So how about that Zimmerman trial?

[Hasbinbad]

well right they are only given certain options, but at every point of the process the jury can at least hang itself if not go against what is recommended by process

[Malice_Mizer]

ofc any ruling is subject to appeal, but juries can do a lot more than they are told they can do.

The definition of "reasonable doubt" is also totally subjective. It always amazes me how strict "reasonable doubt" becomes in high-profile cases like this and Casey Anthony. People are sentenced to life in prison or death on much less evidence on a routine basis.

[Hasbinbad]

I was summoned for jury duty once only. The judge explained that if they get evidence that points to guilt they MUST convict. So I asserted very loudly that that was absolutely not the case and that jurors can and should enter not guilty if they feel that someone has broken an unjust law.

I was quickly dismissed and I've never been summoned since.

[Frieza_Prexus]

The definition of "reasonable doubt" is also totally subjective. It always amazes me how strict "reasonable doubt" becomes in high-profile cases like this and Casey Anthony. People are sentenced to life in prison or death on much less evidence on a routine basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect

[Reapin]

I was summoned for jury duty once only. The judge explained that if they get evidence that points to guilt they MUST convict. So I asserted very loudly that that was absolutely not the case and that jurors can and should enter not guilty if they feel that someone has broken an unjust law.

I was quickly dismissed and I've never been summoned since.

I too have used Jury Nullification to avoid jury duty. Works everytime. Waiting for a case for a pot conviction to let the person off.

[Malice_Mizer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect

Capital!

I was summoned for jury duty once only. The judge explained that if they get evidence that points to guilt they MUST convict. So I asserted very loudly that that was absolutely not the case and that jurors can and should enter not guilty if they feel that someone has broken an unjust law.

I was quickly dismissed and I've never been summoned since.

HAVE SOME SENSE OF CIVIC DUTY, BRO ...

[Hasbinbad]

HAVE SOME SENSE OF CIVIC DUTY, BRO ...
The goal was to be a conscientious juror, I wasn't trying to be nullified.

[Rhambuk]

I was summoned for jury duty once only. The judge explained that if they get evidence that points to guilt they MUST convict. So I asserted very loudly that that was absolutely not the case and that jurors can and should enter not guilty if they feel that someone has broken an unjust law.

I was quickly dismissed and I've never been summoned since.

Good for you.

Haven't been called highly doubt I ever will

[Malice_Mizer]

The goal was to be a conscientious juror, I wasn't trying to be nullified.

I was the jk.

I was a juror a few years ago, and it was a pretty brutal experience. It wasn't anything huge-- a guy got a ticket for driving without insurance, and went to court with some forged documents saying he actually did have insurance at the time. The whole trial took 4 days, and the guy represented himself (poorly). He told the jury he'd go to prison if he was found guilty because of his past record (which is against the law). The solidarity and comradery that blooms among jurors is definitely interesting-- you wind up growing oddly close to your fellow jurors. At least that was my experience.

I feel awful for the jurors in the Zimmerman case, though I couldn't bear being a juror in a murder trial-- way too much responsibility.

[Rhambuk]

I feel awful for the jurors in the Zimmerman case, though I couldn't bear being a juror in a murder trial-- way too much responsibility.

and theyll probably be deliberating for weeks

[Samoht]

and theyll probably be deliberating for a few minutes

fixed that for you

[Rhambuk]

right? should be no question, hang the motherfucker.

but its america so it will draaaaaag

[TarukShmaruk]

Racism only exists within a context of racial power imbalance. Bottom->up "racism" is not really racism, it is a reaction to being treated like an animal.

This is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard in my life. Racism is racism - it had a very explicit definition.

Did you learn this tripe in your white privilege anonymous meeting?

[Sarius]

This is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard in my life. Racism is racism - it had a very explicit definition.

Did you learn this tripe in your white privilege anonymous meeting?

Agreed. Pretty ignorant statement by HBB.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
This is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard in my life. Racism is racism - it had a very explicit definition.

Did you learn this tripe in your white privilege anonymous meeting?
Agreed. Pretty ignorant statement by HBB.

[Malice_Mizer]

Did you learn this tripe in your white privilege anonymous meeting?

Yes.

[Reapin]

This is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard in my life. Racism is racism - it had a very explicit definition.

Did you learn this tripe in your white privilege anonymous meeting?


You are confusing Racism with prejudice.

[Barkingturtle]

Personally, I never learn much of anything at my White-Privilege Anonymous meetings because it's pretty much just me pooping on the floor in the bathroom at Starbucks.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Personally, I never learn much of anything at my White-Privilege Anonymous meetings because it's pretty much just me pooping on the floor in the bathroom at Starbucks.

And you didn't even have to clean it up. That's privilege my friend.

[Rhambuk]

Personally, I never learn much of anything at my White-Privilege Anonymous meetings because it's pretty much just me pooping on the floor in the bathroom at Starbucks.

Brown Bandit!

[Kagatob]

Personally, I never learn much of anything at my White-Privilege Anonymous meetings because it's pretty much just me pooping on the floor in the bathroom at Starbucks.

17 years ago that's how Treyvon was born.

[Splorf22]

HBB, do you cut yourself before you go to bed at night as a penance for being born white?

[Malice_Mizer]

A racially insensitive otaku. Now I've seen everything!

[Hasbinbad]

HBB, do you cut yourself before you go to bed at night as a penance for being born white?
White guilt is not something I experience anymore.

[Hasbinbad]

But I encourage you to try it for a while until you're able to take your head out of your ass.

[TarukShmaruk]

HBB, do you cut yourself before you go to bed at night as a penance for being born white?

Naw, they just make sure to rush to call other (presumably) white people racist at every opportunity.

When they meet up at Starbucks to write their latest novel, they discuss the evils or racist 'white america' as loudly as possible - just so people might hear and tell their black friends, or even better, a black person walks in and overhears.

