Teenager shot/killed while Tweek's hero gets off free

[ronin sparthos]

My brain hurts even thinking how this could in any way have a religious component.

Well, the one brown juror pulled the 'God will sort this out!' card in her interview but overall this case boils down to a judicial component where Zimmerman is not guilty and a deep rooted emotional/social component where the black/white/brown racial tensions still run hot beneath the surface. The case is simply a vector for people on all sides to continue their march towards whatever they feel is the ideal.

You have black people who think this is another example of 'the white mans game', while ignoring the self-inflicted problems that plague the community (including Trayvon) at large.
White people who feel guilty about the status of blacks and want to change the system.
Black people who want to discuss the social/economic/racial injustices that caused Zimmerman to profile in the first place.
White people who want to hold up Zimmerman as a hero though under normal circumstances he'd be wetback scum.
Black people who want to wage war on the white community as revenge for centuries of oppression.
White people who want to ignore the racial component for fear of discussing a touchy topic.
Black people who want to ignore the racial component as a matter of pursuing a post-racial society.

etc etc etc.

[Ksandra]

Wait, where did they say you feel that way because you believe in god?

Also theistic thinking where rational thinking and personal beliefs are allowed to be separate.

@ blubber
I also didn't pay any attention to the media on this trial and actually just watched said trial.

[Abandon]

I think you think that way because the media convinced you he was a bad guy from day 1. I think you allow yourself to continue feeling that way even when you openly acknowledge that the evidence says you shouldn't feel that way (i.e. it would be an injustice to feel that way based on the evidence you have) because your culture (read: theism) has propagated the notion that beliefs are OK to have even when unsupported by evidence. They don't need to make sense, and they're unquestionable by others because they're your own personal beliefs, and you're allowed to believe whatever stupid thing you want. I disagree with that notion.

holy shit, shut up

[Ksandra]

Well, the one brown juror pulled the 'God will sort this out!' card in her interview but overall this case boils down to a judicial component where Zimmerman is not guilty and a deep rooted emotional/social component where the black/white/brown racial tensions still run hot beneath the surface. The case is simply a vector for people on all sides to continue their march towards whatever they feel is the ideal.

This is very true. Many in this thread have felt he did it but understands there wasn't enough evidence to convict him. The problem in this case is there just really isn't any evidence to either support or deny Zimmerman's story. But of course everyone is going to want to decide for themselves what they THINK happened. And that's ok as long as they do it with the understanding they don't, for example, beat the guy up for it. And as well, that you (general you, not ronin specifically) may have come to your own conclusion on what you think happened, you do it with the understanding that's your own gut, not what should have been upheld in law.

[Deader2818]

Seems I have learned a new word for the day!

[Blubbartron]

@ blubber
I also didn't pay any attention to the media on this trial and actually just watched said trial.

My mistake, and my apologies for misrepresenting you in that case. Regardless of the source for your information, you still openly stated you believe something that's contradictory to the evidence, and accept the truth of the evidence for use in believing he should have been (and justifiably was) found not guilty. That should make your head hurt. It makes mine hurt a great deal.

[archibaldcrane]

It's only "contradictory to the evidence" if you take Zimmerman's account of what happened as unbiased evidence.

Without his account (which should obviously be looked at with great skepticism), you have quite frankly zero evidence as to who confronted who, who initiated a physical altercation. You have evidence that Zimmerman got hurt and that Trayvon didn't, but you also have evidence that Zimmerman is a terrible fighter so if he had started the fight, Zimmerman's lack of injury isn't particularly surprising.

Basically, if you hold Zim's testimony at proper length, you have a black hole of information about how these two men came within arms length of each other and fighting. That black hole is more than enough to drive a "reasonable doubt" truck through - but it's hardly convincing to feel confident in what actually happened, period.

