George Zimmerman, the killer of young Trayvon Martin, was found 'not guilty'.

[Irvine511]

You have to excuse me, but I laughed at the "redneck" comment - while I've never met you, the image I have had in my mind over the years was anything but a "redneck"

i am pretty much the exact opposite of a redneck. but i suppose the person was looking for a white person slur, and that's what came to mind.

So you profile white people?? You said you profile people all the time who commit the vast majority of street crime. Obviously you would never profile a black person as a criminal as you're past posts boasts. So you only profile a white person as a criminal. What a racist.

i'm not sure what you're talking about here.

where i live, yes, the vast majority of street crime is committed by black males, and the vast majority of victims are black males. setting aside the problematic term of "black on black" crime or violence (as if it counts less), i don't think it's out of line for me to be alert and aware. i also profile on age and especially gender.

however, i don't seek people out and follow them and walk around armed like i'm fucking robocop.

and i'm also aware that if i stiffen as someone passes, i've sent out signals that i'm sure they pick up on. i try to be aware of that, and i'm not sure what i could do differently, but i'm also aware that it would drive me bonkers if white ladies clutched their purses every time i walked by.

I'm sure you've been profiled as a gay man and didn't even know it. It just shows how far we've come to accepting the gay lifestyle that you don't even recognize it.

being a vegetarian is a lifestyle, being gay is not.

i'm sure people know i'm gay, but i can honestly say that i've never felt threatened at all (can't say the same for some of my friends, however, as i know people who have been bashed and physically harassed). but Memphis and i are thick, rock solid men. and we also don't go places where we might feel threatened, and being gay you can usually "pass" if you need to, whereas you really can't hide being black. or white.

Btw. Sorry for jumping on Pres Obama the other day. I only seen a few soundbites of his speech on the news and figured it was an answer to one specific question. Didn't realize it was a 17 min speech. The news kept showing the same 4 sentences. I just recently watched it and thought it was very good.

i experienced some kind of hassle from pretty much every nationality there - and the guys on the train were French but high as kites and very very rough! needed eyes in the back of my head in Paris just to survive unscathed lol

exactly. there is a degree of "street smarts" that one needs in pretty much every city in the world. the only time i've ever been actively (attempted) robbed was in Prague (by a white woman, and i literally pushed her away from me as she went for my wallet) and the only time i've seen an organized pickpocketing was by white girls on a train in Belgium.

profiling is a part of that. but we need to be aware of the effects of profiling on other individuals, how the assumption of criminality breeds resentment and anger, and being a member of a minority that's still socially acceptable to persecute and demean by no less than members of Congress, i think i get it, the anger that must come when you haven't done anything wrong but someone is acting like you're about to do something wrong. it's maddening.

but another difference is, unlike GZ, i protect myself and that's it. i take defensive steps, not proactive, shit-starting steps. and i don't walk around with a gun.

 

[Jive Turkey]

But Memphis and i are thick, rock solid men.

oh lawdy!!

 

[anitram]

I've seen this raised in a couple of places since this story broke out but I've been thinking about it a bit more.

What if TM had been a young woman? A teenage girl, being followed by a relatively burly man who appears to be stalking her in a car, who then gets out of the car, etc.

Not only would it be terrifying, but would we feel differently if she started hitting him, knocked him out with a purse or maced him?

I understand that the situation would be different in that she likely wouldn't be able to get on top of him, break his nose, etc unless she was particularly strong and he would have been far less likely to profile her unless maybe she too was in a hoodie and he couldn't tell she was a girl, but as a woman, I'd find GZ's behaviour to be utterly terrifying and inappropriate.

And I think that's where my main issue lies - he played wannabe Rambo, walking around with a gun in his pants, with a history of violence or aggressive behaviour and seemingly not a lot of intelligence. He is the reason this whole thing went down. This notion that TM died because he "jumped" GZ...you know, BUT FOR the fact that GZ followed him, probably in a creepy manner, none of the rest of it would have happened.

