Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[The Commish]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

That one is going to be tough to top.

Not familiar with the work of Jo Jo or Mr Two Cents???

The Omission strikes again by singling out the participants covering one side of the story!

That's anecdotal. Doesn't change the substance of your posts. If you're going to post it, you might as well own it

The more you drag my name through the mud, the more I'm going to call you out for being the biased P.O.S. that you are.

Keep fighting the fight you've created If you don't want people taking issue with your offensive and childish posts, don't post them. Love the sense of entitlement you have here Jo Jo.

I've created? I'm not the dbag bringing your name into arguments showing "how holier than I am" whenever I get the chance.

No...just calling people what I assume you think is cute little nick names and flat out insulting names. Very productive.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

That one is going to be tough to top.

Not familiar with the work of Jo Jo or Mr Two Cents???

The Omission strikes again by singling out the participants covering one side of the story!

That's anecdotal. Doesn't change the substance of your posts. If you're going to post it, you might as well own it Is it my fault that you helped reach new lows? I certainly have no control over which "side" you're on.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Stop robbing and killing people and people will stop thinking you're likely to rob and kill people.

Not a good posting at all. Icon may have not had a good upbringing, but it's silly for him to compare himself to most black teens. Neither he nor I nor any white person can truly understand what it's like to be black in this country.And while it's true that blacks have a responsibility to improve themselves and stop violence, we as a society also have a responsibility to remove racism from our police and judicial system where it continues to exist.

There have been great strides socially to help combat racism that has opened many doors for blacks in the workforce.

Culturally, black acceptance in society as a whole has come MASSIVE distances over the last 40 years.

However, blacks account for as high (or higher) a percentage of crime as they ever have.

It's easy to live in "Timmay's Fantasy Land" and say "We just need to eliminate racism and everything will be okay. However, at this point the bulk of the blame here is on black America. If they start doing their part, the rest of society can continue the progress they've made thus far. Until then... they are the primary force holding themselves back. Period.

Do you think wealthy blacks commit violent crimes at a higher rate than poor whites?

Why would that matter? I dont think anybody questions whether or not poverty factors into crime levels.

Because it's really really stupid to characterize a poverty problem/family problem as a "black" problem just because blacks are disproportionately poor and from single parent homes. It's not just racist, it's also counterproductive. It leads to tension between the races and allows people to ignore the actual causes of violent crime. It would be akin to me saying that because unemployment is much lower among Jews than among the general population, the lazy, irresponsible Christian culture is to blame for joblessness.

You are right, but only in as far as you take this line of logic. You take the profiling as racism, when it's nothing more than following the same simple logic....skin color isn't the cause of the violence, low SES and single family homes are...but it does nothing to change the data. A random 20 year old black kid is 10X more likely to commit a violent crime than a random white kid the same age. That simple fact leads to profiling, regardless of the reasons behind the disparity.

And yes...culture is a problem. AAs in general have a very definitive victim mentality and deflect far too often. This happens throughout most SES levels.

I'll ask again- if family and socioeconomic status are far greater indications of tendency to commit violent crimes than race, why are you and others focusing so much on race instead of the other things? Just in your post you admit that its more about those other things than race, but you immediately retreat to blaming the "culture" instead of the real causes.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.

I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

You are a liar and you make me sick. This adds more value to this discussion than the 1,765,432 vapid squishy flippity floppity nonsense words you have posted in this thread in the last 2 days.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

Or, to put it another way, If you're black, you're approximately three times as likely to be killed by a white person as a particular white person is to be killed by a black person.

What are the odds to get killed by another black person? What are the odds of a particular white person to get killed by a particular white person?

 

[timschochet]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

No...just calling people what I assume you think is cute little nick names and flat out insulting names. Very productive.

I told you before, dirty hands, click on the link if you want to continue to act this clueless.

 

[Henry Ford]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

Or, to put it another way, If you're black, you're approximately three times as likely to be killed by a white person as a particular white person is to be killed by a black person.

What are the odds to get killed by another black person? What are the odds of a particular white person to get killed by a particular white person?

By a particular white person? Probably pretty low. Like, the chances of me getting killed by Tom Cruise are astronomically low.

 

[cstu]

OK, several of you have responded to my point that there is no evidence that Trayvon Martin doubled back by pointing to the timeline, to the statement by Martin on the phone to Rachel that he was "outside his house", to the statement by Jenna as to where the confrontation took place- all of this, you argue, would cause someone to reasonably conclude that Martin must have doubled back, which would therefore indicate that it's more likely that Trayvon Martin was the actual person who initiated the confrontation.

