Why is Fox New Defending George Zimmerman?

[EXman]

I can't believe this. It seems like every stupid/evil position of every possible news story is defended by Fox News. All people want is for George Zimmerman put on trial just like anyone else would be if they shot someone.

You need some Street Justice?

 

[runzwithsizorz]

Doesnt surprise me. I don't really watch TV but my impressions of FOX was white is right.

Amazing. Just like a friend of mine said, "I hate Fox News". My reply was "Have you watched Fox News?" Her reply, "Never".

 

[Ausm]

Amazing. Just like a friend of mine said, "I hate Fox News". My reply was "Have you watched Fox News?" Her reply, "Never".

She sounds like she has good taste.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Amazing. Just like a friend of mine said, "I hate Fox News". My reply was "Have you watched Fox News?" Her reply, "Never".

You really don't have to watch Fox News for it to reach out and touch you. Inappropriately I might add.

 

[cybrsage]

My posts in this thread are mostly about my opinion that the SYG law with it's low standard of what can be considered self-defense is a pretty bad law. It forces prosecutors to accept self-defense even when investigators don't believe the claim.

No, it does not. Show me where the law says this. Quote the relevant portion.

 

[cybrsage]

Did Z believe he was in danger? Probably.
Was he in danger? Absolutely not. And he's not some angelic person who was panicking because he's never been in an altercation and didn't know what to do. He's had plenty of violent encounters, this was clearly a case of him overreacting to save his ass.

Did you record the atack on your cell phone? Have you given you eye witness statement to the police?

 

[cybrsage]

I know this won't come out right but here goes...you are an example of how things should be---a fight is a fight. There are no guns, just a beating and people walk away alive. Nowadays, everybody is a fucking pussy and needs to use guns to settle their disputes. It's a cultural thing and it will be hard to change.

So you are of the mindset that big guys should be able to beat up little guys and the little guys have to take it? Personally, I am of the mindset that technology means the big guys need to stop beating on the little guys or they could wind up dead.

 

[blankslate]

No, it does not. Show me where the law says this. Quote the relevant portion.

this is the relevant portion

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

on the surface it looks innocuous unfortunately even though is says reasonably it is being interpreted in a very loose manner in Florida.

The evidence for this is that after the law was passed shootings involving claims of self defense has risen.

More evidence is that a person chased down a burglar attempting to steal a car radio and repeatedly stabbed him until he died then the charge of 2nd degreemurder was thrown out by a judge even though the stabbing was caught on a surveillance recording.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/20...fpl-employees-miami-dade-judge-miami-dade-man

As critics assail Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law in the wake of the killing of an unarmed Miami Gardens teen in Sanford, a Miami-Dade judge on Wednesday cited the law in tossing out the case of a man who chased down a suspected burglar and stabbed him to death.

Greyston Garcia was charged with second-degree murder in the slaying of Pedro Roteta, 26, whom he chased for more than a block before stabbing the man.

Miami police Sgt. Ervens Ford, who supervised the Garcia case, was floored when told Wednesday of the judge’s decision. Ford called the law and the decision by Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Beth Bloom a “travesty of justice.”

“How can it be Stand Your Ground?” said Ford, a longtime homicide investigator who on his off-day on Monday plans to attend a rally in the Trayvon case in Sanford with his two teenage sons. “It’s on [surveillance] video! You can see him stabbing the victim . . .”

Bloom granted Garcia, 25, immunity under the 2005 law after she decided that his testimony about self-defense was credible. The judge did not issue a written ruling, but is expected to do so in the next few days.

The Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office is likely to appeal the judge’s ruling. Garcia’s defense attorney could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

The 2005 law eliminated a citizen’s duty to retreat when attacked, leading critics to say the statute fosters vigilante justice and allows criminals to get away with murder on a claim of self-defense.

granted the burglar probably deserved an ass-kicking but being stabbed to death? Only a total retard would defend that.

If a person can chase down a burglar and stab him to death then have the charge of 2nd degree murder against him thrown out base on SYG then the law needs to be repealed or rewritten so that travesties of justice like that don't occur anymore.

 

[cybrsage]

this is the relevant portion

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

on the surface it looks innocuous unfortunately even though is says reasonably it is being interpreted in a very loose manner in Florida.

None of that says they have to accept the claims of self defense. They simple are deciding it is not worth their effort to do a Reasonable Person test. You will always be able to find cases where things are applied inappropriately. Heck, look at what legalized abortion - the right to privacy. Grabbing an outlier is not support for what commonly happens.

I would expect self defense shootings to rise when people realize they do not have to try to flee an attacker first.

 

[blankslate]

Grabbing an outlier is not support for what commonly happens.

