George Zimmerman declared not guilty of second-degree murder

[Heysaboda]

Well whatever I said to cause offense or insult I apologise for it.  Maybe I should go back to the Bloo Board……

Mea Culpa

IAmADork

[Awesoman]

Well whatever I said to cause offense or insult I apologise for it.  Maybe I should go back to the Bloo Board……

Mea Culpa

IAmADork

Don't apologize for having an opinion. We may not agree here but you're not doing anything wrong by voicing your thoughts. 

[Heysaboda]

Well whatever I said to cause offense or insult I apologise for it.  Maybe I should go back to the Bloo Board……

Mea Culpa

IAmADork

Don't apologize for having an opinion. We may not agree here but you're not doing anything wrong by voicing your thoughts.  

Well, true.  But I do apologize to you and DRB for being overly "snarky" or whatever.  (No I won't go back to the Bloo Board that place is HORRIBLE.)

Honestly, I think the case ran its course.  Ironically, GZ "got away with it" which is what he said on the phone.  We can agree or disagree with the outcome, but it's done.  The Feds should have better stuff to do than worry about this.  People can protest if they like, but if it leads to violence... that's just hooliganism.  Most of the protests have been peaceful at least.

[Jason]

Yes, because nothing says "justice for Trayvon" like looting.

[drbeachboy]

What would you like done? We have been doing it this way for 237 years. Do you want someone to go shoot him to get YOUR justice?  So, you want someone to break another law to enforce justice for this one? You are a vigilante? It was a terrible thing that happened. I know of no other way than the justice system to try people for crimes committed.

You asked what I'd like done DRB, so here it is:  Actually, nothing!  I think the courts should be done with this.  They tried.  They failed (in some people's opinion).  That's it.  Done.  I think the endless protests are pretty meaningless at this point.  And having the Feds get involved is also meaningless.

Not exactly sure why you're accusing me of being a vigilante?  Where did I ever encourage law breaking?  I clearly said the comics were having a field day with GZ having to wear a hoodie now LOL.  I take offense at your remark, SIR!  (LOL)    The expression "Just. Ice." was directed at GZ, as he's clearly the vigilante here.  Maybe you don't agree?  No I am not a vigilante?  LOL

GEEZ get a grip will ya DRB?

I didn't call you a vigilante, only asked if you were, is all. Please notice the "question mark (?)". I would never presume such a thing. Hopefully, one day you will sit on a jury an experience what it is like to hold the power of life and death. I know of very few people who take it lightly. No one should. It bothers me that so many people take what this jury did as being wrong. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. If you really want to be pro-active about this case, lobby to have the "Stand Your Ground" law reversed. I have a grip. Always have. I don't take things of high importance lightly, the law being one of them.

[guitarfool2002]

Temar's quote "so I saw this, like, suspicious car" is a point to consider around the term "profiling",

Again, you're cutting off the quote at a very convenient spot. He did not just see a suspicious car but a little girl inside it at a time when a little girl went missing. Therefore, given the evidence of the time, Boggs and Garcia could have objectively said without being at all questioned, that they could have been looking at a crime. George Zimmerman, on the other hand, could not say that because under no circumstance could a person simply walking and looking around be a crime. Boggs and Garcia had every reason to follow the car - not out of paranoia but because there was actually a valid reason to assume a crime was taking place. If the standard is that one should be suspicious when a little girl in a community goes missing and you see a person behaving erratically with a little girl with him, then I'd be on board. However, if the standard is that one should be suspicious because you see a person walking at night, then I'm not. And I find it nothing short of astonishing that anyone should correlate both of those reactions.

Watch the interview, jeez...is this really coming down to this kind of scrutiny? I don't have time to transcribe and type out the entire interview, which is why I linked directly to and therefore anyone can watch the YouTube clip and take it on your own initiative to sort it all out. If you either can't see or simply don't believe that these kids saw a suspicious car driving erratically before being able to get close enough and *then* realizing there was a girl in that car, and the car's actions piqued their suspicions about what that car was doing in their neighborhood, then that's something you need to sort out. It's just plain silly to go back and forth like this. And no comment on the fact that police were seemingly oblivious of anything that was happening between kids chasing a car on bike around a neighborhood where an "intense search" was in progress for the little girl in that car? That's the astonishing part.

