Thousands Protest in New York, Rallies in Other Cities Against Zimmerman Verdict - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Reimu;41462914]Where did I say in that post that Zimmerman was racially profiling him? I'm saying that Trayvon, as a black person, obviously had previous experience with racial profiling. The IAT tests alone prove that, on a snap, subconscious judgment, [i]everyone[/i] has a more positive view of whites than blacks. Even blacks themselves. All I'm saying is that Trayvon's experiences with racial profiling fueled his anger. It wasn't right for him to hit Zimmerman, but it should be a call for concern if our society is producing people like Trayvon. And it should be a call for concern that thousands upon thousands of people of color are saying that they, too, recognize that racial profiling is happening on a daily basis. Dr. Despair himself captured this perfectly in the last thread, when his parents had to teach him how to hide his hands so he wouldn't look suspicious in stores. Fair enough. I've heard the justification for this too. But it still proves that we're creating a legal system where killing or harming someone is tactically better than trying to psychologically defend yourself. Here's a better example though: [url]http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/22/1076889/-Black-Shooter-of-White-Victim-in-Florida-Claimed-Stand-Your-Ground-still-went-to-Court#[/url] He was sentenced to 8 years for manslaughter - [url]http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/civil/trevor-dooley-sentenced-to-8-years-for-manslaughter/1270967[/url][/QUOTE] Please continue to cherry pick examples that have little in common with the case at hand. For instance, the last example: [Quote]Witnesses said an argument between James and Dooley took a lethal turn when Dooley flipped up his T-shirt, revealing a gun in his waistband, as he cursed James.[/Quote] And you wonder why he got sentenced to 8 years?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;41462950]No, we created a legal system where its better to kill a guy who's attempting to harm you, rather than potentially harm an innocent person with a warning shot.[/QUOTE] But SYG creates a legal loophole where flimsy claims for self-defense are acceptable. It creates a situation where, if there's a confrontation between a man with a knife and a man with a gun, the man with the gun can shoot the knife-wielder and flee the scene. Even if there's very flimsy evidence that his life was threatened - as proved by the situation with the belt thief. It's not so much a problem with warning shots as it is a problem with SYG. [QUOTE=Get Swag Son;41462953]You elaborated after "he didn't deserve to have Zimmerman following him" with "Trayvon had to carry racial profiling with him where ever he went"[/QUOTE] All I was saying was that a prior experience with racial profiling in the past would cause any person of color to be on edge if someone was following him. Plus no one deserves to be followed in the middle of the night. Would you like it if a white stranger started following you, and you had a lifetime of bad experiences with white strangers following you? I'm sure you would be anxious. Likewise, as someone mentioned in the Zimmerman thread, "following" often becomes aggressive fast. There was one poster who was essentially rammed off the road because of a paranoid white driver who wanted to question him about why he was out late at night. Other poc face verbal or physical hostility from individuals just because they "appear" suspicious. It's pretty natural if you have a bad experience with racial profiling, to be on edge when someone begins following you in a similar manner.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;41461834]You think that's bad? The conspiracy side of the internet is doing backflips over the idea that Trayvon's dad was in the masons.[/QUOTE] Someone on FP talked about being a Freemason, it actually sounded pretty cool.

[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;41463045]And you wonder why he got sentenced to 8 years?[/QUOTE] Yes I do: [quote]They said Dooley then turned and headed home, but James spun him around and tried to grab the gun. The men fell to the ground.[/quote] Dooley headed home, but James attacked him any way? Dooley flashed the gun but he never brought it out. James was the one who tackled him and choked him, leading to the confrontation itself.

That's not how it works. If Zimmerman walked up Trayvon swearing and flashing a gun, Trayvon would be the one in danger. And if Trayvon attacked Zimmerman after he turns around, and got killed in the process then Zimmerman would have gotten murder or manslaughter charges. You don't know what the fuck people are going to do, just because someone turns his back to you doesn't mean the confrontation is over. [editline]14th July 2013[/editline] If you take a concealed carry test, one of the things they drill into your head is: "The only time you show your gun is when you are ready to take the life of another human being" You don't shoot warning shots, you don't shoot to wound, you don't flaunt your weapon around.