 

[maycocksean]

1) I don't think there was enough evidence to convict Zimmerman (and many posters in here seem to agree with that)

Honestly, I did not watch the trial coverage at all so I don't have as strong a grasp on the evidence as others might. Perhaps if I took the time to really study the trial I would come to similar conclusion to yours. Unfortunately, you have not done a very good job at convincing me that evidence you've seen is insufficient to convict him. Everything you've shared from what I assume is your more detailed knowledge of the case seems very circumstantial and subject to interpretation. I suppose I could understand why the jury would make the choice they did; I don't see that was the only choice they could have made.

Further, it seems to me that as you watched the trial/reviewed the evidence you felt certain what the outcome should be before the jury rendered a verdict. As you said, if they had rendered any kind of guilty verdict, even for manslaughter you would have felt that they were wrong and had been swayed by the politics of the situation. Both of us had an idea of what we thought should be the appropriate outcome to this trial (granted, you perhaps having a better handle on the evidence), so I think it's somewhat disingenuous to suggest that questioning the jury's judgement is inappropriate. You would have been just as quick as I am to question the jury had they come back with a guilty verdict. This is not about the sacrosanct jury whose Final World must never be questioned. The jury decided what you thought they should based on the evidence; I feel the opposite. It's that simple.

3) However - that agreement and empathy does not extend to needing Zimmerman to be convicted of a crime when there was not enough evidence to convict him. We can't solve injustice with more injustice.

He wasn't convicted. I think I have a right to disagree with that conclusion. That's all it is; a disagreement. I would not be interested in civil rights charges being filed against Zimmerman--I feel that's a losing battle from the beginning (and honestly despite the DOJ promise to further review their decision, I have a feeling they are not going to press charges). I do feel the family should pursue civil litigation as was done in the OJ Simpson case, and I hope they are successful. I continue to believe that Trayvon's death was wrongful and I continue to believe that Zimmerman should be held accountable in some way.

Thank you for your patience with me. Please try and I understand that I am listening to you - and your blue words on this blue screen mean something to me.

 

[maycocksean]

i am pretty much the exact opposite of a redneck. but i suppose the person was looking for a white person slur, and that's what came to mind.

Perhaps the folks in your neighborhood have not heard about "cracka"?

 

[maycocksean]

One of the things that I'm going to be talking about with my students this fall when school starts is how they can be proactive to reduce people jumping to negative conclusions. It may not be fair that people judge you by how you dress but they do, and you have to be smart about it. There is much in popular "urban" culture that I want my students to think critically about and make some choices about what they adopt.

 

[AEON]

perhaps the folks in your neighborhood have not heard about "cracka"?

lol

 

[AEON]

Unfortunately, you have not done a very good job at convincing me that evidence you've seen is insufficient to convict him.

Fair enough - I'd make a crappy lawyer. I was just trying my best to put the pieces together. Race was not a motivation/filter for me. For instance, in the second case that Turkey posted where the black man shot the white teenager breaking into his car - I thought he was not guilty (based only on the article mind you) - even though we will never know all the facts when one of the key witnesses is dead.

Further, it seems to me that as you watched the trial/reviewed the evidence you felt certain what the outcome should be before the jury rendered a verdict. As you said, if they had rendered any kind of guilty verdict, even for manslaughter you would have felt that they were wrong and had been swayed by the politics of the situation.

I only came to that full conclusion when the trial ended -and many people in this forum also agreed that either 1) the prosecution botched the case or 2) there simply was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman. However - I have also contended numerous times that the concealed weapon laws should be changed.

Both of us had an idea of what we thought should be the appropriate outcome to this trial (granted, you perhaps having a better handle on the evidence), so I think it's somewhat disingenuous to suggest that questioning the jury's judgement is inappropriate. You would have been just as quick as I am to question the jury had they come back with a guilty verdict.

The point I was trying to make that this was not a slam-dunk case, especially for the prosecution - and that making it into a rally cry of systemic racial injustice was/is misplaced. Had the case been a slam-dunk (let's say a video and several eyewitnesses clearly showed Zimmerman running down Martin and shooting him for no reason), and the jury came back with "not-guilty" - then heck, you might even get boring old me to walk down the streets in protest.

This is not about the sacrosanct jury whose Final World must never be questioned. The jury decided what you thought they should based on the evidence; I feel the opposite. It's that simple.