I won't go into it again, but this tactic about challenging the way the person is re-posting this stuff and his/her motives rather than looking at the big picture is infuriating, and I blame myself for not remembering this is part of the same playbook that unfolds in nearly every discussion on this sub-forum involving politics. The issue isn't about watching and analyzing the facts, it becomes twisted into challenging how much or how little of something is clipped and posted, despite at least three full links, and a full uncut video interview with the actual person involved available for all to view? Yet the practice of NBC News clipping, editing, and repeatedly airing part of a 911 call to directly influence public opinion in an active *criminal case* is brushed aside or ignored?

Go on with the delusions, I really at this point regret even entering this bullshit fest because a basic discussion of some hot topics was not the ultimate goal, rather it again became a case of "winning" in some absurd way by focusing on the branches on a sapling on the outskirts of a larger forest while ignoring the forest itself.

The point of the story is that people in a neighborhood "getting involved" and acting on something they think is suspicious in their neighborhood is not in itself a bad thing, as some in the wake of this case may be suggesting.

Doing the opposite reminds me too much of the insidious "don't snitch" mentality which has infected many communities and has led to a situation where no one who could potentially help solve or break a criminal case by reporting something they witnessed due to fear of reprisal or being branded a "snitch" in their community is leading to a lot of death, injury, and misery in communities that simply cannot take any more of that misery.

But, again, make sure to look for and be outraged by the discarded recyclable soda can perched on top of the pile of toxic waste, that's a helpful tactic when trying to evade any semblance of the bigger picture.

[Jason]

"Trayvon Martin could have been me, 35 years ago." - President Barack Obama

I am getting really sick and tired of this president.

[guitarfool2002]

And ultimately I wanted to post all of that from Pennsylvania because it's a positive story that had a fantastic ending and put the focus on a few teens who did the right thing, took action, and saved a little girl before the authorities searching for her could make it there. The narrative of the political influences in America and in the media parroting certain narratives if not outright promoting those narratives doesn't stay on a story like this for too long because, to be brutally honest, there is nothing in the story to help further the narrative they think gives them better ratings and gets more attention. "If it bleeds, it leads..." is the old adage in the news business, I'd add to that after this past week "If it incites, it leads..." because it's been surreal if not absurd to watch certain things play out.

Retrying the Zimmerman-Martin case as some are doing here is ultimately an exercise in futility. The verdict is in, it's a done deal, it cannot be reversed nor under the laws of the US can someone be retried for the same crime after being found innocent by a jury. "Double Jeopardy" in other words is not allowed in these cases. So now we wait to see if the Martin family files a suit in civil court, or if the D.O.J. tries to file civil rights charges in federal court. But the criminal trial itself is over, it cannot be changed.

But what can be at least addressed by the case I highlighted here is the fact that getting involved and acting on something suspicious is not wrong, nor is it bad in any way to do such a thing in a neighborhood. The Martin case showed where that notion went too far, and it certainly was a shame that it had to happen that way.

But for folks to start peering into these communities where various Town Watch organizations, or in cities where a citizen group like the Guardian Angels may be on the streets, and declaring that the entire notion of keeping an eye on things, reporting suspicious activity, or in general getting involved at all, is by nature a bad thing or indicative of a paranoia based on fear and racism, or worse, is totally counterproductive to having a community where people are looking out for each other.

And if any practice or any program or anything in everyday life involving those other than ourselves is to be judged based on the abuses or the negative results of those abuses rather than the overall effect, in other words focusing on the trees rather than seeing the forest, I'd estimate 99.9% of all programs and activities we engage in every day would be declared a failure if not worse based on the abuses and damages some individuals have caused by their own actions.

And yet those failures are amplified if and only if the failure can be played into a larger sociopolitical narrative being promoted by whoever has something to gain by using it.

[Bean Bag]

"Trayvon Martin could have been me, 35 years ago." - President Barack Obama

I am getting really sick and tired of this president.

Someone needed to stoke the fire.  May as well be the community dis-organizer... I mean Prez.

OBAMA: 'TRAYVON COULD HAVE BEEN ME'
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/19/Obama-Trayvon-could-be-me

What I find funny is to think about where Obama actually was 35 years ago.  From Wikipedia (before someone changes it to look like he was living on the south side helping lost, hungry teens)

In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, and with the aid of a scholarship attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979

Could have been him...  Could have been him... 

[Heysaboda]

I didn't call you a vigilante, only asked if you were, is all. Please notice the "question mark (?)". I would never presume such a thing. Hopefully, one day you will sit on a jury an experience what it is like to hold the power of life and death. I know of very few people who take it lightly. No one should. It bothers me that so many people take what this jury did as being wrong. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. If you really want to be pro-active about this case, lobby to have the "Stand Your Ground" law reversed. I have a grip. Always have. I don't take things of high importance lightly, the law being one of them.

