Toxic Topic of The Week: Trayvon Martin

[n11pilot]

Well said, Oracle.

The terrible case of the baby being shot in a drive by will not garner any of the media attention of the Martin case since it lacks the ability to inflame profitable rage. Those in the race baiting industry won't be able to make a buck off of it or even be able to use it to justify their phony positions in the community. Therefore it just doesn't have the legs.

Another story that is being studiously ignored by the mainstream media is the bounty offered by the New Black Panther Party on the head of MR Zimmerman. I believe the offer was made "Dead or alive". Two things strike me about this bounty. One, MR Zimmerman hasn't been convicted in a court of law and should therefore be presumed currently innocent. Two, isn't the offering of a bounty on the head of MR Zimmerman tantamount to a solicitation of murder, which I believe is a felony?

[The Oracle]

Two things strike me about this bounty. One, MR Zimmerman hasn't been convicted in a court of law and should therefore be presumed currently innocent. Two, isn't the offering of a bounty on the head of MR Zimmerman tantamount to a solicitation of murder, which I believe is a felony?

I believe you would be correct. And because I'm sure that the New Black Panthers have holding cells to keep Mr. Zimmerman if he is brought in alive, I am sure that they would keep him alive and well until he was brought to trial.

If I offered money for a "hit" on an individual, I would got to jail. I just saw the cover of "People" Magazine at the store today and to my suprise I got to see a big picture of a 12-13 year old Trayvon Martin with the words "An American Tragedy." This case will be tried in the court of public opinion long before any facts are known. It will be difficult for Mr. Zimmerman, if convicted, to get a fair trial in any jurisdiction.

[The Oracle]

If anyone questions the media's involvement in this here is a great example;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... _blog.html

[The Oracle]

I found this blog post interesting to say the least.

Eve Was Unarmed. She Wasn’t Wearing a Hoodie. She Was Murdered. Are You Angry?
I don’t have to tell you I’m not a racist; my life speaks for me. Yet, I will probably be called a racist because of this post.

I don’t like what happened to Trayvon Martin and I don’t claim to understand the frame of mind George Zimmerman was in when he fired his weapon. I don’t know the whole story behind the story. None of us do, yet. But this I know: a kid is dead and his killer is being publicly executed. The state of Florida is investigating the killing more slowly than some think is necessary and the Panthers have a bounty on Zimmermans’ head. People are angry with Florida. But more than being angry with Florida, people are Outraged at what they believe to be death by Racial Profiling. Perhaps profiling was a factor in the killing of Trayvon, unfortunately profiling happens everyday. But it isn’t a problem patented by one race. It’s a problem in every race.

When are we going to admit profiling, violence and racism exists everywhere…in all cultures, in and against every socioeconomic status? Violence is wrong, regardless of the reason behind it. Murder is inhumane, regardless of the color of the victim. But I ask, why aren’t we equally outraged when a white kid is killed by another race? Last week a boy in Ohio was burned by a group of black kids while walking home from school….media outrage? No. Did Al and Jesse show up and puff up in front of cameras? No. They’re calling Zimmerman a White-Hispanic…a term unheard of before now…a term being used to create more racial conflict.

In 2008 Eve Carson, a white female from Athens, Georgia was an exceptional student at the University of North Carolina. She served as President of the Student Body and was a Moorehead-Cain Scholarship recipient. She majored in Political Science and Biology, Pre-Med. Eve gave back to her community, she was a peer educator for underprivileged youth, was selected to be a North Carolina Fellow and she was murdered. Slaughtered by four blasts of ammunition to the head and body by two young black males (ages 17 and 21), because they wanted her car and her ATM card. The final killing shot tore through her hand and into her head as she made a sad attempt to protect herself; obviously aware the bullet to her skull would be fatal. Was she profiled? You bet she was. Eve was profiled as a Rich, Blue -Eyed, Blond Haired, White Girl. Were there protests, marches and outraged politicians speaking out for her? Did Barack call her family? Why is it about race only if the victim is black? Why aren’t we outraged when ANY kid is murdered? As a nation, have we been silenced by a politically correct whip? Lets’ be outraged about all murders, all racism, every injustice.

In the meantime, allow me to speak my mind without calling me a racist. You have the freedom to call me names but if I defend myself, you call me a racist. That’s not right. Let’s stop creating more problems for each other. Let’s grow up.

One last thing about Eve…one of her assailants testified that she asked them to pray with her before they killed her. “Let’s pray”, she said. One of the ATM videos shows Eve in the backseat of her vehicle with her murderers, she has her hands in the air, a Be True bracelet is on her wrist. Her head is bowed in prayer.

http://lettersfromawhoremongerswife.com ... you-angry/

[Cousi]

Apparently the exact reverse of the Trayvon Martin case happened in Phoenix AZ. The black shooter is claiming self defense and the white hispanic victim's family is demanding justice. I'm waiting for commentary from the President and national coverage in about another two weeks. La Raza should be down there shortly calling for a "red sea of blood from black-haired, brown-eyed and skinned devils" shortly.

I'm not holding my breath.

[The Oracle]

La Raza should be down there shortly calling for a "red sea of blood from black-haired, brown-eyed and skinned devils" shortly.

