Who said that they did?
Well that’s fine but there’s no clear evidence about exactly what happened.
The standard for conviction is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is a reason to believe that Trayvon may have initiated the conflict and/or threatened Zimmerman’s life during the altercation then there exists a reason to believe that the killing was in self defense.
Trayvon’s past speaks to his character and would give me pause before convicting Zimmerman of any crime. Ultimately, this will be for a jury to decide though, not me.
I agree with your take on the Darwin award. I have no idea why Caley said that. bloomj31 is right though: The fight club, clothes, and photos do speak to character. If Martin is prone to violence, as opposed to a timid geek, then it does give reason to doubt second degree murder. Likewise, if Zimmerman has a history of violence as well, it gives reason to doubt his story. Ultimately, the prosecution has to prove that Zimmerman committed murder, and the defense should use what they can to demonstrate that the prosecution cannot prove this.
Really? No idea at all after I explained it in no uncertain terms? I’ll tell you a little story. I quit high school because there were such threats made against me that I essentially had a choice between between (a) quitting, (b) waiting for something to happen to me, (c) assassinating the antagonists. Frankly, after incessant harassment, threats and intimidation, c was and still is my ideal. If I hadn’t been in school on court order, as in I actually had any stock in what I was giving up, imagine how wonderful an option set that would have been. (In that case I definitely would have chosen c.) When you rent space in people’s heads you put a bullseye on yours. Someone like me that is fed up with that is bound to hit it on the dot. Get it now? Trash belongs in the bin and anyone wanting to emulate trash can go into the bin too because nobody but fairies in a high chair want to try sorting them out and waiting for something to happen.
I’ll also add that Trayvon’s parents, undoubtably total losers, should have planned the parenting a bit better. I’ll send a big boohoo out to them.
Come to mention my history, if you think the police in cases like this are bad, try this. In the hicktown where I grew up the official position of the authorities is that you are a “pussy” if you actually expect any assistance. My friend learned this the hard way from a police officer just before getting mob attacked.
You are a very angry person.
Caley is firey right now I love it.
Don’t quit your day job and become a psychologist.
I’m a firey guy.
No need. I offered that one for free.
Btw, all this not-so-clever personal trolling going on recently makes it seem like it is no longer against the rules. Just noticing this because I was banned once without being blatantly obvious like the above.
You are the one who responded to one of my posts. And the response was, well, rather angry. You are saying that people who act like thugs - but are not thugs - should die. After all, you wrote:
And when you respond with
Then the appriopriate response to such nonsense is
Considering the anger that you demonstrated above - calling for the execution of people who act tough - I’m not surprised you have been banned before.
Don’t quit your day job and become a psychologist.
But you’re giving psychologisms - such as here:
I’ll also add that Trayvon’s parents, undoubtably total losers, should have planned the parenting a bit better. I’ll send a big boohoo out to them.
On top of that you are giving personal case studies/testimonials with unpolite expressions of inner motives… perhaps even extreme to most (the desire to kill in an illegal / uncustomary fashion)…what do you expect?
So the state and all its puppet institutions fail in what is basically the most obvious ways (media bias, lack of investigation), causing hundreds of residents in Florida to directly question the legitimacy of the state institution in charge of this case, and the conclusion here is…what?
I honestly don’t understand A) the point of this thread, B) why people have opinions on the personality of the Martin family or Zimmerman, or anyone involved in the case for that matter, or C) how this can be considered a productive conversation relating to any ioata of libertarian philosophy whatsoever in any way.
Was there a point to any post in here other than to be provacative and perhaps take a cheap shot at the media?
His clothes are irrelevant. His photos are irrelevant. His fight club is irrelevant.
If clothes, photos or activities may reflect what someone could perceive of a person at a glance in a situation, they are most certainly relevant. You sound like every college party girl who used to attend the self-defense classes I assisted with in college. They were convinced (and the university condoned convincing them) that just because you have the right to wear whatever you want, and go wherever you want with whomever you want (or no one at all) that you should be free of fault should something happen to you when you do them, which is pure nonsense. Decisions have potential risks and if you are aware of them and fail to take precautions, you do bear some responsibility if TSHTF.
I will never forget my best friend being totally mystified when a girl on his dorm floor told him a story about how she went to a party (which she knew would be almost all guys) by herself, she got extremely drunk, passed out and woke up to someone having sex with her. After hearing the story my friend became livid trying to get information out of her so he could report the incident as a rape, but she refused to give it to him. She said she didn’t feel like she was raped, but even if she was, she should’ve been much more careful in what she did to begin with. She accepted her part in what happened to her, and she changed how she would do things from then on. He went on for weeks about how crazy she was to think like that, never realizing that she was really more sane about it than he was.
These things do not make his death his fault…
This is an amusing line of illogic. “Fault” is not an all or nothing prospect; in almost any situation you may find yourself in, you bear some degree of responsibility. Does that mean you deserved to have something bad happen to you? No, of course not. But that doesn’t mean your actions leading up to something bad happening to you are without fault.
For example, if Trayvon hadn’t gotten caught with weed (or weed “traces”, whatever that is) in his bookbag and been suspended from school, do you think he would be dead right now? If Trayvon’s father had gone to the trouble of introducing himself and his family to the neighbors and the neighborhood watch after he moved into the neighborhood, do you think he would be dead right now? None of that is to say he deserved to die, but it is to say he and the people around him do bear some responsibility for what happened to him. Pretending as if Zimmerman is a sole villain is ridiculous.
