quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

[quote]Originally posted by alabamafan2



If you don't believe me, ask 10 black people what it means when they are "profiled" and I would be willing to bet you that at least 60% of them mention ethnicity...

Again, do I personally think that profiling is a "racist act" as you tried to imply? No, I am suggesting that it DOES mean that to MANY people and therefor draws animosity when the word is used. Thus, that is why the media uses this word - to fuel the fire...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


I didn't say you were a racist skinnee. I said that you assumed I was accusing Zimmerman of racism by stating that he profiled Martin. I never said any such thing. Therefore my contention is that you are a victim of the very thing you accused me of. You believe that to profile is a racist act. I do not.

---

I would also like you to quote where I said that profiling is a racist act... The closest thing to that that I ever said was that it was often linked to racism and thus gives it a bad connotation subconsciouly to people. This is why the news used the word.... Once again... To paint GZ in a bad light...

I don't see how you don't understand what I am saying here... Again, the news could have used the word "suspicious", but that would not follow their intent of making GZ look like the bad guy. That is why they chose the word "Profile". It's because "profile" is a bad word to a lot of people...

---

Where is the disconnect skinnee? I agreed with you that the media used that word to portray a negative connotation. I also repeatedly stated that I do not believe Zimmerman had anything but good intentions and that I do not believe he is a racist. The only thing I disagreed with you on is your contention that I am parroting a word from the media script. I disagree with you on that point because it is not true.

If it will make you happy I will change my statement to say that Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin because of general characteristics not matching any suspect description but that he judged to be of a nature not ordinary for the place and time. But between you and me, that is just a long fancy way to say that word you don't like.

Pretend I am an idiot and lay our disagreement out in simple terms because maybe I am just tired but I can no longer tell what your point is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


P.S. did you miss the part where I told you I have not watched a single television news report on this case?

---

All mainstream media is the same to me...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


I didn't say you were a racist skinnee. I said that you assumed I was accusing Zimmerman of racism by stating that he profiled Martin. I never said any such thing. Therefore my contention is that you are a victim of the very thing you accused me of. You believe that to profile is a racist act. I do not.

---

I would also like you to quote where I said that profiling is a racist act... The closest thing to that that I ever said was that it was often linked to racism and thus gives it a bad connotation subconsciouly to people. This is why the news used the word.... Once again... To paint GZ in a bad light...

I don't see how you don't understand what I am saying here... Again, the news could have used the word "suspicious", but that would not follow their intent of making GZ look like the bad guy. That is why they chose the word "Profile". It's because "profile" is a bad word to a lot of people...

---

Where is the disconnect skinnee? I agreed with you that the media used that word to portray a negative connotation. I also repeatedly stated that I do not believe Zimmerman had anything but good intentions and that I do not believe he is a racist. The only thing I disagreed with you on is your contention that I am parroting a word from the media script. I disagree with you on that point because it is not true.

If it will make you happy I will change my statement to say that Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin because of general characteristics not matching any suspect description but that he judged to be of a nature not ordinary for the place and time. But between you and me, that is just a long fancy way to say that word you don't like.

Pretend I am an idiot and lay our disagreement out in simple terms because maybe I am just tired but I can no longer tell what your point is.

---

I think that this post finally shows that you "get it"... Althouth, I don't think people use "profiling" on a day to day basis when talking about criminal suspects.

But, sure, use whatever word you like... Being "good with your money" and being a "cheap ass" basically mean the same thing to some people, but can really change the mood of people depending on how they are used...

So, if you aren't brainwashed by the mainstream media, then good for you. Unfortunately about 80% of America is, and that is a sad thing...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


And 60% of them would be incorrect. All racial profiling is profiling. Not all profiling is racial.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


And 60% of them would be incorrect. All racial profiling is profiling. Not all profiling is racial.

---

How would they be incorrect? It's an opinion question... I didn't say "Ask them what the term 'profiling' means", I said, "Ask them what it means [to them] if they are 'profiled'".

I'm going for perception here, not their understanding of Webster's second edition...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

I got it from the start skinnee. I just don't think you realized that we agreed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


And yes, profiling is a very commonly used term. It was before Zimmerman/Martin. And it will continue to be commonly used. It will probably continue to be misused too but neither you or I can control that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


You're right. If you are asking for perception you get what you get. But when perception is based on misunderstanding of fact the conversation gets interesting.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

I got it from the start skinnee. I just don't think you realized that we agreed.