Sure, that's fair. But did you feel they reached their verdict based on lack of evidence/reasonable doubt (in their view) - or do you think that there was a racial "filter" in place - something that influenced their decision making? Or both? You see - disagreeing with the verdict because we come to different conclusions based on the evidence and arguments is one thing - disagreeing with the verdict because we feel the jury simply refused to convict a white-Hispanic for shooting a black man is another.

He wasn't convicted. I think I have a right to disagree with that conclusion.

Of course you do - I certainly don't dispute that.

I do feel the family should pursue civil litigation as was done in the OJ Simpson case, and I hope they are successful. I continue to believe that Trayvon's death was wrongful and I continue to believe that Zimmerman should be held accountable in some way.

Yeah, I don't know enough about civil litigation (or any litigation for that matter) to know if they have a case for compensation - and a reasonable expectation to win. However - unlike OJ, Zimmerman doesn't seem to have a lot of money to surrender.

 

[corianderstem]

What if TM had been a young woman? A teenage girl, being followed by a relatively burly man who appears to be stalking her in a car, who then gets out of the car, etc.

Then the TV talking heads and Twitter asshats would all be saying "She shouldn't have worn x" or "She shouldn't have been walking alone at night."

 

[AEON]

I've seen this raised in a couple of places since this story broke out but I've been thinking about it a bit more.

What if TM had been a young woman? A teenage girl, being followed by a relatively burly man who appears to be stalking her in a car, who then gets out of the car, etc.

Not only would it be terrifying, but would we feel differently if she started hitting him, knocked him out with a purse or maced him?

I understand that the situation would be different in that she likely wouldn't be able to get on top of him, break his nose, etc unless she was particularly strong and he would have been far less likely to profile her unless maybe she too was in a hoodie and he couldn't tell she was a girl, but as a woman, I'd find GZ's behaviour to be utterly terrifying and inappropriate.

And I think that's where my main issue lies - he played wannabe Rambo, walking around with a gun in his pants, with a history of violence or aggressive behaviour and seemingly not a lot of intelligence. He is the reason this whole thing went down. This notion that TM died because he "jumped" GZ...you know, BUT FOR the fact that GZ followed him, probably in a creepy manner, none of the rest of it would have happened.

I think in this case, Zimmerman would have had a difficult time claiming his life was in danger or that there was a chance for great bodily harm.

Than again - your scenario does show (again) how ludicrous it is to have an armed Neighborhood Watch.

 

[nathan1977]

Though I disagree with the conclusions this article draws (and it refers to Zimmerman as "cherubic" and "contrite and mortified," which I think is a bit much), I think it does ask a fascinating question: when racism is latent rather than blatant, what does leadership look like for the future Sharptons and Jacksons of the world? Can you replicate the civil rights movement of the 1960s, when churches, NGOs, etc. worked together across racial lines? When moral indignation at events that are easily-definable goes away, what are we left with?

Shelby Steele: The Decline of the Civil-Rights Establishment - WSJ.com

And I thought this was an interesting commentary as well:
A Message to Trayvon Martin Sympathizers | Romany Malco

I think there are valuable questions being raised here...

 

[deep]

i am pretty much the exact opposite of a redneck. but i suppose the person was looking for a white person slur, and that's what came to mind.

Could this be guilt by association?
Isn't Memphis a good ol' boy from the South?

 

[U2girl]

Michael Dunn remains adamant in police interview after killing Jordan Davis | jacksonville.com

 

[U2girl]

Or the eerily similar:

Roderick Scott Trial: What’s Wrong with New York?�|�The Martialist

There weren't three drunk/high Trayvon Martins breaking into Zimmerman's car. And one of the kids openly attacked Scott.

 

[Irvine511]

Could this be guilt by association?
Isn't Memphis a good ol' boy from the South?

this incident happened before we were together,

but Memphis is definitely from PWT* roots.

being gay saved him more than Jesus ever could.






* - mean humorously and with love.