[QUOTE=Reimu;41463050]But SYG creates a legal loophole where flimsy claims for self-defense are acceptable. It creates a situation where, if there's a confrontation between a man with a knife and a man with a gun, the man with the gun can shoot the knife-wielder and flee the scene. Even if there's very flimsy evidence that his life was threatened - as proved by the situation with the belt thief. It's not so much a problem with warning shots as it is a problem with SYG. All I was saying was that a prior experience with racial profiling in the past would cause any person of color to be on edge if someone was following him. Plus no one deserves to be followed in the middle of the night. Would you like it if a white stranger started following you, and you had a lifetime of bad experiences with white strangers following you? I'm sure you would be anxious. Likewise, as someone mentioned in the Zimmerman thread, "following" often becomes aggressive fast. There was one poster who was essentially rammed off the road because of a paranoid white driver who wanted to question him about why he was out late at night. Other poc face verbal or physical hostility from individuals just because they "appear" suspicious. It's pretty natural if you have a bad experience with racial profiling, to be on edge when someone begins following you in a similar manner.[/QUOTE] Being arrested for stolen possessions and weed at separate times is racial profiling? I'm sick of people like you who think every time a black person is booked it's racial profiling when in reality the color of your skin has nothing to do with it. You commit a crime, you face the consequences regardless of what group you belong to.

[QUOTE=Reimu;41463050] All I was saying was that a prior experience with racial profiling in the past would cause any person of color to be on edge if someone was following him.[/QUOTE] Quote the source on this "prior experience" that Trayvon had. It must've been so traumatizing to make him beat a man on the ground and bash his head against the sidewalk. Hmm...who's usually on edge when they think someone's following them, I would say, someone that has previously done something illegal or wrong but that would make too much sense. [QUOTE=Reimu;41463050]Plus no one deserves to be followed in the middle of the night. Would you like it if a white stranger started following you, and you had a lifetime of bad experiences with white strangers following you? I'm sure you would be anxious.[/QUOTE] Following someone isn't illegal anyways. A person has a right to assume that someone is following them, they don't have the right to assault them. Being anxious is human nature, assaulting someone who was keeping an eye on you from a distance is not. Please also quote a source where Trayvon has been stalked on numerous occasions by white men. [QUOTE=Reimu;41463050]Likewise, as someone mentioned in the Zimmerman thread, "following" often becomes aggressive fast. There was one poster who was essentially rammed off the road because of a paranoid white driver who wanted to question him about why he was out late at night. Other poc face verbal or physical hostility from individuals just because they "appear" suspicious.[/QUOTE] Not the same case.

[QUOTE=Reimu;41462688] Or, something like this happens - [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/11/justice/florida-stand-ground-sentencing[/url] 20 years is pretty rough for firing warning shots against an abusive husband.[/QUOTE] If you actually looked further into the story you'd find she was offered a 3-year plea bargain, and her husband's and children's testimony painted her as the aggressor. [url]http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-05-16/story/marissa-alexanders-husband-says-it-was-her-violent-nature-led-shooting[/url] Stand your ground is meant to be a last resort for self preservation in the face of absolute destruction. Not as some trivial law that allows the evil white man to shoot people of color, and quite frankly it's fucking ridiculous to even suggest such a thing.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;41463087]Also, if you cut through a gated community, and they have a security guard, or neighborhood watch, you tend to get followed. Hell, i've done it, and got followed, and questioned why I was there, and I was clearly white as shit. Race doesn't have that much to do with it, you're going to get followed if your in a place you don't need to be in.[/QUOTE] He never cut through the community. He was staying there; his relatives were in Sanford at the same community where Zimmerman lives. A good neighborhood watch would be aware that a community's relatives may be visiting. Especially if he's concerned about break-ins. Neighborhood Watches rely on creating a network of individuals who remain informed among one another. This explains why you would be followed if you cut across a gated community, but a relative or guest would not. Also, this article does a better job of examining why SYG is so troublesome: [url]http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/many-killers-who-go-free-with-florida-stand-your-ground-law-have-history/1241378#[/url] [quote]A Tampa Bay Times analysis of stand your ground cases found that it has been people like Moorer — those with records of crime and violence — who have benefited most from the controversial legislation. A review of arrest records for those involved in more than 100 fatal stand your ground cases shows: • Nearly 60 percent of those who claimed self-defense had been arrested at least once before the day they killed someone. • More than 30 of those defendants, about one in three, had been accused of violent crimes, including assault, battery or robbery. Dozens had drug offenses on their records. • Killers have invoked stand your ground even after repeated run-ins with the law. Forty percent had three arrests or more. Dozens had at least four arrests. • More than a third of the defendants had previously been in trouble for threatening someone with a gun or illegally carrying a weapon. • In dozens of cases, both the defendant and the victim had criminal records, sometimes related to long-running feuds or criminal enterprises. Of the victims that could be identified in state records, 64 percent had at least one arrest. Several had 20 or more arrests.[/quote] Criminals are more likely to take advantage of SYG. Not upstanding citizens.