---

Certainly possible

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


And yes, profiling is a very commonly used term. It was before Zimmerman/Martin. And it will continue to be commonly used. It will probably continue to be misused too but neither you or I can control that.

---

Commonly used on the news, yes... Commonly used between two guys talking over a beer about a crime that just happend? I would tend to disagree... I can't say that I have EVER used the term "profiling" with respect to a crime when discussing with friends.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


You're right. If you are asking for perception you get what you get. But when perception is based on misunderstanding of fact the conversation gets interesting.

---

And that is exactly my problem with using the word to begin with! The word is used by the media as a manipulation to trigger an emotional response from the mob, NOT a logical response...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2


Think about the saying "He doesn't fit the profile" of a serial killer, robber, arsonist, cattle stampeder, etc...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

And I agree with you. But I refuse to quit using a perfectly accurate and useful word just because others don't have a proper understanding of the definition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

When a word is "commandeered" to a certain degree it becomes useless.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

Nice try, OFM, but the last time I checked, the "stand your ground" clause doesn't permit you to physically attack someone for following you. It allows you to "meet force with force". So, Martin would have no right to jump Zimmerman and start pummelling him. Some say that's what happened.

Let's just make this easy. If Zimmerman picked the fight or threw the first punch, then he's guilty. If he just followed Martin to keep an eye on him because his neighborhood was being robbed, and Martin attacked him first (regardless of Martin's perceptions), then the state should not be able to touch Zimmerman. If you attack someone physically, and you get hurt or killed in the process, unfortunately, that's part of the risk you take when you attack someone. As far as I know, I have ever right to go anywhere in the common-property areas of my neighborhood that I want, even if I'm following someone, but I don't have the right to attack anyone. Who initiated the attack should, therefore, be the trigger, as far as I can tell.






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

The stand your ground law states that you can use force in self defense if there is a reasonable belief of a threat. It is not if you are attacked but if you BELIEVE you are threatened. Zimmerman, carrying a pistol, that he should not have been allowed to carry, profiled a young man, followed him, confronted him ( which Trayvon could have believed as a threat) and shot him. The girlfriends phone calls appear to very damaging to Zimmermans account of what happened and I believe will be one of the focuses of the prosecution. The timeline of calls line up with when Trayvon was shot and she apparently heard the encounter and it was Zimmerman that cornered Trayvon.

"Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so." Thomas Jefferson

---

Not quite, OFM.

First, South Carolina's stand-your-ground law clearly says you must be "attacked".

"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in another place where he has a right to be, including, but not limited to, his place of business, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or another person or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16160."

Since this was not in South Carolina, though, let's look at Florida's law. It says the person standing his ground must not only believe he is in danger, but "REASONABLY believe" that the use of force is necessary "to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm".

"776.012#8195;Use of force in defense of person.A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the others imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)#8195;He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or (2)#8195;Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013."

The word "REASONABLY" was included in the law for a reason. It's in both SC and FL. It's there to prevent people from making the argument you're trying to make here if they attack someone. It's there to prevent PHONY self-defense claims. It means that the man standing his ground must not only believe that he is about to be mamed or murdered if he doesn't act, but that such belief must be found to be REASONABLE. You can't just attack someone because he LOOKS scary or asks "what are you doing here" when you walk through HIS neighborhood at night with a hoodie on. Trayvon would not have been justified by the stand-your-ground law for attacking Zimmerman just because Zimmerman followed him and asked him what he was doing. CLEARLY, the law is not intended to allow you to assault or kill someone for following you and asking you questions--in his own neighborhood. If, however, Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, Zimmerman was CLEARLY covered by the stand-your-ground law in fighting back. So, the guilt depends on who started the fight. That doesn't necessarily mean who threw the first punch, but it could be loosely referred to in those terms.

The rest of your post shows an apparent prejudice against Zimmerman, similar to that of all the news articles with yellow-press statements that have had to be retracted. You have no knowledge other than some veritable 5th-hand news articles about Zimmerman's life, and he was carrying a completely legal firearm with a completely legal permit, but you say he shouldn't have been carrying it. Also, you ignore the testimony of the only eye-witness and single in on only the girlfriend's testimony, who drew conclusions from things she didn't see. In conjunction with her testimony, ABC reported the "screams" heard in the 911 call as if they were Martin's, but the eye-witness said that ZIMMERMAN was the one screaming out for help! If anyone's credibility is to be questioned, certainly, the testimony of a man's girlfriend and family is less credible than that of a third party. Then, what about the fact that only Zimmerman had wounds from the fight? If Zimmerman attacked Trayvon first, wouldn'y Trayvon have at least had a scratch? Zimmerman had cuts and a broken nose, and every bit of this lines up with the eye-witness' testimony rather than that of the girlfriend, but you still cling to the gilfriend. Interesting.