I am not convinced of that, but you guys make persuasive enough arguments so that I will amend my original contention that there is NO evidence to suggest that Trayvon initiated the fight. Rather, I will now say that there is no conclusive evidence as to who initiated the fight. I will no longer contend that it is more likely that Zimmerman initiated the fight. We just don't know. It does not change my original point this morning that it is wrong for people to simply accept Zimmerman's narrative without question. For the purposes of reaching a verdict in the trial, fine- his narrative which can't be disproved provides reasonable doubt. But for the purposes of discussion we can certainly question it.

That's all I'm asking. We don't know but it's like arguing about the existence of God. We don't have all (hell, much) of the information but the little we do supports GZ's story.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

This would be a great separate thread.

Poverty and violence seems to go hand in hand, much more than race.

About half of those living in poverty are non-Hispanic white (19.6 million in 2010), but poverty rates are much higher for blacks and Hispanics.

Do the drug laws in this country that put many people behind bars who would otherwise not be incarcerated have anything to do with this?

Does the availability of drugs and weapons in poorer neighborhoods have anything to do with it?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

Tim why don't you delete another one of your posts from a previous page? It's obvious you don't like seeing that post as the first post on a new page.

 

[renesauz]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.

I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

I'd back Timmy up on this one. He's got his head firmly up his butt on this one, but he loves to talk/argue and isn't trying to incite or put anyone down.

 

[jon_mx]

OK, several of you have responded to my point that there is no evidence that Trayvon Martin doubled back by pointing to the timeline, to the statement by Martin on the phone to Rachel that he was "outside his house", to the statement by Jenna as to where the confrontation took place- all of this, you argue, would cause someone to reasonably conclude that Martin must have doubled back, which would therefore indicate that it's more likely that Trayvon Martin was the actual person who initiated the confrontation.

I am not convinced of that, but you guys make persuasive enough arguments so that I will amend my original contention that there is NO evidence to suggest that Trayvon initiated the fight. Rather, I will now say that there is no conclusive evidence as to who initiated the fight. I will no longer contend that it is more likely that Zimmerman initiated the fight. We just don't know. It does not change my original point this morning that it is wrong for people to simply accept Zimmerman's narrative without question. For the purposes of reaching a verdict in the trial, fine- his narrative which can't be disproved provides reasonable doubt. But for the purposes of discussion we can certainly question it.

Nobody accepted Zimmerman's story without question. There are a few aspects of it which raised suspicion, but the reality is it held up quite well to the known facts and testimony which is why the investigator believed him. If Zimmerman lied there would have beenore serious discrepancies between his story and other evidence. You make way too big of a deal over minor points.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

Or, to put it another way, If you're black, you're approximately three times as likely to be killed by a white person as a particular white person is to be killed by a black person.

What are the odds to get killed by another black person? What are the odds of a particular white person to get killed by a particular white person?

By a particular white person? Probably pretty low. Like, the chances of me getting killed by Tom Cruise are astronomically low.

Why did you use particular in your response?

 

[timschochet]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.

I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

You are a liar and you make me sick. This adds more value to this discussion than the 1,765,432 vapid squishy flippity floppity nonsense words you have posted in this thread in the last 2 days.

1. Where did I lie?

2. Based on your posts, I'm kind of glad I make you sick.

4. Even if one believes, as I do, that George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, I can still find that cartoon disgusting, and I do. Your posting of it only proves what I have already asserted- you are a troll with no purpose other than to incite people.

 

[The Commish]

No...just calling people what I assume you think is cute little nick names and flat out insulting names. Very productive.

I told you before, dirty hands, click on the link if you want to continue to act this clueless.

I'll resist the "dare" to "continue" cluelessness. No need to come down a level

 

[greenroom]

So has any new news came out?

Pro Zimmerman still blame "evil thug, MMA expert, PCP Skittles makin, 5star high School Football player" Martin for his death.

Pro Martin thinks that "racist, wannabe cop, doughboy, .5 on athlete scale" Zimmerman got away with murder.

Unless something else has changed. I am looking forward to the interviews with the jury. To see how bad of job the DA did with this case.

 

[lod01]

Regardless of the issues of the black community, we still have to rely on the justice system. A justice system that has failed us too many times.

It didn't this time.

It did.

How so? Given the evidence...you think the jury should've ruled "Guilty"...and of what? Based on what, specifically?I know I'm not going to sway you and you're probably not going to sway me...but it still might be worth an attempt or two to discuss.