On the occasion a black person walks into Starbucks, they immediately pull up their shirts Al Bundy style to reveal their Obama 2012 shirts underneath, and bombard their 'brother' with phrases like "i understand your pain, man" or "aren't you so happy Obama is president?".

If they do this enough, they ascend to new levels of tolerance, kind of like scientology. Of course this usually means throwing out the term 'bigot' in every single sentence when communicating with someone who is a white male or simply a conservative/republican/libertarian.

[Hasbinbad]

HBB Fan Fiction never fails to amuse me!!

[Splorf22]

What's funny HBB is that its guys like you that have destroyed the American black man. You should read a little Sowell some time. Black people were actually recovering quite nicely from the evils of slavery by the 40s and 50s; it was all the free handouts that destroyed the black nuclear family and created the gangsta/baby momma inner city culture of violence and laziness that is now glorified by rappers everywhere.

P.S. You cannot disagree with Sowell, he is black and therefore superior to you

P.P.S. I like Clint Eastwood! And your quote made me think of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks7-A-7Zvak

[Hasbinbad]

I am not an advocate of any state, so saying that I advocate things a state provides is really idiotic.

[TarukShmaruk]

What's funny HBB is that its guys like you that have destroyed the American black man. You should read a little Sowell some time. Black people were actually recovering quite nicely from the evils of slavery by the 40s and 50s; it was all the free handouts that destroyed the black nuclear family and created the gangsta/baby momma inner city culture of violence and laziness that is now glorified by rappers everywhere.

P.S. You cannot disagree with Sowell, he is black and therefore superior to you

P.P.S. I like Clint Eastwood! And your quote made me think of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks7-A-7Zvak

Shelby Steele has some really good articles out there too, and several books where he talks about this stuff.

[Hasbinbad]

Not everyone who is not racist is also democrat.

[Hasbinbad]

P.P.S. I like Clint Eastwood! And your quote made me think of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks7-A-7Zvak
great movie, great quote

[Hasbinbad]

Not everyone who is not racist is also democrat.
I'll wait while you puzzle this out.

[Splorf22]

Not everyone who is ridden with white guilt is also democrat.

Should be easy to prove a correlation

[Hasbinbad]

Should be easy to prove a correlation
That's not what I said. I make no apologies for the idiocy of democrats.

[Shaunte]

White guilt is not something I experience anymore.

hahahahahahahahahah

You are crippled by it.

[Hasbinbad]

^projection

[Hasbinbad]

watch the one where stan says he gets it but then token says he doesn't, and then he realizes that the fact that he doesn't get it is the point, and then he gets it that not being able to get it is he needs to face and then admits to token that he doesn't get it and then token says he gets it.

[Rhambuk]

watch the one where stan says he gets it but then token says he doesn't, and then he realizes that the fact that he doesn't get it is the point, and then he gets it that not being able to get it is he needs to face and then admits to token that he doesn't get it and then token says he gets it.

That scene was so spot on. there is no way any white person will ever understand how a black person feels when it comes to racial intolerance. Sympathy is one thing but don't say you know what its like or that you understand it...

[Samoht]

there is no way any white person will ever understand how a black person feels when it comes to racial intolerance.

oh please.

black racial intolerance is relatively new to the age of the earth. you know who white people were hating long before the rediscovery of the old continent? other fucking white people.

black people are fucking spoiled by modern racism. it gives them some sort of entitlement where they're allowed to get away with things that they'd never allow a white person to get away with (see: the N word).

but before that, white on white racial crimes were the norm. look at the irish. my people are STILL under british oppression, but you don't see me asking for hand outs or whining about it in every breath.

you trayvon sympathizers need to fuck off and quit using the race card. this shit wasn't about race. gz isn't even fucking white. gz killed a petty thief when he caught him casing houses and got attacked by him. you don't get to physically assault someone for occupying the same city street, so all of your "trayvon was defending himself" bullshit is just out the window.

sorry.

gz acquitted quicker than casey anthony. done.

[Daldolma]

i like how racist people have dragged race into this case, then accused others of racism for not bending the facts of the case to their racially charged interpretation

[Barkingturtle]

Yeah, it's not an interesting case due to the racial element--although that's the type of sensationalism we media-consumers most appreciate and thus why we're even discussing it--it's an interesting case because it puts on display the untenable nature of "stand your ground" laws. As it stands right now it appears the perfect murder is facilitated by the state of Florida. That's great news for Dexter but bad news for anyone who doesn't want to get shot to death.

[Samoht]

gz not even using SYG...

[Daldolma]

honestly stand your ground is an overrated element of this case. it would be a very minor hurdle for gz to clear, given available evidence. all stand your ground states is that someone like gz has no obligation to retreat to safety before using deadly force in self defense, even if it would be possible. but as gz was pinned to the ground, the facts would support his inability to retreat anyway.

this is strictly a case of self defense. the reason it's garnering so much outrage, race aside, is that gz initiated the confrontation and there's no way to know who initiated physical violence. to some, it seems ridiculous that he can start a dispute, kill the other guy, and then we have to let him walk because we don't know who is responsible for violent escalation. but we don't, and assuming one reasonable explanation of events, gz merely questioned trayvon and then got pummeled and was forced to act in self defense. you can't convict someone of murder for that -- and since we can't disprove it, he walks

[Barkingturtle]

Look, I'm trying to stay involved in the conversation but if you're going to require I stay up-to-date on what's actually going on I'm gonna have to opt out. I think I've made that pretty clear, cocksucker.