[Meian]

Why do people still feel they have to believe what dispatcher said literally being telling him not to pursue. You can interpret it both ways. Surprised with all these theories running around with "if Martin was white..." etc yet nothing on if dispatcher had literally said "DO NOT PURSUE" if anything would've changed. Also baffles me the whole profiling thing = racist still to people when most if not all of the robberies that had been going on in the neighborhood were by black teen-ish people. Zimmerman is no saint since he could've handled it far better (from what we know) but some of the things I am reading here after all this time is... lol... least it is entertaining

I never paid close attention to this case and trial, but was he charged with murder or manslaughter?

Dude should've at least been convicted of manslaughter, but I guess shooting a kid is cool these days.

No, seriously, just stop, please

[tyven]

Will lock when I get back to work. Everyone compete for last word

[Blubbartron]

It's only "contradictory to the evidence" if you take Zimmerman's account of what happened as unbiased evidence.

Without his account (which should obviously be looked at with great skepticism), you have quite frankly zero evidence as to who confronted who, who initiated a physical altercation. You have evidence that Zimmerman got hurt and that Trayvon didn't, but you also have evidence that Zimmerman is a terrible fighter so if he had started the fight, Zimmerman's lack of injury isn't particularly surprising.

Basically, if you hold Zim's testimony at proper length, you have a black hole of information about how these two men came within arms length of each other and fighting. That black hole is more than enough to drive a "reasonable doubt" truck through - but it's hardly convincing to feel confident in what actually happened, period.

Absolutely correct. That's why having any belief about who was wrong is, well, wrong. We just don't know. We'll probably never know for sure. Hopefully I expressed that properly when we were discussing the plausibility of Trayvon being a criminal earlier in this thread.

[Ksandra]

We just don't know. We'll probably never know for sure.

And I've said that several times. But people are going to naturally come up with what they think happened. There's nothing wrong with that as long as they do it with the understanding that it's their gut coming up with the conclusion, not evidence.

[Day]

what everyone can take from this thread: next time you go out for lean mix in the rain don't be lurking round latino folks they don't play around man

[Headspace]

Will lock when I get back to work. Everyone compete for last word

BG is so boring. WHY WOULD U DO THIS

[Ksandra]

tyven = mod = gaf

[Seiji Okita]

Will lock when I get back to work. Everyone compete for last word

Finally the circle jerk of stupid comes to an end.

[Denchi]

In closing: Poop

[ronin sparthos]

Mods are fags that ruin all semblance of fun.

Plow being banned from this forum should qualify as a holiday and he should be inducted into the BG hall of fame.

[Enkidu]

And I've said that several times. But people are going to naturally come up with what they think happened. There's nothing wrong with that as long as they do it with the understanding that it's their gut coming up with the conclusion, not evidence.

Well I think it's a little wrong, don't you? I think it's good that you can distinguish between your personal beliefs and the law because so many people can't, but come on.

[archibaldcrane]

Absolutely correct. That's why having any belief about who was wrong is, well, wrong. We just don't know. We'll probably never know for sure. Hopefully I expressed that properly when we were discussing the plausibility of Trayvon being a criminal earlier in this thread.

Oh give me a fucking break, the pro-zim crowd has just as much of a "belief" about how the confrontation occurred as the anti-zim crowd, yourself included. The guy wasn't convicted, and rightfully so - the tyranny of "beliefs" that you are now conveniently rallying against hasn't condemned anyone. That doesn't mean we have to turn off our brains about what we think happened.

And I'm saying this as a guy who thinks that Trayvon likely initiated the fight, and that Zim's exaggerations are mostly about how in danger he was, Trayvon reaching for the gun, etc.

[Ksandra]

Well I think it's a little wrong, don't you? I think it's good that you can distinguish between your personal beliefs and the law because so many people can't, but come on.

Nope, I really don't. People are going to want to know what happened, it's like watching a mystery movie that cuts off in the last 30 minutes. I would say it goes as far as human nature for the brain to then piece together what you think happened. If I met GZ I wouldn't punch him in the face or treat him differently. But I will think it, and I think it foolish to pretend I don't when I really do.