Because a black youth was killed and his murderer walks free, he gets no consequences. At all. No probation, no lesser charge, nothing.

How do you not see the issue with this?

But what can you do? We have the rules of evidence and you have to abide by them.What else would you do? Just because it was a black youth that died...send the guy to jail without evidence? Just to "make it right" or like the NBA does..."a makeup call"?

Lets not forget cases like the Casey Anthony murder...she was guilty and walked ...and we all know what race she is

Semi hot female?

Easily semi-hot.

Now you want a case, I give you the drunk old $ chasing FL skank who walked away a free ho after claiming her rich boyfriend shot himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmUhW1ESSWU

 

[renesauz]

Stop robbing and killing people and people will stop thinking you're likely to rob and kill people.

Not a good posting at all. Icon may have not had a good upbringing, but it's silly for him to compare himself to most black teens. Neither he nor I nor any white person can truly understand what it's like to be black in this country.And while it's true that blacks have a responsibility to improve themselves and stop violence, we as a society also have a responsibility to remove racism from our police and judicial system where it continues to exist.

There have been great strides socially to help combat racism that has opened many doors for blacks in the workforce.

Culturally, black acceptance in society as a whole has come MASSIVE distances over the last 40 years.

However, blacks account for as high (or higher) a percentage of crime as they ever have.

It's easy to live in "Timmay's Fantasy Land" and say "We just need to eliminate racism and everything will be okay. However, at this point the bulk of the blame here is on black America. If they start doing their part, the rest of society can continue the progress they've made thus far. Until then... they are the primary force holding themselves back. Period.

Do you think wealthy blacks commit violent crimes at a higher rate than poor whites?

Why would that matter? I dont think anybody questions whether or not poverty factors into crime levels.

Because it's really really stupid to characterize a poverty problem/family problem as a "black" problem just because blacks are disproportionately poor and from single parent homes. It's not just racist, it's also counterproductive. It leads to tension between the races and allows people to ignore the actual causes of violent crime. It would be akin to me saying that because unemployment is much lower among Jews than among the general population, the lazy, irresponsible Christian culture is to blame for joblessness.

You are right, but only in as far as you take this line of logic. You take the profiling as racism, when it's nothing more than following the same simple logic....skin color isn't the cause of the violence, low SES and single family homes are...but it does nothing to change the data. A random 20 year old black kid is 10X more likely to commit a violent crime than a random white kid the same age. That simple fact leads to profiling, regardless of the reasons behind the disparity.

And yes...culture is a problem. AAs in general have a very definitive victim mentality and deflect far too often. This happens throughout most SES levels.

I'll ask again- if family and socioeconomic status are far greater indications of tendency to commit violent crimes than race, why are you and others focusing so much on race instead of the other things? Just in your post you admit that its more about those other things than race, but you immediately retreat to blaming the "culture" instead of the real causes.

Because culture does make a difference, and it's sad that many AAs refuse to look at it as a factor. Is it the top factor? Maybe not, but it is there and deserves recognition.

 

[lod01]

So has any new news came out?

Pro Zimmerman still blame "evil thug, MMA expert, PCP Skittles makin, 5star high School Football player" Martin for his death.

Pro Martin thinks that "racist, wannabe cop, doughboy, .5 on athlete scale" Zimmerman got away with murder.

Unless something else has changed. I am looking forward to the interviews with the jury. To see how bad of job the DA did with this case.

Nope. That's right where we are.

 

[Joe McGee]

How did I get sucked into this downward spiraling thread? I think I'm out.

 

[timschochet]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

1. I question it because (a) it was released a year after he died, and could easily have been faked (b) because it's really immaterial since we don't know the context. Teenagers use this sort of language and phrasing all the time, and there is no connection between that and what they actually do.

2. It doesn't hurt "my case" at all. My case has nothing to do with Trayvon Martin's character, except that I have no evidence he was the thug you seem to want to make him out to be.

3. Sure, if it had been admitted into evidence it might have speeded up deliberations. But the judge correctly ruled it out because it was not provable and also immaterial. IMO, had Zimmerman been convicted of manslaughter and the ruling out of this evidence the basis of his appeal, he would have lost.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

Tim why don't you delete another one of your posts from a previous page? It's obvious you don't like seeing that post as the first post on a new page.

I think the point is hes dead and buried...the case is over...zimmy walked...why keep dragging up dirt about a kid who cant even tell his side ...just let it go man...let it gooooooo

 

[RCon]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

This would be a great separate thread.