[Samoht]

^ i LOLed

[Shaunte]

oh please.

black racial intolerance is relatively new to the age of the earth. you know who white people were hating long before the rediscovery of the old continent? other fucking white people.

black people are fucking spoiled by modern racism. it gives them some sort of entitlement where they're allowed to get away with things that they'd never allow a white person to get away with (see: the N word).

but before that, white on white racial crimes were the norm. look at the irish. my people are STILL under british oppression, but you don't see me asking for hand outs or whining about it in every breath.

you trayvon sympathizers need to fuck off and quit using the race card. this shit wasn't about race. gz isn't even fucking white. gz killed a petty thief when he caught him casing houses and got attacked by him. you don't get to physically assault someone for occupying the same city street, so all of your "trayvon was defending himself" bullshit is just out the window.

sorry.

gz acquitted quicker than casey anthony. done.

People like HBB will never get it.

Irish are white, you can't be racist against whites. (In HBB's mind, only racism is against blacks.)

[TarukShmaruk]

i like how racist people have dragged race into this case, then accused others of racism for not bending the facts of the case to their racially charged interpretation

Pretty sure the race/bigot card was immediately played by the Martin supporters in this thread.

[Daldolma]

that's who i'm talking about...

[Daldolma]

Look, I'm trying to stay involved in the conversation but if you're going to require I stay up-to-date on what's actually going on I'm gonna have to opt out. I think I've made that pretty clear, cocksucker.

i like your style

[moklianne]

gz not even using SYG...

The professor testified Wednesday that Zimmerman got an "A" in his criminal justice class -- a course in which self defense and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, now pivotal in Zimmerman's case -- were discussed.

from the first paragraph:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57592318/george-zimmerman-murder-trial-college-professor-testimony-may-undermine-zimmerman-credibility-expert-says/

[moklianne]

this is strictly a case of self defense.

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

[Daldolma]

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

you can.

the only thing unique about stand your ground is that you have no obligation to retreat. hence, "stand your ground". and since gz was pinned to the ground, his obligation to retreat was nullified anyway.

you're not just supposed to let yourself get beaten to death in non-SYG states. deadly force is linked to seriousness of the threat, not obligation to retreat

[Frieza_Prexus]

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

A minority of states that are NOT SYG use the following rule:


1: General Rule: It is a defense that the defendant believed that:
a) he was in IMMINENT danger of being illegally physically harmed by another;
b) the force he used was NECESSARY to prevent the threatened harm; and
c) those beliefs were objectively REASONABLE

2: Deadly Force: same as above but the physical harm must be an imminent threat of DEATH or SERIOUS bodily harm, and the deadly force used was REASONABLY necessary to prevent that harm

CAVEAT: Any opportunity to retreat MUST be taken before using deadly force ONLY if retreat is possible with COMPLETE SAFETY.

[Samoht]

The professor testified Wednesday that Zimmerman got an "A" in his criminal justice class -- a course in which self defense and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, now pivotal in Zimmerman's case -- were discussed.

someone clearly doesn't understand SYG or self-defense

[r00t]

GZ american hero. did what he had to do to defend his life, and thats the american way

needs Free Zimmerman bumper sticker campaign

[moklianne]

someone clearly doesn't understand SYG or self-defense

Or lives in a state where SYG doesn't exist and self defense can't be so easily abused.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Or lives in a state where SYG doesn't exist and self defense can't be so easily abused.

I think you're not catching the thrust of the argument. SYG abuse is not in question here, at all. Sure, people are talking about it BECAUSE of the trial, but it is in NO WAY part of the actual proceedings. SYG was not used, much less abused, here.

Zimmerman's defense is as follows:

Self-defense because he was about to be murderized while pinned to the ground. That's it. He is NOT asserting SYG nor is it relevant to the case. SYG would ONLY be relevant if he had to opportunity to flee before using deadly force but chose not to flee. Even if Florida was NOT a SYG state, the concept would be irrelevant because of Zimmerman's defense. His story is that he was pinned. It is an integral part of his claims. Because his defense includes the inability to escape, SYG never enters the picture.

This is an all-or-nothing situation. He either proves that he defended himself from imminent harm while pinned, or he does not. There is no third theory where SYG comes into play.

[Samoht]

SYG has nothing to do with self-defense. SYG states that you don't have to flee. it's more like self-offense.

it's also completely irrelevant to this case.

self-defense says that if you fear for your safety, you can return aggression to try to escape/subdue your aggressor. every state allows that.

that's the defense GZ is using.

[Samoht]

also, zimmerman did try to flee*, but was ambushed by martin. still not SYG. still self-defense.

*if by flee you mean return to his vehicle.

[r00t]

we need Right to Pursue laws

[Samoht]

we need Right to Pursue laws

these exist if you have your money stolen by a hooker at night in texas

[Frieza_Prexus]

we need Right to Pursue laws

I think Somalia can offer just about everything you're looking for.

[Barkingturtle]

How's the meth in Somalia?

[Splorf22]

That scene was so spot on. there is no way any white person will ever understand how a black person feels when it comes to racial intolerance. Sympathy is one thing but don't say you know what its like or that you understand it...

Give me a fucking break. Black people are if anything more racist towards white people because their natural human tendency to prefer people like them is not tempered by thousands of multicuturalists screaming "white bad! black good!" over and over. Look at what is happening in South Africa right now: their fucking president sings "Kill the Boer" (=white farmers) and their politicians are elected based on promising to steal from the whites and give to the blacks. Of course the media doesn't cover this kind of thing because, well "white bad! black good!".

I am so tired of people who justify any black/white conflict (not that Zimmerman is even white!) with this legacy of slavery BS.

[Barkingturtle]

Honestly Zimmerman is the worst kind of Mexican because he not only steals our jobs he steals our murders, too. What do I as a white man even have left?

[Rhambuk]

Give me a fucking break. Black people are if anything more racist towards white people because their natural human tendency to prefer people like them is not tempered by thousands of multicuturalists screaming "white bad! black good!" over and over. Look at what is happening in South Africa right now: their fucking president sings "Kill the Boer" (=white farmers) and their politicians are elected based on promising to steal from the whites and give to the blacks. Of course the media doesn't cover this kind of thing because, well "white bad! black good!".

