The Trayvon Martin Case

[Rocer]

Ken and James, now you're getting to the real heart of "That Used To Be Us." The issues are addressed and some solutions are proposed. Out of all the books I've read in the past 2 years on the subject, which is a pretty substantial number, that one was best. You ought to read it - see if it makes sense to you. I can see from your posts, you will enjoy it.

 

-MKL

 

PS Education is for snobs. Didn't you know that?

 

From the editorial review synopsis of That Used To Be Us - "They explain how the paralysis of our political system and the erosion of key American values have made it impossible for us to carry out the policies the country urgently needs. "

 

If I may put words in KenH's mouth I believe the need for education is not so much 'economic worker units' as much as it is understanding and correcting this "erosion of key American values". Yet, while Ken has pointed out that even Canada is concerned about the current American malaise I'm not so sure that is the case as I'm seeing the same "erosion" on our own soil.

 

Moshe, thanks for the reference to this book. I look forward to reading it.

[upflying]

Ken and James, now you're getting to the real heart of "That Used To Be Us." The issues are addressed and some solutions are proposed. Out of all the books I've read in the past 2 years on the subject, which is a pretty substantial number, that one was best. You ought to read it - see if it makes sense to you. I can see from your posts, you will enjoy it.

 

-MKL

 

PS Education is for snobs. Didn't you know that?

 

From the editorial review synopsis of That Used To Be Us - "They explain how the paralysis of our political system and the erosion of key American values have made it impossible for us to carry out the policies the country urgently needs. "

 

If I may put words in KenH's mouth I believe the need for education is not so much 'economic worker units' as much as it is understanding and correcting this "erosion of key American values". Yet, while Ken has pointed out that even Canada is concerned about the current American malaise I'm not so sure that is the case as I'm seeing the same "erosion" on our own soil.

 

Moshe, thanks for the reference to this book. I look forward to reading it.

 

I can answer that without reading the book. The 24/7 cable news networks and infotainment on the internet has paralyzed politics and corrupted American values. American politics and government worked well in the past because no one knew what was going on. Walter Cronkite was the only news source we had back in the day.

The more we know the more we question authority.

[pmurphy]

At the risk of offending some members of this board, I simply ask, Do you feel that the mass immigration into the US starting in the 70's has some influence in the down turn in the standard of living and opportunities?

http://web.mit.edu/cis/fpi_immigration.html

 

We have an unprecedented degree of immigration occurring, and all those immigrants are competing with the native workforce for positions and resources. We are having to create jobs at an unprecedented level.

 

My city has gone so far as to request a moratorium to the resettlement of refugees here. The resettlement agencies sponsor them for 6 months, and after that they become the responsibility of our social welfare system (which has become taxed to the breaking point).

[upflying]

Real or not?

I posted that earlier with not much response. What little I know about the Rules of Evidence, I would assume the judge might not allow that photo to be admitted because custody and chain of evidence was not maintained and or/cannot be proven. Cbain of custody is important to avoid creating doubt that the photo was tampered with.

If it is a police evidence photo, I am surprised Sanford police take crime scene photos with an iPhone.

If it is allow in court, that could be the smoking gun Zimmerman needs for his defense.

[moshe_levy]

From the editorial review synopsis of That Used To Be Us - "They explain how the paralysis of our political system and the erosion of key American values have made it impossible for us to carry out the policies the country urgently needs. "

 

It is easy to misunderstand that "values" statement from the editorial review as something other than what is in the book. In fact the book argues that stringent education with high standards is, in and of itself, a key American value. Given the performance of our university system in the past, that was a fact. We had the best university system in the world, and that's why everyone was trying so hard to get in here to study. And once they got their degrees, they stayed here, started business here, raised families and paid taxes here. That is my parents' story, in fact. We have let it slip, to our detriment.

 

There's a difference between reading about riding, and riding. This book is worth reading, in full - go beyond reviews and soundbites and excerpts, and get into the meat of it. It is short, and well researched. It also notes many examples of successes (solutions) being tried in various states for most if not all of our major problems, by people from all political stripes and ideologies - especially education. There is something there for everyone. You may not agree with Friedman - I don't, on many issues - but this book is, to me so far, the modern gold standard to summarize what is wrong, and how to fix it REALISTICALLY with solutions that are actually proven and working, not pie in the sky ideological nonsense.