Poverty and violence seems to go hand in hand, much more than race.

About half of those living in poverty are non-Hispanic white (19.6 million in 2010), but poverty rates are much higher for blacks and Hispanics.

Do the drug laws in this country that put many people behind bars who would otherwise not be incarcerated have anything to do with this?

Does the availability of drugs and weapons in poorer neighborhoods have anything to do with it?

Hell yes.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

1. I question it because (a) it was released a year after he died, and could easily have been faked (b) because it's really immaterial since we don't know the context. Teenagers use this sort of language and phrasing all the time, and there is no connection between that and what they actually do.2. It doesn't hurt "my case" at all. My case has nothing to do with Trayvon Martin's character, except that I have no evidence he was the thug you seem to want to make him out to be.

3. Sure, if it had been admitted into evidence it might have speeded up deliberations. But the judge correctly ruled it out because it was not provable and also immaterial. IMO, had Zimmerman been convicted of manslaughter and the ruling out of this evidence the basis of his appeal, he would have lost.

The cell phone has been in custody of police since the night of the shooting, are you seriously alleging that someone from SFPD or the Defense team created these text messages and planted them on his cellphone?

 

[timschochet]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

1. I question it because (a) it was released a year after he died, and could easily have been faked (b) because it's really immaterial since we don't know the context. Teenagers use this sort of language and phrasing all the time, and there is no connection between that and what they actually do.2. It doesn't hurt "my case" at all. My case has nothing to do with Trayvon Martin's character, except that I have no evidence he was the thug you seem to want to make him out to be.

3. Sure, if it had been admitted into evidence it might have speeded up deliberations. But the judge correctly ruled it out because it was not provable and also immaterial. IMO, had Zimmerman been convicted of manslaughter and the ruling out of this evidence the basis of his appeal, he would have lost.

The cell phone has been in custody of police since the night of the shooting, are you seriously alleging that someone from SFPD or the Defense team created these text messages and planted them on his cellphone?

I didn't know that. No, I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that it's immaterial. And it's also in very poor taste. It's just ugly to bring it up.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

So it is ok for you to take a wild stab that martin was profiled because of race, but we are not allowed to discuss the text messages that were on martin's phone?

There is a very high probability that Martin had a history of getting in fights. The fact that he was in a fight that was likely structured into rounds would definitely show a scary pattern. The evidence is certainly not 100%, but it is 10 times more reliable than what you are basing your opinions on.

These text messages exist. The odds that they were forged or impersonated is what maybe 1 in 5000?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Because culture does make a difference, and it's sad that many AAs refuse to look at it as a factor. Is it the top factor? Maybe not, but it is there and deserves recognition.

Really? You think the role of culture in the violent crime rate among African-Americans has gone unrecognized?

Read the last few pages of this thread again. I'd say this "culture" thing is getting FAR more attention than any of the other factors that play a much bigger role. And every time someone like you posts about the role of culture without acknowledging those more important factors, you make the problem worse IMO. When you blame a secondary factor for a problem, you're shoving the more important factors into the background, and you're legitimatizing the views of racists who refuse to acknowledge those more important factors.

 

[ATC1]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.

I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

You are a liar and you make me sick. This adds more value to this discussion than the 1,765,432 vapid squishy flippity floppity nonsense words you have posted in this thread in the last 2 days.

1. Where did I lie?

2. Based on your posts, I'm kind of glad I make you sick.

4. Even if one believes, as I do, that George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, I can still find that cartoon disgusting, and I do. Your posting of it only proves what I have already asserted- you are a troll with no purpose other than to incite people.

Tim, do you believe GZ shot TM in self defense? Do you believe without reasonable doubt that he did not fear for death or great bodily harm?

 

[cstu]

Because culture does make a difference, and it's sad that many AAs refuse to look at it as a factor. Is it the top factor? Maybe not, but it is there and deserves recognition.

Really? You think the role of culture in the violent crime rate among African-Americans has gone unrecognized?

Read the last few pages of this thread again. I'd say this "culture" thing is getting FAR more attention than any of the other factors that play a much bigger role. And every time someone like you posts about the role of culture without acknowledging those more important factors, you make the problem worse IMO. When you blame a secondary factor for a problem, you're shoving the more important factors into the background, and you're legitimatizing the views of racists who refuse to acknowledge those more important factors.

Being poor doesn't mean that you have to become a thug. There are poor people all over the world whose culture doesn't embrace violence.