I am so tired of people who justify any black/white conflict (not that Zimmerman is even white!) with this legacy of slavery BS.

my post had nothing to do with the case simply that whites cannot understand how blacks feel.

You act as though blacks have no reason to hate whites....

[TarukShmaruk]

I think Somalia can offer just about everything you're looking for.

Ahh yes the standard 'lol Somalia' retort to any libertarian views.

[Splorf22]

You act as though blacks have no reason to hate whites....

What exactly are those reasons?

[Rhambuk]

nice troll.


almost

[TarukShmaruk]

nice troll.


almost

Let's also force everyone to look the other way when 12% of the population commits over 60% of the murders for fear of being called a racist.

[Rhambuk]

im pro equality and dont believe being racist should have any form of legal ramifications.

12% of the population commits 60% of the murders for fear of being called racist

who is murding people because they don't want to be called a racist...

[Splorf22]

You didn't parse his sentence correctly.

[Hurley]

Brown on Black crime and it's still whitey's fault.

[Splorf22]

Also I always troll a little in RNF but I'm basically serious about my main point. In our media today any black-on-white problems are excused by the legacy of slavery while any white-on-black problems are obvious racism.

I am 100% for equal treatment of blacks and whites. The problem is that multiculturalists made a bad assumption (blacks and whites have identical genes environments and culture on average) leading to a bad conclusion (any equality in outcomes implies racism/bias in the system) leading to all sorts of stupidity. In a few years police departments will be arresting Asians for parking violations while letting blacks get away with assault just so their statistics seem balanced along racial lines. And in my opinion that is bullshit.

[Rhambuk]

Also I always troll a little in RNF but I'm basically serious about my main point. In our media today any black-on-white problems are excused by the legacy of slavery while any white-on-black problems are obvious racism.

I am 100% for equal treatment of blacks and whites. The problem is that multiculturalists made a bad assumption (blacks and whites have identical genes environments and culture on average) leading to a bad conclusion (any equality in outcomes implies racism/bias in the system) leading to all sorts of stupidity. In a few years police departments will be arresting Asians for parking violations while letting blacks get away with assault just so their statistics seem balanced along racial lines. And in my opinion that is bullshit.

Solid. It is ridiculous that a black person can pull the race card and whitey shits his pants for fear hes going to lose his job have his rep bashed etc etc. Unfortunately I don't believe humankind will ever be able to look past race/sex/sexual orientation, if someone of authority is DOING THEIR JOB and the person that they are going after is different in anyway, thats the only reason that they did it.

but its also ridiculous that it actually does happen. of course no one ever really knows if it was truly racism or not because we cant see inside their head(rodney king) I still see people on both sides (of both colors) saying he was an innocent victim the police beat him because he was black OR that he was a drug dealer criminal and he assaulted the officers first. no one will ever really know and cases like this will pop over forever and people will forget the facts and focus on race.

[Rhambuk]

Also I always troll a little in RNF

it wouldn't be any fun if people didn't!

[Splorf22]

but its also ridiculous that it actually does happen. of course no one ever really knows if it was truly racism or not because we cant see inside their head(rodney king) I still see people on both sides (of both colors) saying he was an innocent victim the police beat him because he was black OR that he was a drug dealer criminal and he assaulted the officers first. no one will ever really know and cases like this will pop over forever and people will forget the facts and focus on race.

I think discrimination hurts the discriminator more than the discriminatee - which is why I personally prefer to judge on merit. For example, feminists have been whining for years about how women make 0.70 for every dollar a man makes. It's obviously bullshit, and here's why: if that were true, the smart play would be to found a company that employs only women, pay them 0.85 on the dollar, and be hugely profitable. You can apply similar logic to race: the fact that we don't have companies that only hire minorities suggests that discrimination is a relatively small problem. In comparison the chilling effect of discrimination lawsuits and the government apparatus required to police them is a clear and substantial problem.

Of course, with the government things are different. Which is why I hate government in general and ours in particular.

[Rhambuk]

Of course, with the government things are different. Which is why I hate government in general and ours in particular.

its horrible that we focus on the stupid shit, race sex etc, its just a screen to get people off he topic. kind of like rnf someome posts a real probekm then theres 8 pages of people talking about semantics and completely ignore the real issue.

and othing gets fixxed

[Sidelle]

You act as though blacks have no reason to hate whites....

I'm curious about what those reasons could be in this day and age. There is no more slavery. Sure, there are racist people out there but they come in ALL colors. I myself have been discriminated against for being of mixed race. But I don't take isolated incidents and use them to justify hating an entire group of people because a couple white people were mean to me.

I never owned anyone's great-great grandmother, so what reason is there for black folks to hate whites?

[Tasslehofp99]

Racism, sexism, whateverism.


All bullshit, of course 2 people who look,act, speak, develop (mentally and physically) are going to hate eachother when they're forced to live, work, and go to school together.


I'm from a very diverse city where id feel pretty safe in assuming there is no real majority race. There's mostly blacks/whites in what seemed to be a proportionate number with a random mix of whatevet other races. Basically since gradr school all we learned about was how bad white people were "back then" and how we constantly exploited anyone for anything we could. No wonder black people hate white people, the only thing that's being taughy in suburban high schools is racism. Sure there are racist whites but I've deffinetly met more racist hispanics/blacks than anything else. I've never even felt the need to act racist in any way, let alone openly make racist remarks in public. When this happened to me as a youngster I realized how hearing such remarks can spur feelings of intense racism within you. This is when I decided to never make racist remarks, and to personally and publically embarass anyone I witnessed doing so.



I'm sure in different cities/states its very different but like I said when people are just different in many ways there seems to be a superiority factor among ones own race. For example when you are walking to your class and you see a group of obnoxiously loud, rude and annoying group of kids from a different race the first thing that comes to mind in many cases when trying to justify such behaviour to yourself is their racial identity. Its probably something that's hardwired into us and then reinforced by ultra liberal curriculums being forced down our kids throats.