Google around and see just how many of the articles have had to issue retractions because they reported against Zimmerman in unfactual ways initially. I saw two articles with retractions just poking around this morning. It's pretty disgusting. Those are not bloggers, mind you. They are news networks and newspapers.






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission
Again, tkae the gun out of Zimmermans hand and he doesn't follow Trayvon, he waits on the police.

---

Hmmmm, that sounds like it could be an argument against CWP's. Please refer back to my original post and title here.






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

Ok lets think about this here. Trayvon was profiled

---

Just curious OFM... If you saw a 6'3" subject walking through your neighborhood at night that you had never seen before and you recently had a rash of theft, and you were in the neighborhood watch group and you happen to be on the street, and as he noticed you, he slipped his hoodie over his head to conceal his identity, would you find suspicion in this activity, or is that run of the mill type of stuff?

Bottom line... Typical perpetrators conceal their identity when noticed. Potential victims who are getting stalked tend to remove their hoodie so that they can see and hear a predator better.

Tigers have stripes to let them hide in the grass... Gazzelles have eyes on the side of their head so that they can see the tiger coming better...

---

I would have called the police and would not follow anyone with a gun. Being suspicious of someone is one thing, trying to take justice into your own hands is something different all together. Again, tkae the gun out of Zimmermans hand and he doesn't follow Trayvon, he waits on the police.

"Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so." Thomas Jefferson

---

Ah, so you would PROFILE him! EXCELLENT!




Good work, Skinnee!






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

I'm also curious OFM and Bama... If GZ would have been an neighborhood security guard instead of the head of the neighborhood watch, would you feel any differently?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

Ok lets think about this here. Trayvon was profiled

---

Just curious OFM... If you saw a 6'3" subject walking through your neighborhood at night that you had never seen before and you recently had a rash of theft, and you were in the neighborhood watch group and you happen to be on the street, and as he noticed you, he slipped his hoodie over his head to conceal his identity, would you find suspicion in this activity, or is that run of the mill type of stuff?

Bottom line... Typical perpetrators conceal their identity when noticed. Potential victims who are getting stalked tend to remove their hoodie so that they can see and hear a predator better.

Tigers have stripes to let them hide in the grass... Gazzelles have eyes on the side of their head so that they can see the tiger coming better...

---

I would have called the police and would not follow anyone with a gun. Being suspicious of someone is one thing, trying to take justice into your own hands is something different all together. Again, tkae the gun out of Zimmermans hand and he doesn't follow Trayvon, he waits on the police.

"Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so." Thomas Jefferson

---

Ah, so you would PROFILE him! EXCELLENT!




Good work, Skinnee!






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

Ha ha! Glad you picked up on that. I missed it earlier. I guess we are all "profilers" and we should all feel bad about it.

---

Yes, sir. We all profile by nature--even those who begrudge "profiling"--and we should not feel bad at all (unless we do it out of hate or with criminal action or intent). It's just common sense.

Good job on tricking OFM into confessing his own natural propensity toward profiling, even if it was unintentional.






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mixed Nutz

You're still avoiding my questions OFM, or maybe you've hit the ignore button on me? I think that I've come to an interesting conclusion here though. It appears to me that after a PM you sent me a few weeks back touting your accomplishments as a disciple in the training of several Martial Art's Techniques, that only you want to be the one to administer the "ass kicking", and don't want to have to worry about "lead poisoning" during the process??
Does that sound about right??
After all, you were the one who suggested taking an "ass kicking" was all that should have happened. Right?
I've taken my share, and have administered many more, but you see, I'm getting old and tired! And I will not have my life, nor that of my family be threatened by you, or any other self proclaimed Bully or Thug for that matter!!
Please don't take my post as a threat my friend, but merely a suggestion that an "ass kicking" is in the eye's of the beholder, and one never knows what's in store when they open up that can do they??

...Politicians aren't the "Oldest Profession", but the results are still the same!!!