I honestly don’t understand…
No kidding? You’re in the General Miscellaneous forum. I believe that’s where this topic falls in.
In my opinion, just because one may be in an area where there’s an increased risk of being aggressed against does not make any aggression he suffers there any less wrong. Furthermore, he certainly didn’t cause the aggression himself - the aggressor did. That is, the origin of the aggression lies solely with the aggressor.
The part of your quote that I emphasized is a judgement call. Others are free to judge her as being less sane than your friend. No one is right or wrong here, if you ask me. But if the girl doesn’t see herself as having been the victim of aggression, or doesn’t consider it worth pursuing, that’s entirely up to her IMO. On the other hand, my opinion here is also that anyone who has intercourse with a person while he or she is sleeping is raping that person.
This thinking leads to the abandonment of all notions of responsibility, as it ultimately must consider everything that ever happened before to be at fault for a given event. In other words, I think you’re confusing causality with responsibility here.
Again, I think you’re confusing causality with responsibility. Yes, there’s an entire chain of events that (one might say inevitably) led to Trayvon Martin’s death, allegedly at the hands of George Zimmerman. To me, that in no way means that Martin killed himself. Otherwise, one could say that everyone always ends up killing himself, as we all go inevitably to our deaths. And to say that would mean to remove any and all value judgements that anyone can impute to anyone else’s death from the universe of discourse.
In my opinion, just because one may be in an area where there’s an increased risk of being aggressed against does not make any aggression he suffers there any less wrong.
Wow, it’s as if you skipped over that pesky reading problem and went straight to pronouncing ill-informed and irresponsible judgments. Did you even bother to read what I wrote, or did you just skim it then jump in guns a blazin’?
Furthermore, he certainly didn’t cause the aggression himself - the aggressor did. That is, the origin of the aggression lies solely with the aggressor.
You have no idea who the aggressor was in this situation, so you rendering such a premature judgment is silly.
The part of your quote that I emphasized is a judgement call. Others are free to judge her as being less sane than your friend.
What does that have to do with anything? You are arguing something that wasn’t even an argument, it was an emphasis of an argument. And acknowledging the truth of a matter is insane? Guess this whole forum can safely be shipped off to the nut house.
On the other hand, my opinion here is also that anyone who has intercourse with a person while he or she is sleeping is raping that person.
As she told my friend, for all she knows she may have consented but was too drunk to remember, and it wasn’t worth putting herself and someone else who may have thought everything was OK through a criminal proceeding for something that may not be true.
Yes, there’s an entire chain of events that (one might say inevitably) led to Trayvon Martin’s death, allegedly at the hands of George Zimmerman. To me, that in no way means that Martin killed himself.
Again, you’re not only arguing things that I didn’t say, you’re putting an even more ridiculous set of words in my mouth.
Otherwise, one could say that everyone always ends up killing himself, as we all go inevitably to our deaths. And to say that would mean to remove any and all value judgements that anyone can impute to anyone else’s death from the universe of discourse.
I’ll give you credit, once you grab onto an ill-advised piece of logic you ride that good horse to death.
Of course I bothered to read what you wrote. Why would you think otherwise?
I wasn’t. I was talking about a hypothetical situation, wasn’t I? (Yes, I was.)
What are you referring to as “the truth of a matter”?
Well, if she’s not sure whether she was really asleep when the intercourse began, then okay. If she didn’t think* it was worth it to file rape charges against the guy, then okay. As I said before, it’s up to her.
Well, if you’re not going to offer any substantiation, then I won’t either. I’ll simply say that I don’t believe you about this.
I don’t see why you’d expect this to make me back down. Try again, maybe? This time with an actual counter-argument?
- Note: there is no truth to whether something is “worth it” - there are only differing opinions.
I’m requesting an admin delete the part of my post about the police.
I’m saying that pretending to be something is as bad as being it from anyone else’s prespective because that is the information you are giving and expecting people to play Sherlocke Holmes to find the real you is ridiculous. Maybe Hitler was just trolling. This was about the Darwin Award. It’s the same deal on the question of Islam. But I decided that I was too careless about the blanket statement about the police. It’s not letting me edit it. I use my real name here to encourage myself to be reasonable.
I never expect much.
Do you have a problem with personal case studies?
I was banned for saying that a post said something about the person. So, it’s ironic that you would say that given how often you do it.
Do you have a problem with personal case studies?
They are something that is used almost exclusively in “psychological warfare” and avoiding almost anything relevant to what can be discussed in a rational manner for the facts on hand, whatever the topic may be.
Case Studies have no use in argumentation, they are only useful as “practiced advice” (ex: data for an entrepreneur)
That statement just demonstrates total misunderstanding of the situation. Some people in this thread (and others) try to portray anyone that thinks there are real threats before the point that something catastrophic happens as paranoid delusional. That auctionguy13 is one of them is hardly suprising given his muslim affiliation. What my case does is help to realize how real people prioritize when faced with real dilemmas. In this Trayvon case, his image will factor in to the decision on Zimmerman, which in turn feeds back into how people with that image will be dealth with. The only response to it was more of the same: trying to brush it off as meaningless jabber stemming from a psychological abnormality. I’m not going to let you guys off trying to seem like Gotlucky was just making a hurr durr redundant statement informing me of my own state of mind.
P.S. Excuse my incessant editing.