 

-MKL

[Selden]

I can answer that without reading the book. The 24/7 cable news networks and infotainment on the internet has paralyzed politics and corrupted American values. American politics and government worked well in the past because no one knew what was going on. Walter Cronkite was the only news source we had back in the day.

The more we know the more we question authority.

I sincerely hope this won't be interpreted as political, because it's not. Flesch-Kincaid readability scores for State of the Union speeches have dropped from college level to 8th grade in recent decades. For an analysis, Google "flesch-kincaid sotu" then click on the "My Message is Simple" link. Except for A. Lincoln and a few others, most presidential speeches are the products of professional speechwriters.

 

The slide started a few years into the TV era, and one could make a pretty strong argument that cable news, the internet, and the drivel that passes for communication on SMS and Twitter are accelerating the trend.

 

[moshe_levy]

We have an unprecedented degree of immigration occurring, and all those immigrants are competing with the native workforce for positions and resources. We are having to create jobs at an unprecedented level.

 

Nonsense. I have two degreed engineers who have been trying to get their citizenships for 8 years now. They are fed up! In NYU I met dozens, if not hundreds, of extremely bright multiple-degreed MBAs who repeated the same story, over and over - the red tape one needs to go through for citizenship right now isn't worth the hassle. Take those degrees back home, and live like a king. Does it sound smart to you, to educate your competition and then turn them loose against you?

 

The immigrant bashing is a familiar political scapegoat when the economy goes south, and it's as dumb now as it ever was. Again, 25% of all US startups are founded by immigrants. OVER 50% of technical PHds are to immigrants. My paycheck is signed by an immigrant. My father is an immigrant who started a business in his basement 38 years ago, which now employs about 150 people. The list is endless.

 

You know what we are? We are Rocky Balboa in Rocky III, before his first fight with Mr. T. Cocky from past victories, soft from not being hungry for awhile, with unrealistic expectations of our own current abilites and twisted priorities which put those abilities into further peril.

 

Will we come back through rediscovering what made us great, like Rocky does when he trains with his former rival, Apollo Creed? Or will we continue to chant "USA #1" without the faintest clue as to #1 in what, exactly, or where we really stand in the world?

 

-MKL

 

[StuGotz]

We are ALL immigrants here.

 

MB>

[Huzband]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

Anyway, let's get back on topic. Y'all have an opinion on Mr. Zimmerman being allowed bail?

[pmurphy]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

[beemerman2k]

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

pmurphy, please read the post pinned to the top of the "Riders Discuss Other Topics" forum on the rules for discussing politics.

 

Since you seem to be new here, allow me to make you aware of something: we try to steer clear of labels such as "left" or "right", "conservative" and "liberal" around here, especially when referring to people on this forum. Sometimes, when making a larger point, someone might refer to a position as being traditionally "right" or "left", but in doing so it better be very pertinent to the non-political point being made.

 

The problem, pmurphy, is this: once you go down the political ideology road, severe divisions form and political wars of words break out. They get so extreme sometimes that physical attacks are threatened against other members, or against moderators who intervene. Therefore, us moderators decided sometime back that we are to avoid discussing politics on this board. No political personalities, no political parties, no political ideologies. Period.

 

Sure, even in this thread, sometimes one has referred to the above, but when it was done, 1 of 2 things happened: 1) a moderator stepped in and edited the post (you'll see examples of that in this thread if you look back far enough), or 2) they were making a larger point that was deemed by the moderators to require the reference to a politician because it was relevant to the nonpolitical point they were making, and therefore the comments stood. One recent example of that was a post entered by Seldon, who needlessly feared he was violating our no politics rule.

 

So even your observation is a very controversial one. Moderators are often accused from every side of the political spectrum of favoring the other side. Frankly, it's total nonsense in my view. If you have a substantive point to make, make it! If it's valid, it will be valid independent of where it lies on the political spectrum. For example, if you feel immigration is a problem express that fact, which you did. It was rebuffed, but no one is going to tell you not to express your views simply because they coincide with a particular political ideology. Just express YOUR views, not the ideology, but if they happen to coincide with an ideology, big deal. And you were/are perfectly free to rebuff the rebuff on immigration, by the way! But your reasons had better be based upon your personal experiences and therefore not referencing a political ideology to back up your argument.

