Zimmerman Riot poll. place your bets

[desura]

TM put GZ in that situation by attacking him out of the blue.

Actually, you don't know that. There is a lot that is simply unknown about this case.

 

[Attic]

This story is about different standards being applied based on race.

The encounter between GZ and TM is largely fleshed out by evidence. The racists weighed in prior, during, and after that information came to light.

The folks doing that are the evil ones who are too full of them selves to be aware of the damage they've done and will do to communities. Or they simply are working for a paycheck and nothing else.

 

[TerryMathews]

Damn idiots!

I hope GZ has learnt a lesson here and don't carry any more guns.

Why? It probably saved his life that night.

 

[JackBurton]

Damn idiots!

I hope GZ has learnt a lesson here and don't carry any more guns.

Yeah, that's the lesson to take away. Similar to someone breaking into your home. If you shoot him and he dies, the lesson is, don't own a gun.

GZ's gun may have just saved his own life or prevented him from sustaining serious and permanent damage. So no, I don't think the lesson is, he shouldn't have had a gun. The lesson is, it doesn't pay to try to keep your neighborhood safe and look after your fellow neighbors. It should be every man for himself. Oh, and if a black man attacks you, just let him beat on you until he thinks you've had enough. Hopefully he won't kill you or cause permanent bodily damage. Because obviously if you defend yourself, you're a racist, even though the person attacking you is racist.

 

[sourceninja]

I think the lesson is (and I'm a strong supporter of gun rights) that you should not go out of your way to find trouble.

He saw something suspicious and it was not a threat to him or his property (or an immediate threat to anyone or their property). He had called the police. I think that was enough to protect his fellow neighbors. The fact he followed someone he thought might be a criminal and got out of his car are all signs of pure recklessness.

He shouldn't have been charged with murder as he didn't set out to kill someone. Manslaughter is also stretch because I don't think he realized his actions were dangerous. However their is a lot of blame on him for this death. He made bad decisions after bad decisions which lead to his being attacked and forced to defend himself.

Lesson one in self defense, stay out of dangerous situations.

He doesn't have all the blame however. People need to learn that anyone could have a gun and you don't just think you can punch your way out of problems. Martin had a phone and if he really thought he was in danger, maybe instead of calling his friends he could have called the police, ran home, and waited for them.

Instead he decided to make a stupid decision and confront. Again putting himself in danger for no good reason.

Both are classic self defense fails. In the end, tragic, but not deserving the attention given.

 

[TerryMathews]

I think the lesson is (and I'm a strong supporter of gun rights) that you should not go out of your way to find trouble.

He saw something suspicious and it was not a threat to him or his property (or an immediate threat to anyone or their property). He had called the police. I think that was enough to protect his fellow neighbors. The fact he followed someone he thought might be a criminal and got out of his car are all signs of pure recklessness.

He shouldn't have been charged with murder as he didn't set out to kill someone. Manslaughter is also stretch because I don't think he realized his actions were dangerous. However their is a lot of blame on him for this death. He made bad decisions after bad decisions which lead to his being attacked and forced to defend himself.

Lesson one in self defense, stay out of dangerous situations.

He doesn't have all the blame however. People need to learn that anyone could have a gun and you don't just think you can punch your way out of problems. Martin had a phone and if he really thought he was in danger, maybe instead of calling his friends he could have called the police, ran home, and waited for them.

Instead he decided to make a stupid decision and confront. Again putting himself in danger for no good reason.

Both are classic self defense fails. In the end, tragic, but not deserving the attention given.

I agree with this.

 

[IronWing]

The lesson is quite clear: leave no witnesses.

 

[jaha2000]

The lesson is quite clear: leave no witnesses.

First thing they tell you in CPL class.

 

[sci guy]

I think the lesson is (and I'm a strong supporter of gun rights) that you should not go out of your way to find trouble.

He saw something suspicious and it was not a threat to him or his property (or an immediate threat to anyone or their property). He had called the police. I think that was enough to protect his fellow neighbors. The fact he followed someone he thought might be a criminal and got out of his car are all signs of pure recklessness.

Isn't the job of the neighborhood watch to watch the neighborhood?

 

[LTC8K6]

Actually, you don't know that. There is a lot that is simply unknown about this case.

The weight of the evidence says so, and that's what objective people will go with.

 

[LTC8K6]

I think the lesson is (and I'm a strong supporter of gun rights) that you should not go out of your way to find trouble.

He saw something suspicious and it was not a threat to him or his property (or an immediate threat to anyone or their property). He had called the police. I think that was enough to protect his fellow neighbors. The fact he followed someone he thought might be a criminal and got out of his car are all signs of pure recklessness.