 

[deep]

thanks for sharing

some of me best memories include PWT, too much beer, and cheap cigarettes

 

[Irvine511]

What if TM had been a young woman? A teenage girl, being followed by a relatively burly man who appears to be stalking her in a car, who then gets out of the car, etc.

slightly related, in some of our lovely rape threads, we've had men talk about how it utterly guts them when, for example, they've been walking down the street alone at night and perhaps a few steps behind a woman walking alone, and the woman speeds up, or stiffens up, or gives a furtive glance in your direction, or does something to give off signals that she knows you're there and that you're a man and that therefore you're a potential threat to her. it feels awful, it's happened to me.

that's likely how many black people have been treated by white people since they were children.

 

[Jive Turkey]

There weren't three drunk/high Trayvon Martins breaking into Zimmerman's car. And one of the kids openly attacked Scott.

Were you expecting the situation to be exactly the same? Is that the only way for you to see the similarities? Completely unreasonable and thoughtless.

The fact that the teenagers were breaking into cars is irrelevant; they weren't killed in the process. These were both SELF DEFENSE cases. In fact, self defense is way more evident in the Zimmerman case than it was in the Scott case. It's funny you bring up one of the kids "openly attacking" Scott. He didn't even make it that far. Scott remained untouched; He shot as he was being charged. At least Zimmerman had the shit kicked out of him first. HE was the one being openly attacked. What are you even talking about??
How about playing neighbourhood watch with a gun?
"I wanted to stop them before they could get away,” he admitted. “We live so far away, they would have been gone before police got there.”
Quick, who said that? Zimmerman or Scott?

Your bias is disgustingly obvious.

 

[AEON]

slightly related, in some of our lovely rape threads, we've had men talk about how it utterly guts them when, for example, they've been walking down the street alone at night and perhaps a few steps behind a woman walking alone, and the woman speeds up, or stiffens up, or gives a furtive glance in your direction, or does something to give off signals that she knows you're there and that you're a man and that therefore you're a potential threat to her. it feels awful, it's happened to me.

that's likely how many black people have been treated by white people since they were children.

Do you think attitudes and bias would change if the rate of urban black males committing crimes plummeted to insanely low levels? Let's say over the course of a generation or two - the urban black male was more known for randomly handing out $10 on subways, savings old ladies from getting mugged, giving refurbished electronics to kids, being great fathers, terrific students, working harder than anyone else...etc - do you think if these acts dominated the culture (and not only through deed - but through art, songs, movies) the negative profiling and fear of the black urban male would cease?

 

[Irvine511]

Do you think attitudes and bias would change if the rate of urban black males committing crimes plummeted to insanely low levels? Let's say over the course of a generation or two - the urban black male was more known for randomly handing out $10 on subways, savings old ladies from getting mugged, giving refurbished electronics to kids, being great fathers, terrific students, working harder than anyone else...etc - do you think if these acts dominated the culture (and not only through deed - but through art, songs, movies) the negative profiling and fear of the black urban male would cease?

Maybe for some. I think the younger you go the more people see a person rather than a monolithic entity.

But it's quite clear given the politics that govern the base of the GOP that many people have a vested, political, and monetary interest in keeping black Americans a suspect class, and in maintaining an underclass. That won't change, at least not for another generation, or until the GOP becomes something other than a protest movement against all things Obama.

 

[AEON]

Maybe for some. I think the younger you go the more people see a person rather than a monolithic entity.

But it's quite clear given the politics that govern the base of the GOP that many people have a vested, political, and monetary interest in keeping black Americans a suspect class, and in maintaining an underclass. That won't change, at least not for another generation, or until the GOP becomes something other than a protest movement against all things Obama.

Irvine, seriously now - do you really think the leaders of either party really care about the urban black male - or women, or white men, or veterans, or zombies, or anything other than what establishes and maintains their ability to allocate wealth to themselves and to their backers?

I watched Season One of "House of Cards" a little while back - I'm not sure how accurate it is, but it's how I perceive politicians of both parties: ruthless, charming, smart, opportunistic, amoral, and - again - ruthless. Those who try to do the right thing are quickly marginalized, discredited, slandered - and if that doesn't work, killed. Either party would sacrifice the long term health of any group in return for a short term boost in ratings just before an election.