[Hasbinbad]

The problem with all of your opinions about equality is that they universally fail to recognize systemic racism and patriarchy.

You don't see it because you're white dudes.

[Rhambuk]

The problem with all of your opinions about equality is that they universally fail to recognize systemic racism and patriarchy.

You don't see it because you're white dudes.

I get it now!


I don't get it.

[Barkingturtle]

The problem with all of your opinions about equality is that they universally fail to recognize systemic racism and patriarchy.

You don't see it because you're white dudes.

It is pretty weird seeing dudes say all they see through the media are stories of "white bad, black good".

I mean, have you motherfuckers never even heard of Diff'rent Strokes? Expose yourself to some culture before you sound so ignorant.

[Alawen]

A white kid and a black kid get caught with weed independently of each other. The white kid I is going to receive a stern talking to. The cops might even tell his parents! The black kid is thrown on the ground, cuffed, and searched. He's going to be booked and spend at least one night in jail.

A white couple and a black couple are buying their first homes. The white couple will be shown more homes and better neighborhoods. The black couple will receive a higher interest rate despite having the same income and financial history as the white couple.

Neither of these are scenarios of my invention. Racism is alive and well in the US.

[Samoht]

^ doesn't happen as often as you think

[Barkingturtle]

Oh I guess it's okay then. A smidgen of institutional racism never hurt nobody.

[Alawen]

^ doesn't happen as often as you think

It happens often. I didn't accept either scenario as status quo until faced with statistical data. Blacks and whites use cannabis in virtually the same percentage of population, but blacks are 3.7 times more likely to be arrested for it. The FBI/UCR data is 716 of 100,000 marijuana arrests for blacks and 192 for whites. Furthermore, latinos are included in the white population. That ratio increased by almost 1/3 between 2001 and 2010.

Ever been caught with pot? I have. The cops threw my pot and pipe away and gave me a ticket for a burned out tail light and an illegal right turn on red. I went back to the dumpster later than night and retrieved my stuff.

Hey, it was a new bag.

A recent Duke University study of two million home transactions found that blacks and latinos pay an average of 3.5% more for their homes.

It happens. It happens a lot.

[Samoht]

I didn't accept either scenario as status quo until faced with statistical data.

and i accept either as sensationalized racism against whites until presented with data

[Samoht]

A recent Duke University study of two million home transactions found that blacks and latinos pay an average of 3.5% more for their homes.

so you base their poor home-buying decisions on... racism? i'm really not buying it. at all.

[Barkingturtle]

Them uppity land-owning minorities pay more for houses because they gotta have the nicest houses in the best neighborhoods, imo. Genetic tendency toward bling, imo.

[Alawen]

so you base their poor home-buying decisions on... racism? i'm really not buying it. at all.

They're paying 3.5% more for equivalent homes. If you continue research, they pay higher interest rates, too. It's systemic racism.

[Splorf22]

Are you referring to http://www.nber.org/papers/w18069 ?

This paper uses unique panel data covering over two million repeat-sales housing transactions from four metropolitan areas to test for the presence of racial price differentials in the housing market. Drawing on the strengths of these data, our research design controls carefully for unobserved differences in the quality of neighborhoods and the homes purchased by buyers of each race. We find that black and Hispanic homebuyers pay premiums of about three percent on average across the four cities, differences that are not explained by variation in buyer income, wealth or access to credit. Further, the estimated premiums do not vary significantly with the racial composition of the neighborhood; nor, strikingly, do they vary with the race of the seller. This latter finding suggests that racial prejudice on the part of sellers is not the primary explanation for the robust premiums we uncover. The results have implications for the evolution of racial differences in wealth and home ownership and the persistence of residential segregation.

[Splorf22]

Full text not available that I could find :(

[Alawen]

Yeah, that's the one. Economics department at Duke. I don't think the full text is available free yet.

[Samoht]

nor, strikingly, do they vary with the race of the seller.

so, it's not white people doing it

oh, ok

[Samoht]

hbb selling houses to his people at a mark-up again, huh

once again, not racism

just uneducated buyers

[Alawen]

so, it's not white sellers doing it

oh, ok

ftfy

[JurisDictum]

so, it's not white people doing it

oh, ok

guys guuys... white men from Texas all agree race isn't a problem anymore. Just quit with all the empirical data.

[Alawen]

Obviously all black and latino homebuyers are collectively stupid. They don't know how to bargain the price down and they don't know how to get a good loan. 100% their own fault.

[Splorf22]

Here is my question Alawen: suppose what you are saying is true. Why has no one founded "Black & Latino Bank of America" to profit from this inefficiency? They could run ads that specifically appeal to minorities about how the white patriarchy is fucking them and immediately get all of their business. And if they offered a 1% premium instead of a 3% premium they would still be significantly more profitable than their white counterparts selling to white home owners.

[Alawen]

Where is HBB's flying car? Efficient market theory dictates that every demand is fulfilled, right? After all, corrupt government, targeted regulation, and crony capitalism don't exist.

[Splorf22]

So you are saying that some cartel of white bankers and politicians are conspiring to keep the black man down? I mean I can't say your wrong, but I thought they were too busy with drone strikes in Pakistan.