[QUOTE=Reimu;41463207]He never cut through the community. He was staying there; his relatives were in Sanford at the same community where Zimmerman lives. A good neighborhood watch would be aware that a community's relatives may be visiting. Especially if he's concerned about break-ins. Neighborhood Watches rely on creating a network of individuals who remain informed among one another. This explains why you would be followed if you cut across a gated community, but a relative or guest would not. [/QUOTE] It was night, raining and Trayvon had a hoodie concealing the back of his head and hoodies usually cast shadows over a person's face. It would be pretty difficult to know exactly who someone is like that.

-snip-

[QUOTE=Get Swag Son;41463160]Quote the source on this "prior experience" that Trayvon had. It must've been so traumatizing to make him beat a man on the ground and bash his head against the sidewalk. Hmm...who's usually on edge when they think someone's following them, I would say, someone that has previously done something illegal or wrong but that would make too much sense.[/quote] The Implicit Association Test proves that people of color are much more likely to receive negative perceptions wherever they go, based on snap judgments created by internalized socialization. It's a sociological phenomenon only recently proven by IAT. It proves the same thing that the "baby doll" tests in the 1950s did - compared to blacks, whites seem to be the superior color choice. It's only natural that Trayvon would be exposed to this sort of prejudice by simply existing. This is what many people within POC communities have been discussing. Furthermore, as a person of color, do you have any experience with racial profiling? Or are you a white person saying that you think you understand the prominence of racial profiling in society [quote]Following someone isn't illegal anyways. A person has a right to assume that someone is following them, they don't have the right to assault them.[/quote] Following someone isn't illegal. But is it even necessary? He was told by dispatcher to stay in his house. That was all he should have done as a neighborhood watch captain. If he was remotely capable of understanding the ramifications of approaching a stranger in the middle of the night, he would have let the police and the rest of his watch handle the situation. [editline]15th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Get Swag Son;41463261]It was night, raining and Trayvon had a hoodie concealing the back of his head and hoodies usually cast shadows over a person's face. It would be pretty difficult to know exactly who someone is like that.[/QUOTE] Zimmerman knew on the 911 call that Trayvon was black. And IIRC the Martin's were the only black family in the community

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41462936]that's ignoring basically my last couple posts dude.[/QUOTE] No I'm not ignoring your previous posts. [QUOTE=yawmwen;41462264] it isn't just zimmerman's verdict that is being protested, this story is just becoming the face of a serious underlying issue throughout the united states. it isn't "justice for trayvon", it's "justice for all the trayvons".[/QUOTE] Even if you disagree with it, a lot of evidence points towards Trayvon Martim intending to do serious harm to George Zimmerman. There's a huge difference between stealing and being shot and being shot in self defense. Using this case as a representation for change in laws to create "justice for all trayvons" doesn't make much sense. I understand if people want to protest Stand Your Ground or other laws, but there are much better cases out there to use an example.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;41463266] As for why he was followed, he's a guy walking around at night, its pretty hard to see at night, and it's suspicious as fuck to see a single person walking around in the middle of the night in a residential zone. I'm sure had zimmerman asked for him to identify himself, and/or martin identified himself, this wouldn't have happened. Instead martin got paranoid, and instead of asking why he was being followed, or simply stopped at a neighbors house and mentioned what was going on, got violent and assaulted zimmerman, and was shot and killed in the process. This isn't a matter of race, this is a matter of a young man assaulting another person, and being killed in the process. Does it fucking suck? Yes it does, because the justice system would have done much better than that bullet did, AND there wouldn't be a media circus.[/QUOTE] Virtually every neighborhood watch manual says this is NOT the thing to do. You are only suppose to contact the police and alert your watch network. Again, I think in the end Zimmerman was justified to use his gun though. But he should have been held responsible for the situation, and he would have if the murder charge was never added (manslaughter in this situation relied on the court proving an intent to kill. it was all or nothing).