 

[maycocksean]

Do you think attitudes and bias would change if the rate of urban black males committing crimes plummeted to insanely low levels? Let's say over the course of a generation or two - the urban black male was more known for randomly handing out $10 on subways, savings old ladies from getting mugged, giving refurbished electronics to kids, being great fathers, terrific students, working harder than anyone else...etc - do you think if these acts dominated the culture (and not only through deed - but through art, songs, movies) the negative profiling and fear of the black urban male would cease?

Oh dear.


In the old days, you know of real discrimination, many black parents told their children that they couldn't merely be as good as their white counterparts, they had to be better. There was no room for being a normal human being with good days and bad days, good choices and regrettable ones.

It appears we haven't come so far after all.

I would encourage you to reflect on what your statement is suggesting about your own views about young black males, about who commits most of the crime in this country. I can tell you that I work with black kids every day, and there are many that buy into what I feel is a destructive pop culture; my goal is to get them to engage that culture more critically. However, the vast majority of them are good kids who I expect will go on to great success. I can name only a handful that seem to be headed down the wrong track. But here's the thing: I could say the same if I taught white kids. There are issues in the black community, sure, but suggesting such a saintly standard for black boys is frankly another kind of racism.

I would also ask you to consider whether the ridiculously high standard you've set for changing perceptions about black males is fair or reflects real, HUMAN equality.

Couple of other things for you to chew on. I admire the take this young man and his parents have, and sadly, it's necessary, I think. But ask yourself if such an approach to live represents true equality?

https://www.facebook.com/wesley.hall.923/posts/10151578601113860

Here's another one:

White-on-White Crime: It Goes Against the False Media Narrative

 

[maycocksean]

many people have a vested, political, and monetary interest in keeping black Americans a suspect class, and in maintaining an underclass.

do you really think the leaders. . . really care about the urban black male - or women, or white men, or veterans, or zombies, or anything other than what establishes and maintains their ability to allocate wealth to themselves and to their backers?

So in other words you both agree.

 

[maycocksean]

Though I disagree with the conclusions this article draws (and it refers to Zimmerman as "cherubic" and "contrite and mortified," which I think is a bit much), I think it does ask a fascinating question: when racism is latent rather than blatant, what does leadership look like for the future Sharptons and Jacksons of the world? Can you replicate the civil rights movement of the 1960s, when churches, NGOs, etc. worked together across racial lines? When moral indignation at events that are easily-definable goes away, what are we left with?

Very good questions being raised here. It's what makes navigating the racial issues today so much trickier. I almost feel that the only real solution is simply time.

And I thought this was an interesting commentary as well:
A Message to Trayvon Martin Sympathizers | Romany Malco

One of the "good ones", eh. I would counter with this:

White-on-White Crime: It Goes Against the False Media Narrative

It's worth noting that there has never been uniform agreement among African-Americans on how full social equality should be achieved. Google the differences in approach between say W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington. The Romany Malco approach seems more for the approval of a white audience than it does for the edification of fellow blacks.

 

[Jive Turkey]

White-on-White Crime: It Goes Against the False Media Narrative

This is a statistically dishonest article.

"The truth? As the largest racial group, whites commit the majority of crimes in America. In particular, whites are responsible for the vast majority of violent crimes. With respect to aggravated assault, whites led blacks 2-1 in arrests; in forcible-rape cases, whites led all racial and ethnic groups by more than 2-1. And in larceny theft, whites led blacks, again, more than 2-1."

When you then take those ratios and realize that white people outnumber black people by nearly 6 to 1, there does indeed seem to be a problem with black crime more so than with whites (3 fold)
I always see the serial killer 'statistic' thrown around; "well, white people are more likely to be serial killers than black people", well yes, but only because there are so many more white people in the US, a serial killer is more likely to be white. But per capita, blacks are nearly twice as likely to be serial killers than whites. Per capita is the only honest way to weigh the numbers. That shouldn't even need to be said.
This isn't finger pointing; they're merely facts of which I'm sure there are a variety of factors. But articles like the one posted seem to almost purposefully be muddying the issue with sloppy, out of context statistics, hoping nobody would notice.