[Splorf22]

god you're

[Daldolma]

Obviously all black and latino homebuyers are collectively stupid. They don't know how to bargain the price down and they don't know how to get a good loan. 100% their own fault.

i c yer sarcasm but given the fact that the study found no significant differences based on race of the seller or racial composition of the neighborhood, and controlled for wealth and access to credit, wouldn't it make sense to consider that the difference could reside on the demand side?

the idea that black sellers in black neighborhoods are pricing up black buyers at the same rate as lily white sellers in homogenously white neighborhoods seems a bit far fetched. i don't doubt systemic racism exists, nor do i doubt it exists within the housing market. i just question the interpretation of this data, given what it didn't find and what it controlled. if we're seeing a pervasive, invariable premium on real estate purchases by black and latino buyers across all markets, the issue may reside with the buyer and not the varied sellers

[Barkingturtle]

Man, Alawen, I know you've got some masochistic streak which compels you to teach--but I will never understand that which drives you to wrestle with malformed intellects of this mongrel species: the P99 Spergorgon. Rather it is because the basement is too deep or his arms are too short he can reach only the lowest fruits and even then he only comprehends their shiny, waxy skins. Better to make dick and fart jokes, imo. I only mention it because I care.

[Alawen]

Buyers rarely interact directly with sellers. There is usually at least one agent involved and frequently two.

Let's imagine for a moment that Bob opens up Bob's Pretty Good Black and Latino Loan Store. Bob starts making enough loans to show up on the radar of First National Loan Gougers of Omaha. They crunch the numbers and they'll make more money by buying Bob out. They don't even have to pull in favors from Mayor Corruption or Governor How Much You Got. Bob gets a couple mil, First National goes back to gouging. No conspiracy required.

Barkingturtle, I'm pretty stubborn. Not as stubborn as HBB, but I'll waste quite a bit of time before I realize the futility of something. But what if even one person says, "Hey, I hadn't looked at it that way?"

[Splorf22]

In your scenario Bob walks away with a million bucks after a few years of work. Don't you think there would be a lot of Bob's out there?

[Alawen]

Sure, all the Bobs with experience in banking, knowledge to navigate the bureaucracy, and enough capital to finance a bank. It's not like cost of entry exists or anything.

I'm really not interested in continuing this conversation where I cite empirical data and you argue vaguely defined idealized principles. The counterpoint to my evidence is your own evidence, not supposition.

Yes, but what does that MEAN?

[Splorf22]

BTW, I'm with Daldoma: I think most people are racist. It's natural and human and probably a factor. I just think they value their pocketbooks more. Even the authors suggest that racial prejudice is not the primary factor.

[Splorf22]

This paper uses unique panel data covering over two million repeat-sales housing transactions from four metropolitan areas to test for the presence of racial price differentials in the housing market. Drawing on the strengths of these data, our research design controls carefully for unobserved differences in the quality of neighborhoods and the homes purchased by buyers of each race. We find that black and Hispanic homebuyers pay premiums of about three percent on average across the four cities, differences that are not explained by variation in buyer income, wealth or access to credit. Further, the estimated premiums do not vary significantly with the racial composition of the neighborhood; nor, strikingly, do they vary with the race of the seller. This latter finding suggests that racial prejudice on the part of sellers is not the primary explanation for the robust premiums we uncover. The results have implications for the evolution of racial differences in wealth and home ownership and the persistence of residential segregation.

It seems your data doesn't say what you think it says. Anyway if you aren't having fun then forget it. I don't take this stuff seriously and its not fun when other people do.

[Daldolma]

Buyers rarely interact directly with sellers. There is usually at least one agent involved and frequently two.

Let's imagine for a moment that Bob opens up Bob's Pretty Good Black and Latino Loan Store. Bob starts making enough loans to show up on the radar of First National Loan Gougers of Omaha. They crunch the numbers and they'll make more money by buying Bob out. They don't even have to pull in favors from Mayor Corruption or Governor How Much You Got. Bob gets a couple mil, First National goes back to gouging. No conspiracy required.

Barkingturtle, I'm pretty stubborn. Not as stubborn as HBB, but I'll waste quite a bit of time before I realize the futility of something. But what if even one person says, "Hey, I hadn't looked at it that way?"

from the abstract that was posted, the 3% premium seems to be related to purchase price, not loan rates. i'd quibble with your suggestion that buyers/sellers rarely interact, but even granting that most transactions are driven by agents, you're suggesting small-scale actors as diverse as real estate agents are summarily and invariably hiking prices on minority buyers by 3% in all markets. that just doesn't strike me as a tenable interpretation of the data -- it's more of a shifting of the goal posts. the study found no differences based on race of seller or racial composition of neighborhood. you're shrugging off those measures and doubling down on the race of the real estate agent(s), which went unrecorded.

i won't venture a guess as to those numbers, but assuming real estate agents were to fall in line with the people they're representing or the neighborhood(s) they are active in, you'd be back to looking at the buyers

[Samoht]

invariable premium on real estate purchases by black and latino buyers across all markets, the issue may reside with the buyer and not the varied sellers

right, they might be willing to pay more for less value, whether they realize it or not

[Alawen]

I'm not doubling down on the race of anyone. The race of the real estate agent or loan officer is irrelevant. Systemic racism is SYSTEMIC.

Here's another study that shows blacks paying higher interest rates AT ALL INCOME LEVELS: Minorities pay more (http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2013/04/minorities-twin-cities-more-likely-pay-more-mortgages).

Here's another study showing minorities getting jacked in New York (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html?ex=1350187200&en=a9978e04a9864642&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0).

Here's an academic paper from an older study (http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ321/rosburg/Ladd%20-%20Evidence%20on%20Discrimination%20in%20Mortgage% 20Lending.pdf).

This one is from Harvard (http://jchs.unix.fas.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/w05-11.pdf).

Not to be outdone, Yale weighs in (http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/ross.pdf).

Do you have enough links yet? While we're at it, do you know that data and analysis are not synonyms? Will it confuse the issue if I also mention that women also receive fewer loan approvals with identical financial information, pay more for their homes, and pay higher interest rates?

