shackle" shoe or the $300 plus LeBron James Nike shoe? Not wearing hoodies should save lots of lives right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 I still say the 911 operators need to be better trained. Her statement to Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that" when he told her he was going after him was basically a REQUEST. The 911 operator needed to be firm and clear. She needed to use the word NO. Tell him "No, do not pursue". The reality is both sides are at fault, and both men did things that were fool hardy and contributed to the tragedy that happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 I don't know if this is true because I don't know what Trayvon Martin did, if anything, to contribute to the situation. I cannot take George Zimmerman's account at face value since he's trying to save himself by shifting blame on someone who has no voice thanks to his zeal. He wasn't violating any laws and it's disturbing to know that you can be walking along, minding your own business and be forced to take responsibility for someone coming along and pursuing you just because of their own hangups. Then you're dead and he's looking for sympathy. Using the media to paint Trayvon Martin as this drug using thug may be a smart defensive move because there are plenty of people out there who see that as justification for killing a kid who was walking home. As far as I am concerned, George Zimmerman starts out with at least 75% of the blame which increases depending on what anyone believes happened. If he did try to leave and was accosted then it stays the same but it never decreases and it might just be 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 One side is at fault. The one who got out of his car with a gun in his hand because he had delusions of being a hero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ann_SS Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 Damn right. I am so sick of the people who try to claim this false equivalence to lessen George Zimmerman's responsibility for killing Trayvon. A grown man with a gun who pursues a teenage boy with a drink and skittles minding his own business is solely at fault for the resulting death, period. Zimmerman will probably get off, but his ass belongs in prison for a good long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted October 21, 2012 Members Share Posted October 21, 2012 If he gets off then the civil case will wipe him out for the rest of his life. Once that happens Zimmerman will pretty much come apart at the seams. His live will be hell either way. Personally, given his mental and emotional instability, I pretty much expect he'll meltdown before he even goes to trial, resulting in his being found unfit for trial or he'll kill himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 By no means did Trayvon bear equal responsibility, but he does bear SOME for being foolish and making a ton of mistakes, such as: 1: Dressing like a criminal 2: jumping the fence in a gated community dressed is aforementioned attire (His FATHER lived there, most likley nothing would have happened had Trayvon opened the gate with the code.) 3: Confronting the loose cannon with agression instead of calmly explaining who he was and where he was going... and I'm sure he could have just CALLED his father on the spot to prove it. It's just a matter of a dumb teenager doing dumb crap (Which happens all the time with teenagers of EVERY race) at the wrong place at the wrong time. Teenagers tend to have this feeling of invincibility that gets them into trouble sometimes. But It's not as simplistic as you guys are making it sound, there were a wide array of factors at work that night, and if even ONE of them was not in play, then it would not have ended tragically. And the biggest factor, as I said before... a homeowner's assocation using neighborhood watch people to perform security because they are too damn cheap to pay for a trained professional, that was the root cause of this entire event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 He didn't dress like a "criminal." He dressed like millions of other perfectly respectable people dress. Whether he jumped the gate or not, he was doing nothing wrong when Zimmerman attacked him. He was the invited guest of someone who lived there. People in a gated community should be able to invite friends and family over without having to worry that the nutcase with a Stallone complex will gun them down. George Zimmerman was a stranger who accosted him in the middle of the night. Martin had every reason to feel threatened. He had no responsibility to be nice to a strange unstable man following him. The only person who did anything wrong was George Zimmerman. He went out that night with a gun specifically looking to cause violence and that's exactly what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 No, he didn't need to be "nice", he simply needed to be civil and calm. When someone comes up to you and looks to be unhinged the last thing you do is get all confrontational and throw gasoline on the fire. It's just a lack of common sense, that's all. And yes, he was dressed like a criminal. Just because respectable people wear the attire, doesn't change what it is. I can go out in a chiffon gown and just because I'm wearing it, that doesn't make it man's clothing. And the jumping of the fence was his BIGGEST mistake. the fence is there for a reason, because the people who live inside are scared and paranoid. So if your appearance makes people nervous, it makes sense not to tempt fate and do things that will make people suspicious. Because when someone jumps a fence, that says to anyone watching that they don't HAVE the gate code, therefore they are not SUPPOSED to be there. So yes, Zimmerman TOTALLY did the wrong thing, and is an unhstable loose cannon (and should go to jail for manslaughter). But Trayvon is also dumb as a box of rocks for lighting that cannon's fuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 I feel as though I've heard this story a million times but somehow I was asleep when the part about his possibly jumping the fence was mentioned. If he did jump the fence then that does fall under suspicious behavior. Logic dictates that anyone who has a right to be in a place with a fence would walk through the gate not jump over it. I would be curious too if I saw someone hop a fence to get into an area where I lived. I don't believe that a hoodie is criminal attire. The mind might go there because it seems that people holding up stores occasionally have hoods over their heads. It was drizzling and it's normal to cover one's head in wet weather. Would it really have made a difference if he had on a suit and jumped the fence? I don't think so. As far as his answering any questions go, I don't know that I would want some guy approaching me and asking me questions and that I would feel obligated in any way to answer those questions--especially if I felt I shouldn't talk to strangers. I would try to get as far away from his as fast as possible. It might sound reasonable for someone to say that all he had to do was answer but if you put yourself in those shoes you might see it differently. And who's to say that George Zimmerman would have believed him/been satisfied with his response? If he did jump over the fence and arouse George Zinnmerman's suspicions then informing the police should have been sufficient. There was nothing to be gained by following him except the potential for creating a situation which is what ultimately happened and ended in his killing someone. He could have avoided all of that had he stayed in his car and left it alone. He was not being threatened at the time and this law that allows individuals to go and provoke others and then claim self defense when they kill the person(s) they provoked is terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 It's not, unless it's worn in combination with pants on the ground, which he was wearing that night. It comes down to the fact that youth of all races have adopted the dress of the criminal element because they think it to be "cool", and that is something that didn't happen 20 years ago, 30, or 40 years ago. One thing I want to know is why is it not falling out of fashion, in the normal cycle of fashion trends? Are kids going to be wearing this crap 75 years from now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 Im sorry but I beleive thats an igorant comment (one about his attire) and probably the same assumption Zimmerman made that night which resulted in the death of a boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ReddFoxx Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 That's about the same logic used against rape victims, "well, she had on tight clothes, so she brought it on herself". It's wrong and it shouldn't be used, The bottom line is, if Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his car, there would have been no shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 I get what you're saying but I personally see sagging pants as unkempt not criminal. If a guy wears a bandana, white tank shirt, has tatoos over both arms, and sagging khaki pants, should I assume he's a gang member and blame him for not understanding if I see him as one even though he's not? I think we've gotten used to society telling us what how we should see people based on a bunch of criteria that really just stereotypes and pigeon holes people. Blaming clothing takes the responsibility away from adults to make responsible decisions when interacting with others. I'm not going to give anyone a free pass by saying that "criminal" attire is instrumental in a kid being killed any more than I would give people slack for implying that a mini skirt prompted a rapist's actions. The same reason some are okay with giving the hoodie some portion of blame for a death is the about the same reason the unkempt pants on the ground persists. No one or not enough people challenge these things and we mainly shrug and say "what can you do?" I'm sure concerned parents can try to do a lot more than shrug "oh well" and I'm sure some of them do and the ones that succeed probably don't have their kids waking around in their presence with their sagging pants on. People will probably find this harsh but this is what needs to happen when kids try to leave the house in inappropriate clothing: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iwo338Ezcjo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.fbb6aa067610794e36433d57928a2f42.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.