Got it, and yes, sorry! I reacted wrongly to your post.

Coincidentally enough, I have a Jury Summons for July 30.  I will show up.  Perhaps wearing my “Hang ‘Em High!” T-shirt.  (However, we don't have "Stand Your Ground" here in California.)

Question DRBB, so.... did you agree with the OJ jury that found him "not guilty" of those murders?  I, myself, did not!

Not all juries are worthy of respect.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Watch the interview, jeez...is this really coming down to this kind of scrutiny? I don't have time to transcribe and type out the entire interview, which is why I linked directly to and therefore anyone can watch the YouTube clip and take it on your own initiative to sort it all out. If you either can't see or simply don't believe that these kids saw a suspicious car driving erratically before being able to get close enough and *then* realizing there was a girl in that car, and the car's actions piqued their suspicions about what that car was doing in their neighborhood, then that's something you need to sort out.

Sort this out for me: Do you consider walking to be a suspicious act? Or, if taking your claim as true, do you consider walking to be as suspicious an act as driving erratically. And I ask this seriously because I want to make sure that the next time I leave the house that I have left enough time so that I can follow anyone who I see who happens to be walking around and looking at things.

The point of the story is that people in a neighborhood "getting involved" and acting on something they think is suspicious in their neighborhood is not in itself a bad thing, as some in the wake of this case may be suggesting.

Who is suggesting that? Not me. I've already calls these kids heroes, what more do you want from short of total agreement? I don't even think there should be a "police force" so I don't know what you want me to say.

And ultimately I wanted to post all of that from Pennsylvania because it's a positive story that had a fantastic ending and put the focus on a few teens who did the right thing, took action, and saved a little girl before the authorities searching for her could make it there.

Well, then, let's try a thought experiment. Say, no one had heard of the Zimmerman/Martin incident - it wasn't a widely circulated news story. You start a thread specifically about this Pennsylvania news story in order to champion what these kids did. A poster then decides as a rebuttal to post the relatively obscure story about the Zimmerman/Martin case to undermine your position. Would you at all consider that to be a legitimate response?

[drbeachboy]

I didn't call you a vigilante, only asked if you were, is all. Please notice the "question mark (?)". I would never presume such a thing. Hopefully, one day you will sit on a jury an experience what it is like to hold the power of life and death. I know of very few people who take it lightly. No one should. It bothers me that so many people take what this jury did as being wrong. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. If you really want to be pro-active about this case, lobby to have the "Stand Your Ground" law reversed. I have a grip. Always have. I don't take things of high importance lightly, the law being one of them.

Got it, and yes, sorry! I reacted wrongly to your post.

Coincidentally enough, I have a Jury Summons for July 30.  I will show up.  Perhaps wearing my “Hang ‘Em High!” T-shirt.  (However, we don't have "Stand Your Ground" here in California.)

Question DRBB, so.... did you agree with the OJ jury that found him "not guilty" of those murders?  I, myself, did not!

Not all juries are worthy or respect.

Yes, all juries are worthy of our utmost respect! It is the laws that are the issue. Luckily, we can change laws that do not conform to what they were made for. No, I did not agree with the OJ verdict, but I accepted it and did not go ape sh*t in the streets yelling that a black man got away with killing two white folks. Oh, them gloves! "If it doesn't fit, then you must acquit."

[Bean Bag]

Extortionist Extraordinaire, Jesse Jackson called Florida an "Aparthied State." 

[Jason]

Racism has become an industry in the United States. It keeps morons like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in business.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Racism has become an industry in the United States. It keeps morons like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in business.

It's amazing how most of the people who say that are part of the dominant class.

[Heysaboda]

Racism has become an industry in the United States. It keeps morons like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in business.

I'd recommend a book and documentary called "Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II" by Douglas Blackmon.

An eye opener.

[Heysaboda]

Someone needed to stoke the fire.  May as well be the community dis-organizer... I mean Prez.

What I find funny is to think about where Obama actually was 35 years ago.  From Wikipedia (before someone changes it to look like he was living on the south side helping lost, hungry teens)

In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, and with the aid of a scholarship attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979

Could have been him...  Could have been him... 

Speaking for myself (as opposed to someone else??) I don’t find it unusual that The Prez empathized wi/ Trayvon.  BHO did say that he himself got “the treatment” when he was younger, being followed in stores, people assuming he was there to steal something, etc.  In this case, I take BHO at his word.