---

Mn, arrest affidavit are always based on speculation, it is up to the prosecution to prove those speculation as facts in a court of law. I think the arrest affidavit does have holes in it but to be honest, that is the 3rd or 4th one I've ever read, so I can't really say. The problem I have is this that the only one that was standing his ground ended up dead. Zimmerman was not standing his ground, he went on the offensive. Trayvon, even if he attacked first, was standing his ground under the law, whcih states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat. Zimmerman posed a threat to Trayvon. Zimmerman, not listening to the police dispatcher, stalked a guy, cornered and contronted him. I think Bama is right, from that point things got out of hand and he shot the guy. Unlike Bama though, I think he is criminally liable for that, just maybe not for a murder charge. He chose to disregard the police dispatcher and the police officers that came to the neighborhood watch meeting in Sept.2011 and I think he is liable. His decided to disregard what the police told him and a young man ended up dead.

Now back to the ass kicking. If you willfully stalk a person at night, corner and confront them, you are posing a threat to that person and should be willing to take an ass cutting for doing so. You know how you avoid this? DON'T FOLLOW PEOPLE WITH A GUN, call the police and let them do their job. If you do follow someone with a gun and things get out of hand, be ready to take an ass cutting or spend a long time in jail, it's that simple. Had Zimmerman listened to the dispatcher, Trayvon would be alive, period. Had Zimmerman listened to the police in Sept, Trayvon would be alive, period. He didn't though, was negligent and a young kid died as a result of his actions.

"Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so." Thomas Jefferson

---

I don't think there is nearly enough information (as far as what is available to the public) to justify any criminal charges, much less murder 2. And the key is figuring out if you, I, or George Zimmerman have a legal responsibility to obey a 911 dispatcher. The community meeting was just advice from law enforcement. He certainly has no legal duty to obey that so that can be thrown out of the equation completely.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mixed Nutz

OFM is bogus, and simply an alias here to stir the pot for someone else's enjoyment I contend!!

...Politicians aren't the "Oldest Profession", but the results are still the same!!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinneej

quote:

---

Originally posted by alabamafan2

When a word is "commandeered" to a certain degree it becomes useless.

---

I think that explains my feelings about the use of the word "profiling" in the context that the media has been using it.

In my mind, there is a huge difference between these two forms:

1) "The police examined the evidence to try to create a behavioral profile to understand the criminal better"
2) "George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, then followed him, and shot him down in cold blood".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

Right there, you posted exactly why Trayvon had reason to defend himself. Being followed and cornered by a man, at night, is a REASONABLE THREAT. Trayvon posed no threat to Zimmerman until he cornered him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission
Again, tkae the gun out of Zimmermans hand and he doesn't follow Trayvon, he waits on the police.

---

Hmmmm, that sounds like it could be an argument against CWP's. Please refer back to my original post and title here.






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---

No not at all, my point is that a neighborhood watchman should not carry one, should not follow people and should not escalate a situation, which is what Zimmerman did. I personally think he should never have been given a CWP because he had a history of violence, on a police officer no doubt.

Quotes from Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association.
"Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules. First, he approached a suspicious stranger. If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job. This guy [Zimmerman] went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous. There's no reason to carry a gun. You do not carry a weapon during neighborhood watch. If you carry a weapon, you're going to pull it."



"Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so." Thomas Jefferson

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gotchacovered

quote:

---

Originally posted by on a fishin mission

Right there, you posted exactly why Trayvon had reason to defend himself. Being followed and cornered by a man, at night, is a REASONABLE THREAT. Trayvon posed no threat to Zimmerman until he cornered him.

---

First, I know this is hard for you to understand, but near-oblivious internet posters who were not there and don't even live in the same state don't determine if there was a "reasonable threat" to Martin. That is assessed first by law enforcement and then, if tried, by a jury.

Second, nowhere has it been established that Zimmerman "cornered" Martin. Excellent display of your prejudice, though.

Here, watch how prejudice can work both ways. I'll turn your own thoughts around and use them against you. "Zimmerman posed no reasonable threat to Martin until jumped Zimmerman and tried to kill him." The one difference is that we actually have an eye-witness to support that version (Zimmerman's story).






Gotcha Covered,
Lee Strickland
Strickland Marine Insurance Agency, Inc.
https://stricklandmarine.net
843-795-1000 / 800-446-1862

---