[QUOTE=Raidyr;41463058]Someone on FP talked about being a Freemason, it actually sounded pretty cool.[/QUOTE] I know a few Masons through Rotary club. It's really not a big conspiracy, honest.

[QUOTE=Reimu;41463289]The Implicit Association Test proves that people of color are much more likely to receive negative perceptions wherever they go, based on snap judgments created by internalized socialization. It's a sociological phenomenon only recently proven by IAT. It proves the same thing that the "baby doll" tests in the 1950s did - compared to blacks, whites seem to be the superior color choice. It's only natural that Trayvon would be exposed to this sort of prejudice by simply existing. This is what many people within POC communities have been discussing.[/QUOTE] And when you take into account George Zimmerman's social perception? A man who criticized the local police department for not charging a cop's son after he beat up a homeless black man? [QUOTE=Reimu;41463289]Furthermore, as a person of color, do you have any experience with racial profiling? Or are you a white person saying that you think you understand the prominence of racial profiling in society[/QUOTE] If you really want to get into this, I'm blaxican. [QUOTE=Reimu;41463289]Following someone isn't illegal. But is it even necessary? He was told by dispatcher to stay in his house. That was all he should have done as a neighborhood watch captain. If he was remotely capable of understanding the ramifications of approaching a stranger in the middle of the night, he would have let the police and the rest of his watch handle the situation.[/QUOTE] I've heard the 911 tapes before, the 911 dispatcher doesn't say anything about staying specifically in his house. And Zimmerman had been in this situation before, he called the police before over a burglary and chose to wait but by the time the police came the person was gone. [QUOTE=Reimu;41463289]Zimmerman knew on the 911 call that Trayvon was black. And IIRC the Martin's were the only black family in the community[/QUOTE] I've never heard of the Martin's being the only black family living there. Source

[QUOTE=matt000024;41463308]No I'm not ignoring your previous posts. Even if you disagree with it, a lot of evidence points towards Trayvon Martim intending to do serious harm to George Zimmerman. There's a huge difference between stealing and being shot and being shot in self defense. Using this case as a representation for change in laws to create "justice for all trayvons" doesn't make much sense. I understand if people want to protest Stand Your Ground or other laws, but there are much better cases out there to use an example.[/QUOTE] not that have gotten widespread media attention. this is what we have, this is what people will use to rally against racism in the judicial system, for better or worse. [editline]15th July 2013[/editline] i mean yea there are better events that highlight the issue, but in order for them to be effective they need to be easily accessible to the masses.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41463478]not that have gotten widespread media attention. this is what we have, this is what people will use to rally against racism in the judicial system, for better or worse. [editline]15th July 2013[/editline] i mean yea there are better events that highlight the issue, but in order for them to be effective they need to be easily accessible to the masses.[/QUOTE] So it would be like Mother Teresa, in that a whole lot of good could be built upon the foundation of lies?

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;41463504]So it would be like Mother Teresa, in that a whole lot of good could be built upon the foundation of lies?[/QUOTE] idk really. all i know is that this case is just a platform for a greater context, and that this is the story the media decided to report on so this is the story easily accessible. i'm still trying to figure out where my outrage, cynicism, and personal anarchist philosophy fit into this whole affair, so i can't really tell you whether i believe it's right or wrong. i think that all sides(except the conservative "trayvon is a thug" racist comments) have valid reasoning to an extent.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41463528]idk really. all i know is that this case is just a platform for a greater context, and that this is the story the media decided to report on so this is the story easily accessible. i'm still trying to figure out where my outrage, cynicism, and personal anarchist philosophy fit into this whole affair, so i can't really tell you whether i believe it's right or wrong. i think that all sides(except the conservative "trayvon is a thug" racist comments) have valid reasoning to an extent.[/QUOTE] I don't think that anybody truly knows anymore.

and i also know that it's super easy for me, from a position of white privilege, to just ignore the whole issue. but i am also starting to realize such a cop-out wouldn't be intellectually honest to myself. i can't just exercise privilege whenever tough issues come up.

i don't care zimmerman is not guilty, and basta no i'm not a racist

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;41463540]I don't think that anybody truly knows anymore.[/QUOTE] which is why i try to be pretty respectful of most people's views. still, it's quite frustrating when someone tells you that you "don't care about racism in america" when you say you aren't 100% on their side. so many people cling to their arguments as if they were cheering on a football team and it's annoying because you don't get any reasonable arguments from them. just hyperbole, accusations, and rolled eyes. [editline]15th July 2013[/editline] which makes me more cynical about the issue, which means i wanna just say fuck it and go live as a hermit rather than deal with all this partisan bullshit anymore lol

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41463574]which makes me more cynical about the issue, which means i wanna just say fuck it and go live as a hermit rather than deal with all this partisan bullshit anymore lol[/QUOTE] let's both move to the wilderness in the mountains the only winning move is to not play at all

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;41463609]let's both move to the wilderness in the mountains the only winning move is to not play at all[/QUOTE] ok you can teach me your pushup routines and i can teach you how to be an anarchist. you have to bring your own spraypaint, bandanas, and molotovs though.