 

[lod01]

How did I get sucked into this downward spiraling thread? I think I'm out.

That's usuallly when I show up.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

Why do you question the contents of his cellphone as not being authenticate? I understand it hurts your case tremendously but you cannot deny the fact that had this been admitted into evidence and left up to the jury to decide it would greatly hurt the case you are trying to build up via conjecture.

1. I question it because (a) it was released a year after he died, and could easily have been faked (b) because it's really immaterial since we don't know the context. Teenagers use this sort of language and phrasing all the time, and there is no connection between that and what they actually do.2. It doesn't hurt "my case" at all. My case has nothing to do with Trayvon Martin's character, except that I have no evidence he was the thug you seem to want to make him out to be.

3. Sure, if it had been admitted into evidence it might have speeded up deliberations. But the judge correctly ruled it out because it was not provable and also immaterial. IMO, had Zimmerman been convicted of manslaughter and the ruling out of this evidence the basis of his appeal, he would have lost.

The cell phone has been in custody of police since the night of the shooting, are you seriously alleging that someone from SFPD or the Defense team created these text messages and planted them on his cellphone?

I didn't know that. No, I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that it's immaterial. And it's also in very poor taste. It's just ugly to bring it up.

Not to pile on, but didn't the defense claim during the trial that the prosecution had these messages all along and didnt share them with the defense? The defense had to get them from some place else other than discovery. Sneaky, but understandable. Ugly to bring up? It depends on the narrative you're trying to spin.

 

[Guest]

So after a year and 466 pages we are still arguing the same points from Day 1.

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.

 

[tdoss]

It actually kinda scares me that people can look at this case...see all the evidence and STILL feel like those celebrity tweets.

Damn...I really wonder if I were black or a celebrity...would I see this completely differently? Would I honestly be able to look past the evidence and feel so confident in thinking that Zimmerman should've been found guilty?

I mean, geez...even Tim (the most white-guilt ridden, liberal minded person on this board) was able to say that he'd find Zim not guilty.

There's some serious detachment and division in our nation and it's really concerning.

I remember when the OJ verdict came in...the manager of our department jumped up and cheered...actually did a little dance and clapped as loudly as he could throughout the department. Yes...he was black...most of us stood there looking at him with a quizzical look of "What the hell?"

Any "division" in this country is because of whites.

Are you forgetting slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, etc?

It was actually white people who came up with the concept of "race."

I don't know about that last statement...hell, the slaves that were brought to America were...yep, slaves in their homeland being sold to the Europeans and Americans for the most part.

This is highly simplistic, not at all accurate, and VERY misleading. It originated in racist revisionist historical arguments which attempt to excuse the African slave trade. It's since worked it's way into some extreme conservative rhetoric.

Interesting...guess you learn something new everyday. On a continent that has 57 countries...of which many are currently experiencing unbelievable genocide, rape and carnage from fellow countrymen...it's unheard of their being any history of slavery within the African culture. Thanks to whitey for bringing such a new concept to their borders. I'll just take your world for it because I really don't want 50 pages of discourse with you about it when it seems like we're actually having a decent discussion here. I concede the point.

Thanks for changing the goalposts. Of course there was slavery in Africa. But to state that the slaves brought over here were already slaves in their own countries is not at all true. Some of them were slaves, yes. Some of them were political prisoners that the kings of western Africa turned over to the slave traders. But most of them were villagers who were kidnapped.

You're the one who changed the topic from Trayvon Martin to Slavery.

Say what now?

You highlight my responses but ignore his before those that brought up slavery and Jim Crowe laws?

 

[lod01]

So after a year and 466 pages we are still arguing the same points from Day 1.

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.

I'm shocked that this thread hasn't been locked and deleted by now. Someone finish it off. Take one for the team. You'll probably only get a week in the hole.

 

[timschochet]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

You are a liar and you make me sick. This adds more value to this discussion than the 1,765,432 vapid squishy flippity floppity nonsense words you have posted in this thread in the last 2 days.

1. Where did I lie?2. Based on your posts, I'm kind of glad I make you sick.

4. Even if one believes, as I do, that George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, I can still find that cartoon disgusting, and I do. Your posting of it only proves what I have already asserted- you are a troll with no purpose other than to incite people.

Tim, do you believe GZ shot TM in self defense? Do you believe without reasonable doubt that he did not fear for death or great bodily harm?

No and no. I don't believe it was self defense, but I do think there is enough reasonable doubt about this to acquit him. The jury acted correctly, IMO.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Because culture does make a difference, and it's sad that many AAs refuse to look at it as a factor. Is it the top factor? Maybe not, but it is there and deserves recognition.