[Alawen]

While we're at it, here's an article about the real estate process: Buyer and Seller: Never the Two Shall Meet? (http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20010321_meet.htm)

FSBO real estate sales are 10% of all sales and 7% of suburban sales, and 40% of all FSBO sales involve buyers and sellers who already know each other according to the National Association of Realtors (http://www.realtor.org/field-guides/field-guide-to-working-with-fsbos).

inb4 lol racism doesn't exist because invisible hand of the free market

[TarukShmaruk]

So back on topic the prosecution has already rested their case.

The judge threw out a request for acquittal.

The judge also forced the jury to leave when the ME testified that he felt marijuana in Trayvons system could have altered his behavior.

[Fael]

Meh I agree with the judge. That Martin smoked weed is marginally probative (if at all) to the question of whether Zim had cause to reasonably fear for his life. In contrast, the information is highly and unfairly prejudicial to Martin's case, as it has a heavy dose of character implications.

Although, most jurists probably already assume Martin smokes weed, as he is black, and that is a completely safe assumption. So, if i was the judge I would throw it out not based on a typical Rule 403 analysis, but because such evidence is needlessly cumulative and a waste of time!

Dolic

[Hasbinfat]

I'm not doubling down on the race of anyone. The race of the real estate agent or loan officer is irrelevant. Systemic racism is SYSTEMIC.

Here's another study that shows blacks paying higher interest rates AT ALL INCOME LEVELS: Minorities pay more (http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2013/04/minorities-twin-cities-more-likely-pay-more-mortgages).

Here's another study showing minorities getting jacked in New York (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html?ex=1350187200&en=a9978e04a9864642&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0).

Here's an academic paper from an older study (http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ321/rosburg/Ladd%20-%20Evidence%20on%20Discrimination%20in%20Mortgage% 20Lending.pdf).

This one is from Harvard (http://jchs.unix.fas.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/w05-11.pdf).

Not to be outdone, Yale weighs in (http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/ross.pdf).

Do you have enough links yet? While we're at it, do you know that data and analysis are not synonyms? Will it confuse the issue if I also mention that women also receive fewer loan approvals with identical financial information, pay more for their homes, and pay higher interest rates?

This might have something to do with the fact that blacks and hispanics are far more likely to default on their loans, even when controlling for borrower and property characteristics.

Drawing racial discrimination as an having an ironclad causal relationship with the data is intellectually irresponsible. The science supporting that causation is very murky, and there are many intervening variables.

Bias in Estimates of Discrimination and Default in Mortgage Lending:
http://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jrefec/v9y1994i3p197-215.html

What Constitutes Evidence of Discrimination in Lending?
http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jfinan/v50y1995i2p739-48.html

And you're forgetting that in 2002, President Bush pledged to add 5.5 million minority home-owners, and this was accomplished by targeted subprime-type deals, zero-down-payment purchases, and other shady shit that was intended to inflate minority home ownership without much regard to their financial soundness down the road. It was designed to get as many minorities into homes as quickly as possible.

So at least some of what appears to be predatory, racist behavior by banks is actually a shitty, hamfisted form of affirmative action, with much of the impetus to perform this kind of lending coming from subsidies by the federal government.

[TarukShmaruk]

Meh I agree with the judge. That Martin smoked weed is marginally probative (if at all) to the question of whether Zim had cause to reasonably fear for his life. In contrast, the information is highly and unfairly prejudicial to Martin's case, as it has a heavy dose of character implications.

Although, most jurists probably already assume Martin smokes weed, as he is black, and that is a completely safe assumption. So, if i was the judge I would throw it out not based on a typical Rule 403 analysis, but because such evidence is needlessly cumulative and a waste of time!

Dolic

Frankly I don't think marijuana use has any real impact on someone's aggression, but drug use is ALWAYS considered in any crime like this. It seems odd that they'd want the jury to ignore it, yet allow the testimony.

I do find the judge to be a complete coward in not throwing the case out. O'Mara is right - the prosecution hasn't provided enough evidence in the SLIGHTEST to allow for a murder 2 conviction, and has already rested its case

[Freeport]

Doesn't matter- Zimmerman will walk and he should. If I was in the same position I probably would have done the same thing because there are some crazy motherfuckers out there. This goes for anyone who attacks me when im carrying my pistol. If im at fear for my life ill fucking blow your head off. Thanks

Also I like how this is such a white on black hate crime. It gets so much media attention. The media is warping everyone's views on what happened during this trial, during the Paula Deen bullshit and much more.
I wish for once the media would talk about something worth my while. A mexican dude shot a thug. Who gives a flying fuck its called "Natural Selection".

The thing is. Racism will never end. As Racism gets better reverse racism gets worse. It will never stop.

There are worse "hate crimes" done upon white people but its all ignored by the media because they don't want to start "racial tension".

[Fael]

"drug use is ALWAYS considered in any crime like this"

Oh really. I don't think that is true. Particularly in a self-defense case, where the central issue is what Zimmermen knew about TM, and whether that informed his reasonable fear for his life. Perhaps if Zimmermen told the cop directly after the altercation, that TM was behaving and acting like someone on drugs, then it would be relevant that TM was in fact on drugs.

Dolic

[Samoht]

This might have something to do with the fact that blacks and hispanics are far more likely to default on their loans, even when controlling for borrower and property characteristics.

but... that would be racist to assume :O

no

no it wouldn't

bankers take risks when they give you money. it's a fact, not racism, that minorities like blacks and mexicans cannot pay their bills as reliably as everybody else.

sorry :(

[TarukShmaruk]

"drug use is ALWAYS considered in any crime like this"

Oh really. I don't think that is true. Particularly in a self-defense case, where the central issue is what Zimmermen knew about TM, and whether that informed his reasonable fear for his life. Perhaps if Zimmermen told the cop directly after the altercation, that TM was behaving and acting like someone on drugs, then it would be relevant that TM was in fact on drugs.

Dolic

It's relevant because it gives credence to his claim ,and thus the case of the defense, that Zimmerman was threatened and in fear of his life.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Frankly I don't think marijuana use has any real impact on someone's aggression, but drug use is ALWAYS considered in any crime like this. It seems odd that they'd want the jury to ignore it, yet allow the testimony.