Outlier or not it shows that the law is flawed and needs to be rewritten if it's not done away with altogether.
because it illustrates in a shocking manner that not all of the increase in deaths highlighted below are actually a result of a "reasonable fear" of "eminent death"

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand-your-ground-enacted/

That kind of thing is happening a lot, according to FDLE statistics obtained by CBS4′s David Sutta.

According to state crime stats, Florida averaged 12 “justifiable homicide” deaths a year from 2000-2004. After “Stand your Ground” was passed in 2005, the number of “justifiable” deaths has almost tripled to an average of 35 a year, an increase of 283% from 2005-2010.

 

[cybrsage]

Outlier or not it shows that the law is flawed and needs to be rewritten if it's not done away with altogether.

Many laws use wording such as "reasonable". This is done because if they tried to be explicit, they would miss things and create horrible laws. What is actually needed is for prosecutors to do their jobs and root out the reasonable vs the unreasonable ones.

 

[Craig234]

Amazing. Just like a friend of mine said, "I hate Fox News". My reply was "Have you watched Fox News?" Her reply, "Never".

You can see a lot of Fox News without watching Fox News.

Hours and hours and hours is played and reported on on commentary shows, books, mediamaters.org, liberal magazines and more.

I've probably seen over a hundred Bill O'Reilly segments without ever picking his show - not to mention chapters on him by writers such as Al Franken.

There have been times he's been unavoidable in public settings.

Ironically, the criticis of Fox News who 'don't watch it' might be a lot more informed about it than the loyal viewers.

Critics might be aware of the history - of Roger Ailes' rise to fame by impressing Richard Nixon with his 'tv savvy' and being his media advisor, paving the way to his involvement in how to use media for 'the conservative cause', leading to his failed attempt to create a right-wing network (people didn't watch much) and then the second successful attempt, when Rupert Murdoch saw a business opportunity - he could 'create a market' for his news product by having it tell its viewers that all the other news outlets were lying to them, so they could only trust him (sort of like cult leaders). Murdoch for the first time in cable history paid the cable companies to carry his channel instead of the other way around.

That sort of 'force fed' availability helped the channel to build a market where others did not have those resources and rest is history.

History such as the Fox executives being caught sending out political orders and talking points daily, a book by and citing several former Fox broadcasters exposing a lot the network did, their role in things like burying a story on the harm of 'cow growth hormone' and firing the reporters when they refused to kill it, the phone hacking details from England... the role of Murdoch getting British Prime Ministers elected who then gave him exceptions to laws limiting media ownership...

Critics might be informed of these things, how many loyal Fox viewers are?

I don't mind the point you're trying to make - ignrant attacks are not helpful - but I am pointing out you might not be correct in an assumption.

 

[Craig234]

reasonably it is being interpreted in a very loose manner in Florida.

Does the word reasonable really even belong in Florida?

It's like the word 'copyright' in China.

 

[Dulanic]

Amazing. Just like a friend of mine said, "I hate Fox News". My reply was "Have you watched Fox News?" Her reply, "Never".

Do I have to watch dancing with the stars to know I won't like it?

 

[trenchfoot]

Do I have to watch dancing with the stars to know I won't like it?

Agreed. Fox's notoriety and firmly established reputation for broadcasting propagandistic right wing lies and deception 24/7/365 precedes the mere hint of their name.

The problem with this very obvious and universally known fact is that FOX's hardcore viewers are in abject denial about that and will vociferously defend FOX's programming as their viewers would prefer to believe FOX's lies that support their FOX influenced distorted view of reality.

A pretty sick symbiotic relationship to say the least.

 

[pcgeek11]

" Inside Politics: NBC News to probe misleading edit of Zimmerman 911 tape "

Yeah Fox News is bad... Sarcasm

 

[Doppel]

Someone was shot dead who was Unarmed and not committing a Crime and you're wondering why the shooter is not being charged with anything?

Attacking somebody, having them on the ground and beating them is legal now?

 

[cybrsage]

Do I have to watch dancing with the stars to know I won't like it?

What is so bad about watching hot, fit women gyrating around for your pleasure?

EDIT: In case it is your thing, there are also hot, fit men doing the same thing. Either way, there is something for everyone to watch.

 

[airdata]

Because fox news and the people who watch it are _________'s.

Attacking somebody, having them on the ground and beating them is legal now?

Stop pretending Zimmerman was just attacked. He had no business being where he was. He was told to stay in his car and chose instead to follow somebody at night while armed with a gun. The victim has more reason to see zimmerman as suspicous than zimmerman had to see the victim as suspicious.

Somebody follows you around at night w\ a gun... are they going to rob you, mug you, rape you, or kill you?