Really? You think the role of culture in the violent crime rate among African-Americans has gone unrecognized?

Read the last few pages of this thread again. I'd say this "culture" thing is getting FAR more attention than any of the other factors that play a much bigger role. And every time someone like you posts about the role of culture without acknowledging those more important factors, you make the problem worse IMO. When you blame a secondary factor for a problem, you're shoving the more important factors into the background, and you're legitimatizing the views of racists who refuse to acknowledge those more important factors.

Being poor doesn't mean that you have to become a thug. There are poor people all over the world whose culture doesn't embrace violence.

And there are black people all over the world who don't become thugs.

Being part of a "culture that embraces violence" isn't primarily a race thing. It's an urban poverty thing, along with a "children with too little or no adult supervision" thing. Anyone who comes from that kind of background is going to be predisposed to that culture- blacks, Hispanics, Asians, anyone. The race-based statistics are mostly a reflection of the fact that a disproportionate # of blacks come from a background of urban poverty with too little or no adult supervision. And anyone who cites the race disparity without acknowledging the disparity in circumstance is making the problem worse.

 

[jon_mx]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

So it is ok for you to take a wild stab that martin was profiled because of race, but we are not allowed to discuss the text messages that were on martin's phone?

There is a very high probability that Martin had a history of getting in fights. The fact that he was in a fight that was likely structured into rounds would definitely show a scary pattern. The evidence is certainly not 100%, but it is 10 times more reliable than what you are basing your opinions on.

These text messages exist. The odds that they were forged or impersonated is what maybe 1 in 5000?

Tim has showed little honesty in seeking the truth in this case. He knows how he wanted the events to have been and will twist facts to make them fit. He has completely different standards for evidence depending upon who the evidence supports. Way too much emotion and way too little brain in his reasoning.

 

[squistion]

Jojo, I hate that you keep bringing up Trayvon Martin's history according to internet sources. Not only do we not know how much of it (or any of it) is true, we don't know the context, we have no idea how it affects what happened the night in question (I would argue not at all.) Worst of all, it perpetuates certain ugly racial stereotypes that make attitudes in this discussion worse, not better. I wish you would stop.

So it is ok for you to take a wild stab that martin was profiled because of race, but we are not allowed to discuss the text messages that were on martin's phone?

There is a very high probability that Martin had a history of getting in fights. The fact that he was in a fight that was likely structured into rounds would definitely show a scary pattern. The evidence is certainly not 100%, but it is 10 times more reliable than what you are basing your opinions on.

These text messages exist. The odds that they were forged or impersonated is what maybe 1 in 5000?

Tim has showed little honesty in seeking the truth in this case. He knows how he wanted the events to have been and will twist facts to make them fit. He has completely different standards for evidence depending upon who the evidence supports. Way too much emotion and way too little brain in his reasoning.

 

[Henry Ford]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

Or, to put it another way, If you're black, you're approximately three times as likely to be killed by a white person as a particular white person is to be killed by a black person.

What are the odds to get killed by another black person? What are the odds of a particular white person to get killed by a particular white person?

By a particular white person? Probably pretty low. Like, the chances of me getting killed by Tom Cruise are astronomically low.

Why did you use particular in your response?

Because "the odds of a white person being killed by a black person" is a phrase with a different meaning than "the odds of a particular white person being killed by a black person." Another phrase with a completely different meaning would be "a particular white person being killed by a particular black person."

My phrase was used to show that if you're born black in this country, you're more likely to be killed by a white person than you are likely to be killed by a black person if you're born white. By a lot.

 

[ATC1]

Too bad Zimmerman didnt waste this kid, too.

I didn't think anyone could approach Tim in this thread. We have a winner. This is a new low for this thread.

Todd Andrews is a troll who would rather incite people than engage them in discussion. That's not me.I certainly have my opinion about what happened with Zimmerman, and about the larger issue of race relations. I certainly take issue with many of the arguments made in this thread. But I try not to incite people, and to me the discussion is more valuable than proving myself right.

You are a liar and you make me sick. This adds more value to this discussion than the 1,765,432 vapid squishy flippity floppity nonsense words you have posted in this thread in the last 2 days.

1. Where did I lie?2. Based on your posts, I'm kind of glad I make you sick.

4. Even if one believes, as I do, that George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, I can still find that cartoon disgusting, and I do. Your posting of it only proves what I have already asserted- you are a troll with no purpose other than to incite people.