May be they will use MS 13.

I have a question. Did anyone ever believe that Mr. Zimmerman would not have been charged? I actually believe that some charge would have come without the all of the bloviating by the various groups. I believe that if there was enough evidence for this "special prosecutor" to bring charges, then a grand jury would have also seen fit to charge him.

I still maintain that neither side will be happy with the outcome. If he is found guilty, one side will claim that the jury was bias. If he is found not guilty, we will see L.A. type riots.

[CharlieB]

Sad to say but I have to agree that no matter what happens from here on, no one will ever be tgruly happy with the results.

[n11pilot]

Sad to say but I have to agree that no matter what happens from here on, no one will ever be tgruly happy with the results.

You are exactly right. It was mishandled at the start and now it is mob driven. You can't please a mob with anything other than blood.

[WineGuy]

Zimmerman is innocent PERIOD! just a few inconvenient facts...
-He was legally licensed to carry his pistol
-He was asked to participate in a neighborhood watch because of a series of break-ins, thefts and assaults by almost exclusively black males. So he was not some random vigilante.
-He was a resident of the complex(Martin wasn't) and had experienced violence there.
-The dispatcher told him "you don't need" to follow him NOT "don't follow him". If a police officer told him "Don't follow him" that's another story.
-After all the disinformation by the media after the shooting...he did have wounds to his head and nose so he was injured before shooting.

The above facts are all I need to see through the BS and say he's innocent. Could the shooting have been avoided...possibly, but that does not by any long stretch of the imagination make him a murderer. None of us have been in his situation but like some of the FC members,I was in combat and I know what it's like having to make a snap decision when I felt my life was threatened... so I refuse to judge or condemn him.

I read a lot of arm chair pundits condemn Zimmerman and my response is "when you have had to fight for your life...then we'll talk"!

[The Oracle]

Good to see you WineGuy...

[WineGuy]

Good to see you WineGuy...

Thanks Oracle...I've been so busy, just have not had the time to follow the forums.

Hopefully I'll be more active over the coming months.

[Eric Renderking Fisk]

It's awesome to hear from you again, Wine Guy.

I totally agree with you, one hundred percent. I also have to throw in that the more we here about Trayvon Martin and his behavior during the last year or so of his life, the more Zimmerman looks less like a villain.

I'm not going to lie to anyone here, if I saw someone creeping around my back yard in the middle of the night poking around, I'm not sure what I would have done besides confront him with my own side arm close by.

[n11pilot]

I'm not going to lie to anyone here, if I saw someone creeping around my back yard in the middle of the night poking around, I'm not sure what I would have done besides confront him with my own side arm close by.

Eric, that is exactly the kind of thinking that will get you in trouble in Obama's America. Do you not realize that it is far nobler to be a compliant victim, accepting your own loss and possible demise rather than defending your life and the lives of the innocent? No, we must understand that it is right and proper that we be willing sacrificial offerings on the shoddy altar of the false religion of political correctness.

Never! Individual liberty and individual responsibility have built this country and they are the only things that will preserve it.

[Chivewarrior]

Regardless of what you think of "duty to retreat" versus "stand your ground", the debate about it long predates Obama-- I remember reading about it in third grade (yes, I was kind of an unusual third grader) and it wasn't a new thing then.

I'm also going to disagree that it's about being a compliant victim. Going up and confronting anyone who even looks suspicious, before they've done anything threatening, is a recipe for disaster because everybody is going to have different ideas of what looks suspicious. Be alert and keep an eye on them and defend yourself after they've done something threatening? Absolutely. But skulking around, even in a gated community, isn't "threatening" on a level that merits anything more than calling the police. There's no clear, present, immediate danger. Sure, someone could be planning to shoot you, but they also might just be lost or hanging around, and waiting for them to make the first move helps clear up that kind of confusion. Actually trying to break into someone's house would constitute "threatening" and then you'd be justified in saying that people want you to be a passive victim for not fighting back.

[n11pilot]

Regardless of what you think of "duty to retreat" versus "stand your ground", the debate about it long predates Obama-- I remember reading about it in third grade (yes, I was kind of an unusual third grader) and it wasn't a new thing then.

I'm also going to disagree that it's about being a compliant victim. Going up and confronting anyone who even looks suspicious, before they've done anything threatening, is a recipe for disaster because everybody is going to have different ideas of what looks suspicious. Be alert and keep an eye on them and defend yourself after they've done something threatening? Absolutely. But skulking around, even in a gated community, isn't "threatening" on a level that merits anything more than calling the police. There's no clear, present, immediate danger. Sure, someone could be planning to shoot you, but they also might just be lost or hanging around, and waiting for them to make the first move helps clear up that kind of confusion. Actually trying to break into someone's house would constitute "threatening" and then you'd be justified in saying that people want you to be a passive victim for not fighting back.

Chive, speaking aside from the Martin case there are a few states that require an attacked person to flee rather than defend themselves even if the attack occurs within the confines of that person's home.
In the Martin case I think that Zimmerman did have a right to question Martin as a trespasser. It was a gated community and Martin was trespassing.