In fairness to BHO, he fully supported the jury decision.  Maybe Breitbart didn’t print that quote?

People like Jessie Jackson may be “way past their expiration date” but the USA has quite a virulent history of racism, which some of us would like to ignore.

BTW I think this case was more about “Stand Your Ground” than race.

[guitarfool2002]

Familiar with the protection rackets? It's the umbrella term for a con game, a swindle, but it is based on basic human psychology and usually preys on groups of people who are made to feel helpless in their situations, yet a solution arrives in the form of a symbol of trust and power who shows up in their time of need and despair...and helps them for a fee which they pay in regular installments.

In the earlier 20th century, it played out when gang leaders and various mob types would prey on primarily immigrant neighborhoods and business owners. It went something like this: They'd pick out a prominent or visible business which was known to the residents of that community, gather up some of their goons-for-hire who were just anonymous enough not to get caught or ID'ed, and they would target it with vandalism, or violence either against the business itself or the owner and employees. The police would be called, and if they bothered to show up it would be a case of not being able to do anything about it due to many reasons, including "lack of evidence, lack of witnesses..." etc.

Soon after you'd see usually a well-dressed, overly-confident and self-assured man (able to speak the language of the community) usually with an imposing presence of some kind go into the neighborhood and start talking to other shop owners. "Did you see what happened to Joe's butcher shop last week?" "Oh, it was a terrible thing, and the police said there was nothing they could do for us." And that man would convince them that the police and authorities didn't care about the community, or whatever group of immigrants lived and worked there (Irish, Italian, Chinese, Polish, Jewish...etc.), "they don't care about you at all, you're powerless, etc."

Convince by example that there is no hope, no power, no recourse through the law, all of that...people will look for something to feel safe behind, give them a sense of power or at least some defense against those against them.

So the man would offer the "services" of his employers in order to protect that business or that block. "Paying protection" in other words, you give me 30% of your business every month, and I'll make sure what happened to Joe and the butcher shop doesn't happen to your store. We're there to protect you, we know what you're feeling, the cops won't protect you, they don't care, we share the same background and bloodlines, we're family, etc.

We are here to help.

But if you don't pay, we can't help, and whatever happens to your store you're on your own.

Bingo. Get people convinced no one has their back, that no one cares, that there is a conspiracy against them or whatever else, offer a sense of security and a touch of power by association, and all that is required is a payment every month, and perhaps a few favors on the side if we come calling.

And both the guys who broke up the butcher shop and beat the owner, and the self-confident powerful man who came in offering help to the downtrodden and fearful were paid by the same bosses, who orchestrated the whole plan.

Then, as time goes on, the people paying start feeling safe, they have an envelope ready to be collected every month, and if it means giving a few free meals out or some free shoe repairs to certain men, that was fine...we fell safe, someone has our backs! Someone who cares about us!

However, eventually another store on the block would be attacked and vandalized, another shop owner would be beaten up...what happened? We pay every month! Where was our protection?

Cue another self-confident guy in a suit coming in to the neighborhood, this time asking 45% each month and more free services in return for better protection...the endless cycle continued.

And the same folks who orchestrated the whole shakedown scam to begin with continued to rake in more and more of the people's money, people convinced that they were hopeless and trusting in small increments that paying back a larger entity to feel more safe and secure was their only recourse against such powerful interests stacked against them.

It continues today. Watch for reports of specific kinds of violence in cities or areas heavily populated by immigrant-owned businesses. Various "mafias" in certain cities, the so-called "Chinese mafia", the "Vietnamese mafia", they're still playing the same game that we saw fictionalized in the old gangster and tough-guy movies going back to the 30's.

They're shaking people down, people who are most vulnerable or those made to feel helpless to put up any kind of a fight.

And if you want to draw a connection to where this is going, it's the state of American politics and the reasons why certain people do certain things and certain political parties and interests act the way they do regarding certain groups of citizens. And the reason why we only hear certain events reported a certain way versus other events or stories which don't support the larger narrative.

With the old protection racket schemes, they counted on people's fear and relied on convincing those people that protection and power was within their reach - for a price. Look at what the new "price" may be and who is offering the protection versus who is being asked to pay up, and the rest falls into place.

Answers will vary based on political ideology.  

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Familiar with the protection rackets?

They're shaking people down, people who are most vulnerable or those made to feel helpless to put up any kind of a fight.