 

Thanks in advance for respecting the policies of this board. These rules were written with "virtual blood"

[beemerman2k]

OK, I've taken tons of heat in this thread about my concerns over my children's racial experiences. Well, allow me to share a story that took place this past winter. My youngest daughter, who is 8 years old, has been wanting to play on a basketball team for years. So I signed her up to play for our town team in Ellington, CT.

 

One day, prior to the most exciting game of the season in which they went into double overtime, she expressed a concern to me that I didn't know she had, "Daddy, I feel strange that I am the only black person on the team."

 

Wow, OK, what do I say to that?

 

"Emma, don't worry about that, just always apply yourself 100%. I don't think anyone even cares that you're not the same color as they are; and even if they do, excellence always wins the day. When you're out there helping your team win, nobody is going to care what color you happen to be. So play your game, today and always."

 

Emma went out there and let me tell you what, she was in the ZONE that game!

 

 

Above: Here she is ready to "shake and bake" (I love the look on her face right here, she's basically saying to that girl, "You think want some of this?!"

 

 

 

Above: Like I said, Emma was in the zone that day and played her heart out:

 

 

Sadly, Emma fell ill and couldn't attend the season ending pizza dinner. At that dinner, the basketball coach handed out trophy's to all the players.

 

 

Above: I was even given a trophy for being the team photographer, as I took pictures at all the games and put the pictures up on my Smugmug site.

 

 

But let me tell you what, and this event knocked me out of the park: when the coach announced my daughter's name, for her to come up and accept her trophy, the team mates started to debate over who would go up and accept the trophy on Emma's behalf. "She's my friend, so I should go up!" "No, I'm the one who hangs out with her the most..."

 

 

Above: Finally, one of them said, "Let's all go up!" So the whole team went up to receive Emma's trophy in her place.

 

 

I could barely keep myself from bursting out in a flood of tears. I knew how insecure Emma was feeling about being the only black person on her team. I knew how much she feared being singled out, ostracized, and ridiculed for being different. Yet in spite of all those fears, she went out there and gave her all to her team, and her team in return gave their all to her. I so wanted her to be there to see what I was seeing, so I took a picture of them all so I could show her when I got home. That was a moment I'll never forget. Admittedly, I did have to excuse myself after taking that picture, go the mens room, and wipe my eyes. It was that powerful a moment for me.

 

Any issues of race that existed on this team, existed in the fears that resided in Emma's heart. These teammates would be shocked to learn that it ever was a concern for Emma as it clearly was a non-issue to them. Nonetheless, it was still incredibly satisfying to see just how much affection they had for my daughter, and just how unfounded her fears were.

 

Those fears are what feeds the black narrative about what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed. Fear, irrational as it may be, is a strong and powerful thing to have to deal with, and we clearly do not always handle it in the best way. Fear, pure and simple.

[upflying]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

Anyway, let's get back on topic. Y'all have an opinion on Mr. Zimmerman being allowed bail?

As I heard in the media reports, bail was granted because he has ties to the community, a job, no criminal record, surrendered when asked and perhaps revelation of the bloody head photo shown in a few posts above.

IMO, it would be safer for Z to remain behind bars. Maybe he can stay at the same place Casey Anthony is hiding out.

[MT Wallet]

Yes, Zimmerman should have gotten bail for all of the reasons Bob mentions and the fact that we are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Was having him chained in a manner that wouldn't let his raise his hand to shake hands with his attorneys really necessary? If that's procedure for an initial araignment fine but a court hearing appearance? I think this is a little showmanship by the prosecution. It certainly will prejudice the jury if they see him chained up.

 

To pmurphy. Maybe you should start an immigration thread if it can done within the confines laid out by Beemerman.

[Selden]

OT, but very nice, James, especially the part about the whole team going up to accept the trophy — perversely, this event will be even more memorable to both of you than if you daughter had not been sick and had been there in person.

 

Equally off topic, but I have to share this post by Time Magazine's Joe Klein on Swampland about The Mission Continues.

