Unnarmed 17 year old shot dead "in self defence"

[BossMark]

Does Florida use the death penalty

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by BossMark

Does Florida use the death penalty

Yes, they do.

[BossMark]

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

Yes, they do.

Lets hope they use it on the piece crap that killed that poor lad then

[yubba]

why isn't this picture in the newspaper much ?????? it has been way in the 80's here who needs to be wearing a hooded sweat shirt, all our little gansters here wears this, I rememeber being in the gunshop when some kid came in wearing a hoody like that, the owner came unglued. pic was taken march 14 2012.

[mookiemookie]

I own a hooded sweatshirt. Should I be shot because of it?

[Ducimus]

Teens like to think their tough. Some dress to look tough, doesn't mean they are. Where i grew up in california, you had two types of "gangsta's". The real ones that id call "gangbangers", and the "posers". The poser's you laughed at for trying to be all bad, the gangbangers (aka cholo's,) you didn't screw with. This kid was probably worth laughing at, not shooting at.

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

I own a hooded sweatshirt. Should I be shot because of it?

I do too, but i doubt it will happen because I assume we are both white

and why does that picture of the sweatshirt make him "gangster?" I have plenty of hoodies, and when it's chilly I also put the hood up

[vienna]

Going back to why the Feds have moved into this case, I don't think it is a racial issue. Like so many actions, the main reason the local and state agencies are dragging their feet may have nothing to do with race but more with money. The issue of liability spreads farther than Zimmerman and his activities. The local and state agencies are in a bit of a no win situation: (1) if they move swiftly and do a thorough investigation, they may uncover facts and situations potentially self-incriminating; (2) if they don't do a thorough investigation, they may be open to liability for not doing their duty. In the first case, they may uncover lapse or flaws in the firearms permit process and/or the granting of the permit, they may uncover indicators of behavioral problems regarding Zimmerman that should have prompted action by the authorities not undertaken (sort of like when police answer multiple domestic abuse calls at a location, do nothing, and a death results). In the second case, by trying to aviod complicity in actions that may have resulted in the incident by stalling or ignoring the crime, they leave themselves open to civil, if not criminal, liability. No matter what happens now, the local and state governments are in for one hell of a large lawsuit. Race is not the more likely issue in the actions of the authorities; not having to make a huge payout is the probable underlying cause...

...

[Aramike]

Good point. This idiot should never have been armed with a firearm if this is how he's going to use it. But I can't make that logical leap to banning all guns or enacting stricter gun control standards because one idiot used one wrong.

I hope that I didn't seem to be making that leap, either.

My whole perspective on gun control is simple: we should take reasonable steps to make it difficult for a known criminal to legally acquire firearms, but it needs to be EASIER for a known law-abiding citizen to own them.

[Aramike]

My opinion? The media is the most racist of them all, period. This would not be a national story if it was an example of white-on-white violence. But the fact is that the media just happened to notice the disparity between the skin color of the victim and the accused, and it became a major headline.

Honestly, one of the things about our nation that's made me feel the sickest is that, in our attempt to blur the differences of our ethnicities, we've done nothing more than amplify them.

i capitalized white to emphasize that people have mistaken him for a caucasian (if you must be politically correct)

whites, caucasians, meaning originating from european cultures and branching out.

One huge mistake after another
Did you understand what was written at all?
white means white which means white, just because you don't like the way it was used doesn't mean it was used the wrong way.
If some people make a mistake on both what white means and what caucasian means and how it forms their views then that can say something about them and it isn't a very nice thing.

Many people are saying that if it wasn't a white man and a black man or if the roles were reversed it wouldn't be a story.
That has some validity but the validity comes with the sad truth that the events are a big story because of the history of the nation and its everyday legacy.
Some people are very eager to claim the validity but completely reject the truth behind it.

Not the KKK of the '60's, just a black wanting to kill all the whites so that they can take over.

So for balance are you going top post a video of a crazy white supramacist or a crazy chicano with aztlan ambitions ?
Or do you actually have no point ?

[yubba]

Was watching ABC's good morning America, as they talking about this story, there was one interesting point, Trayvon laid in the morque for 2 days as a unclaimed John Doe, So that meant he was walking around at night in a hoody with no identification in a gated community, which is almost a crime in it's self and for the ones that don't get it, I meant not having Identification, most of the time I'm being sarcastic and write-ing in a 6th grade level so, I don't know what too tell you, and If You love what Obama is doing then I can't help you. All the gated communities I know of, don't have a 7 11 in the middle of them. Maybe Hispanics are the other white meat. Al not so Sharpton in Sanford to fan the flames of Hate.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Aramike

My opinion? The media is the most racist of them all, period. This would not be a national story if it was an example of white-on-white violence. But the fact is that the media just happened to notice the disparity between the skin color of the victim and the accused, and it became a major headline.

But it has to be emphasized because it's the whole point of the story. The kid was shot for being black in the wrong part of town, period. He wasn't shot for trying to burglarize something, he wasn't shot because he was holding a gun. He was shot because, in the words of the shooter, "these *****'s always get away" and he was a "*******g coon."

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

But it has to be emphasized because it's the whole point of the story. The kid was shot for being black in the wrong part of town, period. He wasn't shot for trying to burglarize something, he wasn't shot because he was holding a gun. He was shot because, in the words of the shooter, "these *****'s always get away" and he was a "*******g coon."

Mookie, the "because he was black" is such a crap argument.I am so sick of the victim mentality people have when it comes to things like this.Until there is evidence to show this was racial, stop with that garbage because it is WRONG and does nothing but cause discontent.

Zimmerman is an overzealous, wannabe cop who screwed up big time but not fair to claim racism until there is REAL evidence to show this.The coon comment? Come on! I heard that, it was so garbled could not make out what he said, sounded more like static breathing to me.Sure, the Al Sharptons of the world will try to make a big deal out of that.Now, if some evidence surfaces and shows he says that often or is known for racial views, okay. Also, "they always get away" is not a racial comment.Fact is, a lot of criminals get away.Zimmerman was wrong to think Martin was a criminal, but he felt he possibly was and would get away before the police arrived.

Again, I am not a fan of Zimmerman but also not going to stand by while the ignorant masses try to form a type of lynch mob.Drop the victim mentality, it will help you get ahead.Listen to Clarence Thomas types of the world, not the Jesse Jacksons.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Aramike

IMy whole perspective on gun control is simple: we should take reasonable steps to make it difficult for a known criminal to legally acquire firearms, but it needs to be EASIER for a known law-abiding citizen to own them.

And excellent point, and one I share. The problem in this case is the seemingly law-abiding citizen who really shouldn't have a gun. How do we weed them out?