Tim, do you believe GZ shot TM in self defense? Do you believe without reasonable doubt that he did not fear for death or great bodily harm?

No and no. I don't believe it was self defense, but I do think there is enough reasonable doubt about this to acquit him. The jury acted correctly, IMO.

Seems like the main person you dislike in this is the lead investigator. By him telling the jury he believes GZ's story to be true we do not see GZ take the stand. Would have been interesting if he had too. That is for sure.

 

[lod01]

Here's one for ya all to run with.

Killed over a pair of sneakers.

 

[tdoss]

What do people that want "Justice for trayvon" actually think is justice in this case?

Young black men no longer being considered "suspicious" in our society simply because they are young black men.

Not even if break ins in the neighborhood have all been by young black men?

So its ok to hassle to members of a group because of actions of other members of that group?

A black man is standing in your yard...it's night and its raining. He's not doing anything...just standing there. You're not taking notice...wondering "what's this guy doing?"

Now...imagine he was white...or even white Hispanic...do you think the same thing..."what's this guy doing?"

Yep...you do. That's the point...Zim saw Tray just standing in a yard of a house he's called the cops to secure in the past (window and front door)...there's break-ins all the time in this gated community (it is Florida, after all)...just standing there on a sunny day...no hoodie, no skittles...and I'd venture to guess that Zim would call the same number because its strange enough, given the current environment, to call.

 

[cstu]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

This would be a great separate thread.

Poverty and violence seems to go hand in hand, much more than race.

About half of those living in poverty are non-Hispanic white (19.6 million in 2010), but poverty rates are much higher for blacks and Hispanics.

Do the drug laws in this country that put many people behind bars who would otherwise not be incarcerated have anything to do with this?

Does the availability of drugs and weapons in poorer neighborhoods have anything to do with it?

The are 164 million white people aged 15 and over. The poverty rate for whites is 13%. Given that, there's about 21.3 million white people aged 15 and over in poverty.

There are 30 million black people aged 15 and over. The poverty rate for blacks is 35%. There's about 10.5 million black people aged 15 and over in poverty.

If poverty were the primary factor in murders then whites should be committing twice as many murders as blacks.

Link

Link

 

[lod01]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

This would be a great separate thread.

Poverty and violence seems to go hand in hand, much more than race.

About half of those living in poverty are non-Hispanic white (19.6 million in 2010), but poverty rates are much higher for blacks and Hispanics.

Do the drug laws in this country that put many people behind bars who would otherwise not be incarcerated have anything to do with this?

Does the availability of drugs and weapons in poorer neighborhoods have anything to do with it?

The are 164 million white people aged 15 and over. The poverty rate for whites is 13%. Given that, there's about 21.3 million white people aged 15 and over in poverty.

There are 30 million black people aged 15 and over. The poverty rate for blacks is 35%. There's about 10.5 million black people aged 15 and over in poverty.

If poverty were the primary factor in murders then whites should be committing twice as many murders as blacks.

Link

Link

Am I reading this right? So there are an average of over 4000 white on black killings per year and we have 467 pages...and counting....for one of them.

AWESOME!!!!

 

[kentric]

MSNBC reporting that black people around the country are outraged- they feel as if a black life is not worth as much as a white life. This is, of course, based on tweets and it's all anecdotal, but I believe it. I think this is really how most black Americans feel tonight.

That's always the crux of these things; the feeling that America doesn't value the life if young black men.

Dude, young black men don't value the lives of young black men. They need to do that before everyone else will.

Sick, disgusting comment.

You're a POS.

Why. I think it's an accurate statement. There should be more focus on black on black crime but we as a country are too scared to address it.

I was listening to "Oprah Live" on the radio Sunday morning and they were talking about the trial and someone said you can't talk about black-on-black crime until you first address white-on-black crime. A radio announcer backed this up saying something to the effect that the memory of racial slavery requires them to address white-on-black crime first.

 

[larry_boy_44]

OK, several of you have responded to my point that there is no evidence that Trayvon Martin doubled back by pointing to the timeline, to the statement by Martin on the phone to Rachel that he was "outside his house", to the statement by Jenna as to where the confrontation took place- all of this, you argue, would cause someone to reasonably conclude that Martin must have doubled back, which would therefore indicate that it's more likely that Trayvon Martin was the actual person who initiated the confrontation.