Can we get a special shoutout to the media for making the Trayvon Martin case a racial one instead of a self defense one

[QUOTE=aznz888;41461427]im seeing this shit all over my facebook; people pulling the race card and saying how if it was a white kid, zimmerman would've gotten the hammer [/QUOTE] If Zimmerman had killed a white kid nobody would care about this case. The race card is the reason this case has all the media attention its getting.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41463641]ok you can teach me your pushup routines and i can teach you how to be an anarchist. you have to bring your own spraypaint, bandanas, and molotovs though.[/QUOTE] and you gotta bring your own preoteins

I'm so tired of these race baiters like Al Not-So-sharpton and Jesse Jerkson and the rest of these idiots protesting. Originaly, there wasn't even enough to arrest and charge the man with, but these people demanded an arrest and trial- they got their arrest and the trail was more than fair. Now I'm hearing rumors of a civil rights trial? Why don't we see the NAACP leading rallies of out rage about the 12,000 black males killed every year in black on black crime? How come we don't hear the fact that white on black crime is nearly non existant in the black community? Since we're pulling the race card out, I say we all protest the fact that the state of Florida procecuted a minority, George Zimmerkan, because if you listen to these idiots protesting you'll hear that someone who is of a minority race could never be guilty of anything. It is so obvious that the people protesting didn't even watch the trial, because if they did, they would have heard the forensic and law enforcement expert testimony that was actually on the side of Zimmerman. And let's not forget that the prosecution did a real half ass job. This entire race issue with this case is entirely the media's fault. They botched the 911 tapes to make Zimmerman sound racist, and now that's what's stuck in everyone's heads. All of these people need to take a page from Tracy Martin, Trayvon's father, who stated on his twitter that he disagrees with the verdict, but he accepts it.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;41462812]Warning shots aren't ever authorized, even in the military. Warning shots are usually made last minute, and people don't consider what's beyond their "target". This is going to sound horrible, but if your going to draw a weapon, you should shoot the guy. A weapon isn't a threat, it's not to scare someone off; it's to effectively end the threat that that person is presenting, by injuring them, most of the time in a fatal manner. Warning shots on the other hand, are usually made above or to the side of the person, unknowing of whats beyond the target.. What's there, maybe nothing, maybe a brick wall, maybe an innocent bystander, maybe a thin wall that the round punches through, and into some poor fuck who was just going about his day.[/QUOTE] Yes and no. Civilians shouldn't fire warning shots (even into the ground) if they don't want to risk being screwed by stray bullet laws (which are honestly pretty good laws to have) Buuuut, you're way off on the military. First off, I'll just assume that you're talking solely abouutt ground forces (At sea and in the air warning shots are definitely kosher) Annnd, I'm hesitant to believe that organizations that. Make heavy use of cover fire (which really boil down to "a shitton of shits warning you to stay behind cover until we can find a way to neutralize you")would frown on warning shots in the least. [editline]15th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Reimu;41463207]He never cut through the community. He was staying there; his relatives were in Sanford at the same community where Zimmerman lives. A good neighborhood watch would be aware that a community's relatives may be visiting. Especially if he's concerned about break-ins. Neighborhood Watches rely on creating a network of individuals who remain informed among one another. This explains why you would be followed if you cut across a gated community, but a relative or guest would not. Also, this article does a better job of examining why SYG is so troublesome: [url]http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/many-killers-who-go-free-with-florida-stand-your-ground-law-have-history/1241378#[/url] Criminals are more likely to take advantage of SYG. Not upstanding citizens.[/QUOTE] I'd wager that criminals are also more likely to use fire doors escapes etc etc, and ,just to clarify, not for their intended use (like that example above of someone using a gun to terrorize and attempt to falsely accuse [he might still have been abusive though, I have no clue in that regard] their spouse)