 

I'm having a pretty inspirational Sunday morning!

[Selden]

One recent example of that was a post entered by Seldon, who needlessly feared he was violating our no politics rule.

Having stepped over the line a few times (or having posted something that pushed someone else over the line) in the past, I felt the "not political" disclaimer was needed, or at least could do no harm.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Anyway, let's get back on topic. Y'all have an opinion on Mr. Zimmerman being allowed bail?

 

It seems people always get agitated when someone under criminal accusation receives bail, with the claim that they don't "deserve" to be out of jail because of their alleged crime. It's frustrating to hear opinions like that, because they betray a misunderstanding of the whole criminal justice process. Prior to a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, the accused is presumed innocent; we jail such people only if we believe they are a flight risk or a danger to the community. Zimmerman appears to be neither; he is not likely to voluntarily get into another armed street confrontation between now and the trial, and he willingly surrendered himself to police custody when the charges came down, so he is not likely to be a flight risk. Bottom line? If he's out on bail, I'm confident he'll return for the trial and won't kill anyone else between now and then; I think bail is appropriate in this ecase.

[pmurphy]

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

pmurphy, please read the post pinned to the top of the "Riders Discuss Other Topics" forum on the rules for discussing politics.

 

Since you seem to be new here, allow me to make you aware of something: we try to steer clear of labels such as "left" or "right", "conservative" and "liberal" around here, especially when referring to people on this forum. Sometimes, when making a larger point, someone might refer to a position as being traditionally "right" or "left", but in doing so it better be very pertinent to the non-political point being made.

 

The problem, pmurphy, is this: once you go down the political ideology road, severe divisions form and political wars of words break out. They get so extreme sometimes that physical attacks are threatened against other members, or against moderators who intervene. Therefore, us moderators decided sometime back that we are to avoid discussing politics on this board. No political personalities, no political parties, no political ideologies. Period.

 

Sure, even in this thread, sometimes one has referred to the above, but when it was done, 1 of 2 things happened: 1) a moderator stepped in and edited the post (you'll see examples of that in this thread if you look back far enough), or 2) they were making a larger point that was deemed by the moderators to require the reference to a politician because it was relevant to the nonpolitical point they were making, and therefore the comments stood. One recent example of that was a post entered by Seldon, who needlessly feared he was violating our no politics rule.

 

So even your observation is a very controversial one. Moderators are often accused from every side of the political spectrum of favoring the other side. Frankly, it's total nonsense in my view. If you have a substantive point to make, make it! If it's valid, it will be valid independent of where it lies on the political spectrum. For example, if you feel immigration is a problem express that fact, which you did. It was rebuffed, but no one is going to tell you not to express your views simply because they coincide with a particular political ideology. Just express YOUR views, not the ideology, but if they happen to coincide with an ideology, big deal. And you were/are perfectly free to rebuff the rebuff on immigration, by the way! But your reasons had better be based upon your personal experiences and therefore not referencing a political ideology to back up your argument.

 

Thanks in advance for respecting the policies of this board. These rules were written with "virtual blood"

 

It doesn't take a lot of research to see how "new here" I am, just look at the member from date under my name, but while you have no issues lecturing me for daring to enter a differing opinion, you seem not willing to perform the least of investigation.

 

What does does you daughter basketball game have to do with the Trayvon Martin case? Or the fact that one of your daughters lost a mall beauty contest have to do with it. Why is it alright to bring up losing jobs to China or India, but not alright to mention immigration? Does not an organisms greatest competition for it's own survival come from its own species?

 

Yet here you are, threatening to censor me for presenting an alternate viewpoint. Preach reverse racism, and you are praised; Preach equality, and you are a right winged douche.

 

In my book no one gets bonus points for the color of their skin. Justice is blind; But if your think justice is unfair because it is not awarding you enough bonus points, then I suppose you will continue looking for scapegoats, when you could be looking for truth.

 

So, if you want to throw me off this board because I dare to preach equality and not privilege, so be it. I just come here for the tech articles anyway. I'll be enjoying riding my R1200RT, and my R1100S, and my R90S, and you will be seeing discrimination every time something does not go your way. My bikes don't care what color I am, and the black one does not expect anything more than the Red White and Blue one does.