I am not convinced of that, but you guys make persuasive enough arguments so that I will amend my original contention that there is NO evidence to suggest that Trayvon initiated the fight. Rather, I will now say that there is no conclusive evidence as to who initiated the fight. I will no longer contend that it is more likely that Zimmerman initiated the fight. We just don't know. It does not change my original point this morning that it is wrong for people to simply accept Zimmerman's narrative without question. For the purposes of reaching a verdict in the trial, fine- his narrative which can't be disproved provides reasonable doubt. But for the purposes of discussion we can certainly question it.

wasn't everything they said to you just now said in the trial early last week or earlier already?

Were you not paying attention?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Per ABC news, in the 10 year period from 2000 to 2009, black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530 while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Even though whites account for approximately 64% of the population and Blacks account for less than 13% of the

population, 8% of all homicides are black-on-white murders while only 4% are white-on-black murders.

Or, to put it another way, If you're black, you're approximately three times as likely to be killed by a white person as a particular white person is to be killed by a black person.

What are the odds to get killed by another black person? What are the odds of a particular white person to get killed by a particular white person?

By a particular white person? Probably pretty low. Like, the chances of me getting killed by Tom Cruise are astronomically low.

Why did you use particular in your response?

Because "the odds of a white person being killed by a black person" is a phrase with a different meaning than "the odds of a particular white person being killed by a black person." Another phrase with a completely different meaning would be "a particular white person being killed by a particular black person."

My phrase was used to show that if you're born black in this country, you're more likely to be killed by a white person than you are likely to be killed by a black person if you're born white. By a lot.

You are greatly distorting facts and statistics here and you know it.If you are born black:

What are the odds that you are killed by another person?

What are the odds that you are killed by another black person?

What are the odds that you are killed by a white person?

What are the odds that you are killed by a Hispanic person?

What are the odds that you are killed by a person of a race other than the three mentioned above?

Now normalize these statistics based on racial rarity in the United States.

Once you fairly treat the statistics above and normalize, the bold should stand out by leaps and bounds.

Feel free to go through the same steps for a white victim. The picture you are trying to paint is using very broad strokes to mask the details of the facts.

 

[Billy Bats]

MSNBC reporting that black people around the country are outraged- they feel as if a black life is not worth as much as a white life. This is, of course, based on tweets and it's all anecdotal, but I believe it. I think this is really how most black Americans feel tonight.

That's always the crux of these things; the feeling that America doesn't value the life if young black men.

Dude, young black men don't value the lives of young black men. They need to do that before everyone else will.

Sick, disgusting comment.

You're a POS.

Why. I think it's an accurate statement. There should be more focus on black on black crime but we as a country are too scared to address it.

I was listening to "Oprah Live" on the radio Sunday morning and they were talking about the trial and someone said you can't talk about black-on-black crime until you first address white-on-black crime. A radio announcer backed this up saying something to the effect that the memory of racial slavery requires them to address white-on-black crime first.

So, they're still blaming the slave owners? Cool, we'll have this all figured out never.

 

[cstu]

Because culture does make a difference, and it's sad that many AAs refuse to look at it as a factor. Is it the top factor? Maybe not, but it is there and deserves recognition.

Really? You think the role of culture in the violent crime rate among African-Americans has gone unrecognized?

Read the last few pages of this thread again. I'd say this "culture" thing is getting FAR more attention than any of the other factors that play a much bigger role. And every time someone like you posts about the role of culture without acknowledging those more important factors, you make the problem worse IMO. When you blame a secondary factor for a problem, you're shoving the more important factors into the background, and you're legitimatizing the views of racists who refuse to acknowledge those more important factors.

Being poor doesn't mean that you have to become a thug. There are poor people all over the world whose culture doesn't embrace violence.

And there are black people all over the world who don't become thugs.

Being part of a "culture that embraces violence" isn't primarily a race thing. It's an urban poverty thing, along with a "children with too little or no adult supervision" thing. Anyone who comes from that kind of background is going to be predisposed to that culture- blacks, Hispanics, Asians, anyone. The race-based statistics are mostly a reflection of the fact that a disproportionate # of blacks come from a background of urban poverty with too little or no adult supervision. And anyone who cites the race disparity without acknowledging the disparity in circumstance is making the problem worse.

This is simply not true. As I posted above there are twice as many white kids as black kids in poverty yet they don't get commit as nearly many violent acts. I know it's popular to blame it all on poverty but the facts do not back it up. I've also spend almost half a year in Africa and have seen people who make our poorest look like Bill Gates and they are not nearly violent. We have an American culture problem as well as a AA culture problem.