"Mathematical truth" my ass

 

[maycocksean]

This is a statistically dishonest article.

"The truth? As the largest racial group, whites commit the majority of crimes in America. In particular, whites are responsible for the vast majority of violent crimes. With respect to aggravated assault, whites led blacks 2-1 in arrests; in forcible-rape cases, whites led all racial and ethnic groups by more than 2-1. And in larceny theft, whites led blacks, again, more than 2-1."

When you then take those ratios and realize that white people outnumber black people by nearly 6 to 1, there does indeed seem to be a problem with black crime more so than with whites (3 fold)
I always see the serial killer 'statistic' thrown around; "well, white people are more likely to be serial killers than black people", well yes, but only because there are so many more white people in the US, a serial killer is more likely to be white. But per capita, blacks are nearly twice as likely to be serial killers than whites. Per capita is the only honest way to weigh the numbers. That shouldn't even need to be said.
This isn't finger pointing; they're merely facts of which I'm sure there are a variety of factors. But articles like the one posted seem to almost purposefully be muddying the issue with sloppy, out of context statistics, hoping nobody would notice.

"Mathematical truth" my ass

I understand that, and I'm betting the author of the article does too. The point of the article is that inordinate media attention is paid to the issue of "black on black crime", and that media coverage suggests--and many people believe--that most crime is committed by black people. Many whites are more inclined to be fearful of a black person committing a crime, when simply by virtue of there being more white people in America than black, they probably should be fearing another white person.

Here's the thing: one of the ideologies that propped up the old institutions of slavery, that enabled many slave owners to continue to think of themselves as good people, and that continued under segregation was the idea that there is something inherently wrong with black people. The institutions are gone of course, but that toxic idea remains and it is damaging not just to race relations, but also to black people themselves who subconsciously accept these ideas. If you don't feel that there is inherently something wrong with most black people (barring the exceptions), please by all means clarify.

 

[Jive Turkey]

I understand that, and I'm betting the author of the article does too. The point of the article is that inordinate media attention is paid to the issue of "black on black crime", and that media coverage suggests--and many people believe--that most crime is committed by black people. Many whites are more inclined to be fearful of a black person committing a crime, when simply by virtue of there being more white people in America than black, they probably should be fearing another white person.

But even you're interpreting the statistics wrong here. If we're assuming one should be fearful of an individual based on crime statistics, then fearing a black person is still 3 times more rational. We're talking about the likelyhood of a person of a specific race being prone to committing a crime (I'm still operating under the assumption stated above which I don't ascribe to). A random black person on the street would be 3 times more likely to commit a crime than a random white person. The overall percentage of people making up that race in the country is completely irrelevant. Statistics don't work that way. And when we then delve into homicide rates, regardless of the 6 to 1 ratio of whites to blacks, the base numbers alone - without being adjusted per capita - show a larger number - not proportion - of blacks than whites. The adjusted ratio ends up being somewhere around 16 to 1. Now I'm only bringing this up because of the article; really it has nothing to do with the Zimmerman/Martin trial. But pretending a problem isn't a problem by playing fast and loose (and flat out wrong) with statistics isn't helping anything

 

[deep]

if you encounter a black male on the street , what are the odds that he will visit crime on you,
answer- somewhere between 0 and 1 %


if you encounter a white male on the street , what are the odds that he will visit crime on you,
answer- somewhere between 0 and 1 %


if you encounter a person pointing a gun at you, the odds are much higher than 1% that they will visit crime on you , regardless of amount of melanin present in their skin,

 

[Jive Turkey]

if you encounter a black male on the street , what are the odds that he will visit crime on you,
answer- somewhere between 0 and 1 %


if you encounter a white male on the street , what are the odds that he will visit crime on you,
answer- somewhere between 0 and 1 %

Nobody is arguing that crime statistics aren't relatively low when compared to the general population. This isn't Mad Max and that point is irrelevant. Now try looking at the numbers I gave you again and see if you can spot anything wrong.

 

[Jive Turkey]

But we're off topic. As I said, it's irrelevant to this case anyway.

Unless of course we want to talk about fact massaging which has certainly run rampant in a way rarely seen