[Selden]

Was having him chained in a manner that wouldn't let his raise his hand to shake hands with his attorneys really necessary? If that's procedure for an initial araignment fine but a court hearing appearance? I think this is a little showmanship by the prosecution. It certainly will prejudice the jury if they see him chained up.

Shackles are SOP in many jurisdictions in this country:

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the International Monetary Fund director accused of trying to rape a hotel maid, will travel to his Friday grand jury hearing alone and in handcuffs and shackles, not because he is particularly dangerous but because he is a VIP. In an ironic twist of correctional department procedure, inmates who are categorized by the New York courts as centrally monitored cases (CMCs), must adhere to certain special requirements, including wearing shackles and handcuffs and traveling in a so-called cage vehicle, essentially a cargo van fitted with a cage inside.

I think the explanation is bogus, but that's their story....

[pmurphy]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

Anyway, let's get back on topic. Y'all have an opinion on Mr. Zimmerman being allowed bail?

As I heard in the media reports, bail was granted because he has ties to the community, a job, no criminal record, surrendered when asked and perhaps revelation of the bloody head photo shown in a few posts above.

IMO, it would be safer for Z to remain behind bars. Maybe he can stay at the same place Casey Anthony is hiding out.

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3142

 

Short of solitary confinement, I can't see Z being any safer in jail than not. Our justice system is supposed to presume innocence, does not a presumed innocent person deserve freedom (unless they are considered a flight risk, or a danger to society; see aforementioned statute)? Actually, given the degree of vigilantism, death threats, and otherwise, I think society may indeed have a responsibility to take extraordinary measure to ensure his welfare while he awaits trail.

 

I feel that his actions have merited our trust. When charged, he turned himself in; In my opinion, he has consistently availed himself to be judged for his actions. I see nothing to the contrary.

[MT Wallet]

Selden, transport to court is one thing and then leaving the shakles on IN the courtroom is another. I look at it as denigration of a presumed "innocent" man. The message is; "the system is in control of you." I watched tha bailiff tell him (visual interpretation) sit her, scoot over, now scoot in. Z was compliant but intimidated. By the way, in some jurisdictions if you chained a horse like that johnny law would have a talk with you about it.

[beemerman2k]

So, if you want to throw me off this board because I dare to preach equality and not privilege, so be it. I just come here for the tech articles anyway. I'll be enjoying riding my R1200RT, and my R1100S, and my R90S, and you will be seeing discrimination every time something does not go your way. My bikes don't care what color I am, and the black one does not expect anything more than the Red White and Blue one does.

 

 

Wow, talk about the "victim" mindset!

 

Go back and re-read the material you posted that prompted my admonishment about the "no politics" rule. It has nothing to do with immigration or global competition or whatever you might want to claim it does. In fact, why don't you go back and read the "No Politics 'Splained" post so you can get a better appreciation as to why I called your post out in the first place.

 

You're right, I should have noticed the date in which you registered. Since you have been here a while, you should be very well acquainted with our no politics rule. And if that's the case, why did you post something that labels things the way you did? You should have known better than to do that.

 

pmurphy: if you don't like how we do things around here, you're always free to simply surf somewhere else.

[pmurphy]

In fact, why don't you go back and read the "No Politics 'Splained" post so you can get a better appreciation as to why I called your post out in the first place.

 

So tell me, why is it not politics for you to label an elderly white women a racist for not complementing your child, but it is politics for me calling you out for it? I keep silent until then, but just blatant racism was beyond my capacity to keep silent.

 

Seems to me you have found yourself a forum where only your ideas are worthy of consideration,

[beemerman2k]

Everyone, pay attention to this point of conflict going on between pmurphy and myself. See why we have a "no politics" rule around here? Things just get down right ugly real fast. Its rediculous.

[Boffin]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

The bit in bold is political. The rest of your posts are just opinion. All opinions are welcome to be stated. Political labels are not.

Andy

[pmurphy]

So we've gone from the TM case to immigration? How'd that happen?

 

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

The bit in bold is political. The rest of your posts are just opinion. All opinions are welcome to be stated. Political labels are not.