He shouldn't have been charged with murder as he didn't set out to kill someone. Manslaughter is also stretch because I don't think he realized his actions were dangerous. However their is a lot of blame on him for this death. He made bad decisions after bad decisions which lead to his being attacked and forced to defend himself.

Lesson one in self defense, stay out of dangerous situations.

He doesn't have all the blame however. People need to learn that anyone could have a gun and you don't just think you can punch your way out of problems. Martin had a phone and if he really thought he was in danger, maybe instead of calling his friends he could have called the police, ran home, and waited for them.

Instead he decided to make a stupid decision and confront. Again putting himself in danger for no good reason.

Both are classic self defense fails. In the end, tragic, but not deserving the attention given.

Keep in mind that initially the dispatcher twice requested that GZ report what TM was doing. It's only later that the dispatcher talks about following.

 

[DrunkenSano]

The lesson here is and has been taught on Dave Chapelle. This is a perfect example of 'When keeping it real goes wrong'. TM was a stupid thug who thought he was keepin it real.

Instead of doing what any other normal person would do and that is to keep walking while calling 911 saying that there is a creepy man following him and let the police deal with the situation.

 

[Doppel]

Oldgamer

Just as I thought, no riots.. nothing but peaceful protests.. Says a lot about you who thought there would be. Most telling indeed..

Maybe next time you wait longer than 90 minutes after a verdict before declaring your predictive victory and divining what is to be said about people who thought there would be rioting.

The night of the verdict there was vandalism by protesters in Oakland, CA: "people broke windows, vandalized cars and buildings and started small fires in the streets" (per article below).

This morning in LA, http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-15-06-03-21, police have made arrests, and, according to http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-day-demonstrations-planned-night-anger.html had to fire rubber bullets into a crowd.

So, yeah, not quite "nothing but peaceful protests", are they?

Now to be honest the OP never defined what a riot is, and the definition is very broad; using it we can conclude unequivocally that there have been riots and that those who said yes were shown as correct. Practically speaking however I expect many of the yes votes expected more than we have seen thusfar. Even with the destruction of property and arrests the crowds for the most part have been acting legally. The problem with many protests is that only a tiny number of people have to act like fools to turn a peaceful protest into something much worse.

 

[JM Aggie08]

So tell me how you would react if you had some guy following you at night for no apparent reason.

Since when is physically attacking a person a reasonable reaction?

You act as though Zimmerman were waving his weapon around while chasing after the kid.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Since when is physically attacking a person a reasonable reaction?

When you're a thug. Backing down is a sign of weakness.

 

[isekii]

Media has to be the biggest blame for this. GZ was labeled guilty before this even went to the justice system.

Also if you're going to protest, why the fvck are you blocking traffic on the highway ?
Bunch of scumbags I tell you. If you're going to do it, do it without disrupting others.

 

[lupi]

Why are some of yall trying to go with facts and common sense, itsso much easier to ride the race baiting wave.

 

[HomerJS]

White people didn't have to riot. White people made sure OJ stayed in court for years until ultimately he went to jail for stealing some memorabilia that belonged to him. They got him ultimately....no rioting required. Just "Justice"

I disagree slightly. You people riot over a hockey game

 

[desura]

The weight of the evidence says so, and that's what objective people will go with.

No, the weight of the evidence does not say this. Objective people will just throw their hands in the air and say, "I don't know exactly what happened."

 

[cmdrdredd]

I disagree slightly. You people riot over a hockey game

"You people" huh? Yeah and post no pictures of all the looters after major storms and what types they were and all the riots out in LA and Oakland after certain incidents. Those don't count

 

[desura]

"You people" huh? Yeah and post no pictures of all the looters after major storms and what types they were and all the riots out in LA and Oakland after certain incidents. Those don't count

lol, hes kidding. cant take a joke?

 

[HomerJS]

"You people" huh? Yeah and post no pictures of all the looters after major storms and what types they were and all the riots out in LA and Oakland after certain incidents. Those don't count

You do know that was to refute previous post.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I do know that I don't have the time nor patience to scroll through a million posts to find the ones you are responding to.

I really don't find any of this a joke to be perfectly honest. The while situation our country is in today sucks.

 

[QueBert]

The interesting thing about those Hockey riot pics, I see nothing but white people. I was in the heart of LA during the Rodney King riots, I honestly saw probably as many non black people rioting as black ones.

 

[JackBurton]

No, the weight of the evidence does not say this. Objective people will just throw their hands in the air and say, "I don't know exactly what happened."

Objective people do say, "I don't know EXACTLY what happen," but they will also go on to say the evidence supports GZ claim of self defense. It's really as simple as that.