I hope I am misunderstanding you because what I'm familiar with is the far more pervasive tactic of the dominant ideology who very nobly and earnestly pity the poor Other who is unable to understand that they are being swindled. As always, the one group who can see through what's going on are precisely the dominant members of the society, who very patiently and with great and noble intentions, can explain to the ignorant others what reality is really like. There is a voluminous history where you can essetnially find the sentiment that no one knows what the black situation was like in America better than white people. What the slaves didn't understand, according to their slave holders, was that black people were far safer and better off as slaves because they being very well looked after because they were property, so for that reason alone they were probably being treated better than anyone else in the country. This is a familiar record that gets re-played again and again, over and over and it's not merely restricted to race relations but is pretty much a standard in any power relationship. Just look at the discourse on labour - workers are being swindled by unions, say the company owners - you just need to listen to us and we'll set you straight. It's such a familiar tactic - and an outrageous one at that - that's it's difficult to know how to react that anyone even takes it seriously anymore.

[Heysaboda]

Familiar with the protection rackets?

They're shaking people down, people who are most vulnerable or those made to feel helpless to put up any kind of a fight.

I hope I am misunderstanding you because what I'm familiar with is the far more pervasive tactic of the dominant ideology who very nobly and earnestly pity the poor Other who is unable to understand that they are being swindled. As always, the one group who can see through what's going on are precisely the dominant members of the society, who very patiently and with great and noble intentions, can explain to the ignorant others what reality is really like. There is a voluminous history where you can essetnially find the sentiment that no one knows what the black situation was like in America better than white people. What the slaves didn't understand, according to their slave holders, was that black people were far safer and better off as slaves because they being very well looked after because they were property, so for that reason alone they were probably being treated better than anyone else in the country. This is a familiar record that gets re-played again and again, over and over and it's not merely restricted to race relations but is pretty much a standard in any power relationship. Just look at the discourse on labour - workers are being swindled by unions, say the company owners - you just need to listen to us and we'll set you straight. It's such a familiar tactic - and an outrageous one at that - that's it's difficult to know how to react that anyone even takes it seriously anymore.

And as we know, peonage, debt slavery and incarnation labor were all completely legal, in the Southern states specifically, until SCOTUS got off its collective bum and outlawed such practices in the 1940’s.

[Bean Bag]

Let's take a look at some of the dominant class...











I can go all day...

[guitarfool2002]

And what was it exactly that made those running the protection rackets target certain neighborhoods and communities over others?

Or conversely, what kept them out of some neighborhoods or prevented them from intimidating certain businesses and areas into paying them the money?

If you cannot convince someone that they are or will be a victim who needs to be protected, the scam falls apart before it even starts.

And those whose game was offering the protection for a price would be irrelevant and unnecessary if they didn't have a group of people who felt unsafe and desperate enough to require that kind of help and were more willing to pay.

And the only way Sharpton, Jackson, and any number of other charlatans and opportunists stay relevant, keep their names and images in the media, and stay needed (and continue earning millions of dollars in salary) is to continue to convince people that their services are required...

...which in turn requires that those people believe that they are in fact dependent enough or lacking enough of something to require such services.

Remember the Three Stooges episode where they're in business as exterminators, but they don't have any clients or business? Their solution was to sneak into a mansion, where they knew there was money to be made, and then open up bags and boxes containing various pests like mice during a house party. So they ring the front doorbell offering their services, and the person answering the door tells them "But we don't have a pest problem in this house!". And right on cue one of the mice they had brought into the house earlier in those bags shows up, which makes the pest killing services offered by the Stooges not only necessary but essential so the party guests don't find out there are mice running around.

More people need to catch the likes of Sharpton and Jackson actually carrying those bags of mice into the houses before they're convinced to hire them for pest control after the bags have been opened. 

[Awesoman]

People like Jessie Jackson may be “way past their expiration date” but the USA has quite a virulent history of racism, which some of us would like to ignore.

I don't think anyone is trying to ignore history, but at what point do we learn to move past this and progress as a society?  What needs to transpire before everyone feels they have the same opportunities as everyone else?

[Heysaboda]

Remember the Three Stooges episode where they're in business as exterminators, but they don't have any clients or business......

AH NOW I'm starting to relate!!!!!  You are finally at MY level! 

[drbeachboy]

Remember the Three Stooges episode where they're in business as exterminators, but they don't have any clients or business......

AH NOW I'm starting to relate!!!!!  You are finally at MY level!  

See, and my mother said I'd never learn anything watching those three knuckleheads.