Andy

 

Far left wing is political? If I had used the term liberal would that have been political? So let me get this straight, Social, economic, racial, none of these are political? Perhaps left wing has a political context outside of the US, but in the US, it just is a label for a demographic.

 

If all demographic labels are to be construed as political, I would have thought the admins should have spoken up long before Beemerman2k choose the attack that poor old women. (Oh sorry, old women is a demographic, but then, so is women, and old); Poor person?

[Roadwolf]

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

Been lurking on this thread forever... but this comment brought me out...

 

Seriously? You haven't been here long then, because that couldn't be further from the truth... if anything, it is populated heavily from the other side of the political spectrum.

 

Back to lurking mode.

[pmurphy]

It appeared to me that opinions were not welcome here unless you were a member of the far left wing. Just testing my theory.

 

Been lurking on this thread forever... but this comment brought me out...

 

Seriously? You haven't been here long then, because that couldn't be further from the truth... if anything, it is populated heavily from the other side of the political spectrum.

 

Back to lurking mode.

 

Actually, that was just a sarcastic response to another posting.

 

The topic had migrated to outsourcing, movement of jobs to other countries, etc. I don't feel that a discussion of such topics can be adequately had without the inclusion of the effects of the post 60's immigration policy being included.

 

Short synopsis, the attitude in the 60's was for zero population growth; The birthrate for the US, post 60's is actually negative if you do not take into account the population growth due to immigration. The topic for discussion would then have been, given a zero to negative population growth, would those factors that were being attributed to outsourcing, and job migration, have even been a factor?

 

But, people were to quick to jump to assumptions than to join in a dialog.

 

BTW, everyone join date is right under their name in every post they make. You just need to look, and not jump to the assumption that just because someone doesn't talk a lot, they are not worth being heard when they open their mouths.

[Kathy R]

Reading some of the posts here I can't help but feel that the room is unnecessarily contentious. Let's get back to a discussion without the bad vibes, please.

 

I agree that Z should have been offered bail.

 

 

[upflying]

I agree that Z should have been offered bail.

I agree as well but at what cost?

How "free on bail" will Z be if his safety cannot be guaranteed?

Z will need three armed body guards 24/7 while he sits in a hideaway somewhere waiting for trial.

Might be cheaper and safer if he sits alone in a segregated cell at county jail.

Z will be a prisoner no matter where he goes.

 

 

[Kathy R]

I agree that Z should have been offered bail.

I agree as well but at what cost?

How "free on bail" will Z be if his safety cannot be guaranteed?

Z will need three armed body guards 24/7 while he sits in a hideaway somewhere waiting for trial.

Might be cheaper and safer if he sits alone in a segregated cell at county jail.

Z will be a prisoner no matter where he goes.

 

 

I wonder if they offered him that? I wonder if they can offer him that? Can they?

 

 

[upflying]

Protection costs for Z after he is released on bail will be privately funded.

Out of custody defendants allow the criminal justice system to take their time and drag on with extensive delays, continuations and waiver of the constitutional right to a speedy trial.

It is Z's choice whether to post bail or not. Besides the safety of a jail cell, the trial will take place sooner.

[Kathy R]

It is Z's choice whether to post bail or not. Besides the safety of a jail cell, the trial will take place sooner.

 

Ah, right!

[Whip]

Kinda puts a new light on the saying, "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6."

 

 

..if the 12 turns into 12 million and their is a bounty on your scalp.

 

?

 

 

 

 

[pbharvey]

Was he in protective custody before he turned himself in or was he hiding somewhere? Either way he managed to avoid the National Enquirer...if they can't find you, you're probably safe.

[Huzband]

Prior to a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, the accused is presumed innocent;

 

Sorry, Mitch, but I must disagree with that statement. While constitutionally correct, in this day & age of media the accused is guilty until proved innocent. And if they're white, or even close, they're still guilty.

[upflying]

Was he in protective custody before he turned himself in or was he hiding somewhere? Either way he managed to avoid the National Enquirer...if they can't find you, you're probably safe.

He was in hiding before he surrendered voluntarily.

Besides the New Black Panther Party "dead or alive" $10,000 bounty, I am sure the paparazzi will be paid a similar ransom for just one photo of Z at his hideout.

[Huzband]

Was he in protective custody before he turned himself in or was he hiding somewhere? Either way he managed to avoid the National Enquirer...if they can't find you, you're probably safe.

 

He was NOT in protective custody. Had he been, he could not have turned himself in.

[Peter Parts]

My wife and I were in Sanford a few days before the incident. A poor little city. Got gas at a cheap place there and the pump nozzle failed to stop and the car tank over-flowed. Sordid.

 

What Zimmerman did was sordid (whether or not it proves to be within the letter of that astonishing Florida law) and the local police "investigation" too.

 

BTW, do you know the connection between the murders of several Blacks in Colorado and Sanford? Seems one of the perps in Colorado was peeved because an Afro-American had shot his dad and was unpunished due to that kind of crazy self-defense law. And this was partly revenge, albeit psychotic. I can't say if this is all true or not in fact, only what I've read. Interesting reversal?

 

I have lots of personal interest in matters of bigotry. But I think it is wrong to think the sordid act of one jerk who should not own a gun reflects any kind of universal truth about race relations in the US. But without the media spotlight, Zimmerman and those like him get a free ride.

 

Whatever the Second Amendment meant 200 years ago, it certainly has outlived its value. Why do people who don't read a good newspaper from one year to the next and who never vote think the Bill of Rights is sacred and never changes?

 

Ben

great riding weather today but expecting big wet snow tomorrow

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Prior to a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, the accused is presumed innocent;

 

Sorry, Mitch, but I must disagree with that statement. While constitutionally correct, in this day & age of media the accused is guilty until proved innocent. And if they're white, or even close, they're still guilty.

 

And therein lies my complaint: lay people seem to show great disregard and/or misunderstanding of some very important features of the criminal justice process.

[bobbybob]

He was in hiding before he surrendered voluntarily.

Besides the New Black Panther Party "dead or alive" $10,000 bounty....

 

I'm sure the DOJ will soon require the NBP's to withdraw that bounty. Any day now, probably.

[BFish]

he's out on bail. sometime very early this am.

[beemerman2k]

He was in hiding before he surrendered voluntarily.

Besides the New Black Panther Party "dead or alive" $10,000 bounty....

 

I'm sure the DOJ will soon require the NBP's to withdraw that bounty. Any day now, probably.

 

I thought the people who announced that bounty were arrested. Do i not have that right?

[tallman]

Peter,

The other situation you referenced was on the anniversary of his father's death, I believe.

Most likely would've happened regardless of Zimmerman case based on all the problems the son was having.

"Astonishing" law?

In what way?

The fact you can defend yourself without a duty to retreat or the fact you can defend yourself?

Or is it the ability to own a gun or CCW?

hi

BTW, join date has nothing to do with posting in some cases.

Some folks joined years ago and went away.

Some joined years ago and post infrequently on a regular basis.

/jack

 

The shackles were over the top unless every defendant in cases of a similar charges is treated the same way or the accused has done something while in custody to warrant such measures.

[bobbybob]

He was in hiding before he surrendered voluntarily.

Besides the New Black Panther Party "dead or alive" $10,000 bounty....

 

I'm sure the DOJ will soon require the NBP's to withdraw that bounty. Any day now, probably.

 

I thought the people who announced that bounty were arrested. Do i not have that right?

 

Not that I can see, other than the arrest of one of them for a felon possessing a firearm.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/25/New-Black-Panthers-Offer-One-Millionf-Zimmerman

 

http://www.mediaite.com/online/george-zimmermans-family-asks-eric-holder-to-arrest-new-black-panthers-for-hate-crimes/

 

[brennaman]

My wife and I were in Sanford a few days before the incident. A poor little city. Got gas at a cheap place there and the pump nozzle failed to stop and the car tank over-flowed. Sordid.

 

What Zimmerman did was sordid (whether or not it proves to be within the letter of that astonishing Florida law) and the local police "investigation" too.

 

How do you know this? Can we let this guy have a fair trial first? When 911 told him not to pursue, for all we know, he complied.

 

 

BTW, do you know the connection between the murders of several Blacks in Colorado and Sanford? Seems one of the perps in Colorado was peeved because an Afro-American had shot his dad and was unpunished due to that kind of crazy self-defense law. And this was partly revenge, albeit psychotic. I can't say if this is all true or not in fact, only what I've read. Interesting reversal?

 

I have lots of personal interest in matters of bigotry. But I think it is wrong to think the sordid act of one jerk who should not own a gun reflects any kind of universal truth about race relations in the US. But without the media spotlight, Zimmerman and those like him get a free ride.

 

How well do you know Zimmerman? I can see how the media portrayed him, but do you know this to be true?

 

Whatever the Second Amendment meant 200 years ago, it certainly has outlived its value. Why do people who don't read a good newspaper from one year to the next and who never vote think the Bill of Rights is sacred and never changes?

 

That is your opinion, and in my personal opinion, flat out wrong.

 

 

Ben

great riding weather today but expecting big wet snow tomorrow

[Quinn]

My personal bet is that his home will be shot at. Maybe on a regular basis. No matter the verdict. For years to come. Wouldn't want to be his neighbor.

 

-----

 

 

[Peter Parts]

Peter,

The other situation you referenced was on the anniversary of his father's death, I believe.

Most likely would've happened regardless of Zimmerman case based on all the problems the son was having.

 

 

"Astonishing" law?

In what way?

 

snip

 

Tallman, thanks for filling out the information on the mirror-image deaths.

 

Seems "astonishing" to me when the Florida people who wrote, framed, voted, were previous governor, and/or signed as governor get on TV and cry they never meant to have their poorly written law used that way.

 

It is easy for all of us to picture in our minds the application of this law for some smart-phone game scenario where you and your young family are being attacked by Evil-Doers in your little lone farmhouse on the prairie. I don't think a law that enshrines self-defense in such events adds much legal clarity to such conditions but does clearly cloud the justice in other cases.

 

On the other hand, I understand police thinkers are skeptical of the wisdom of widespread access to guns and laws that facilitate their use in "standing your ground" or otherwise.

 

If you feel you need to "pack heat" when you go to get gas, travel around, or ever in your life in your home country, you deserve enormous sympathy from all of us.

 

Ben

Threats of snow in Toronto. I will stand my ground indoors.

[MT Wallet]

Ben, I have to take issue with some of your statements. Canada and the U.S. have very different cultures and traditions so what seems unfounded in the Canadian view is very well founded here.

You comment that people who run around doing errands "packing heat" "you deserve enormous sympathy from all of us."

I know of a gentleman in Detroit who was running errands and had a guy jump in his car and attempt to rob him. In the scuffle he was shot twice!! He wasn't "packin". Fortunatly for him the wounds weren't life threatening. Here in North Dakota law enforcement from Montana and Saskatchewan and N.D. is having a strategy retreat to anticipate the crime rise that will follow the oil drilling here. Women have been applying for CCW's after a school teacher was abducted and murdered in the area of the oil patch. There is nothing wrong with "packing heat" in the face of a threat to health and safety by criminals. I'd rather have heat and not need it than to not have it and need it. In Canada's case just pain can't have it.

In another post you mentioned that you didn't think our 200 year old constitution held up to today. All I can say to that is it is OURS. Don't mess with it!

[Dave McReynolds]

Ever since I moved to Sacramento in 1970, it has been impossible to get a concealed carry permit unless you are retired LEO or one of the chosen few, probably less than 100, other people. The new sheriff turned that around, and will now issue a concealed carry permit to anyone who has a clean record, completes the course, and goes through the drill of being interviewed, etc. I believe there have been thousands of concealed carry permits issued since the requirements changed.

 

The reason for the change is simple: budgets have been cut and the Sheriff can no longer guarantee the safety of those he is sworn to protect. I doubt that any of the previous Sheriffs could guarantee that either, but it's a little more obvious now that deputies are being laid off and positions are not being filled. Whether the population is actually safer with thousands of civilians running around with guns is debatable, I guess, but there is no question that the ones running around with the guns feel safer, anyway.

 

I always "wanted" to have a concealed carry permit, but when it actually became possible to get one, I found myself losing interest halfway through the process and didn't complete the paperwork. 20 years ago, I'm sure I would have obtained one, had it been available then, but I guess I've gotten soft in my old age.