I do find the judge to be a complete coward in not throwing the case out. O'Mara is right - the prosecution hasn't provided enough evidence in the SLIGHTEST to allow for a murder 2 conviction, and has already rested its case

What Dolic is referring to is Rule of Evidence 403 which is:

The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

The judge is the sole gatekeeper of ALL evidence to be admitted. ANY evidence is relevant and admissible if it in ANY way makes the issues in question more or less likely to be true. However, the judge has the power to throw out relevant evidence if the risk of prejudice outweighs the "probative value." Which simply means "sure maybe he was high and it had a 1% chance of affecting his behavior. But come on the jury can't weigh that 1% they're gonna think he was high and that 1% just isn't worth it."

@ Dolic:

http://i.imgur.com/UrZWYvi.gif

[TarukShmaruk]

So basically the prosecution gets to use it and not the defense. Because you can better believe that the prosecution would have used such evidence if they had it - and the judge would have allowed it.

[Frieza_Prexus]

So basically the prosecution gets to use it and not the defense. Because you can better believe that the prosecution would have used such evidence if they had it - and the judge would have allowed it.

The actual application is a bit more complicated, but yes it can boil down to that.

However, judges are careful because if it could be a big issue it will be preserved for appeal, and the last thing the judge wants is to get bench slapped by the appellate court for wrongly (dis)allowing something.

[Daldolma]

I'm not doubling down on the race of anyone. The race of the real estate agent or loan officer is irrelevant. Systemic racism is SYSTEMIC.

Here's another study that shows blacks paying higher interest rates AT ALL INCOME LEVELS: Minorities pay more (http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2013/04/minorities-twin-cities-more-likely-pay-more-mortgages).

Here's another study showing minorities getting jacked in New York (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html?ex=1350187200&en=a9978e04a9864642&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0).

Here's an academic paper from an older study (http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ321/rosburg/Ladd%20-%20Evidence%20on%20Discrimination%20in%20Mortgage% 20Lending.pdf).

This one is from Harvard (http://jchs.unix.fas.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/w05-11.pdf).

Not to be outdone, Yale weighs in (http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/ross.pdf).

Do you have enough links yet? While we're at it, do you know that data and analysis are not synonyms? Will it confuse the issue if I also mention that women also receive fewer loan approvals with identical financial information, pay more for their homes, and pay higher interest rates?

why would we delve into an avalanche of new links when you haven't satisfactorily demonstrated that your first referenced inequity is actually racist in nature? why do you preclude the possibility of non-racist causes for the systemic racial differences seen in the duke study? there is systemic racial inequity in standardized testing, but we generally don't ascribe it to racism. we're happy to explore cultural, historical, and educational trends that could account for such differences while acknowledging that there may not be a single, convenient catch-all explanation.

would it be unreasonable to believe white home buyers, on the aggregate, have more experience with the housing market, whether it be through education or a more robust family history of home owners?

i'm not necessarily suggesting that is the case -- i'm simply forwarding it as a reasonable interpretation of the data that does not require active forces of prejudice or racism within the housing market. that data could be a result of systemic racism, but it also could not be. if we are too hasty in our assessment of institutional racism, we risk undermining the consequence of the charge.

[Daldolma]

basically the issue is that you're seeing systemic inequality and calling it systemic racism without proving the latter. inequality isn't inherently racist. when the study in question is showing black sellers in black neighborhoods charging black buyers the same premium as white sellers in white neighborhoods, it should be clear that the seller's prejudices aren't a major factor. that leaves the buyer or some overarching controlling entity as the responsible party. you're claiming overarching control, but from whom? the study controls for access to loans, so it's not the banks. you're laughing at splorf's "invisible hand" of the free market while positing an "invisible hand" of racism.

[Fael]

Actually, if it came in at all it would be because the defendant in a criminal case typically gets more of a pass when it comes to getting potentially unfairly prejudicial evidence. The rules of evidence is more concerned about a defendant being unfairly prejudiced than a victim.

Here, what you worry about, as a judge I would imagine, is that the evidence of MJ use would lead the jury to believe, as many people on these boards have suggested, that TM is a dead beat kid who, even if murdered, isn't much use to society, etc. That type of conclusion, of course, is unfairly prejudicial.

Moreover, you have other issues. Even if the evidence makes it 1% more likely TM would act hyper aggressively, you would still have to show that he was affected by the drug at the time, which i am not sure there was evidence of that. That too would substantially diminish the probative value of the evidence. It would also take time to put on experts to have a trial within a trial in regards to how likely it was that TM was effected by the MJ at that time. All the while, the subtext is how TM is a dead beat druggy.

Moreoever, this evidence itself is only conditionally relevant to the issue at stake here, which is whether or not Zimmerman reasonably feared for his life. Yes, perhaps it would make it marginally more likely that TM acted in a manner consistent with Zimmerman's story, and thus he acted reasonably in fearing for his life. But the Jury has other ways to evaluate the truthfullness of Zimmerman's story, without the state's case being subjected to an impermissible and irrelevant character assault.

Dolic

[Barkingturtle]

There's an argument to be made that Zimmerman really did Martin a favor by saving him 3% on the cost of his future home.

[Malice_Mizer]

but... that would be racist to assume :O

no

no it wouldn't

bankers take risks when they give you money. it's a fact, not racism, that minorities like blacks and mexicans cannot pay their bills as reliably as everybody else.

sorry :(

You're drawing generalized conclusions based on a person's ethnicity or race. There's been so many laws enacted over the past 50 years to deny banks the ability to engage in redlining, block busting, or any of the discriminatory practices that you condone as "common sense." It doesn't even matter if, statistically, black people default on their loans more than other "races." In our individualistic society, it shouldn't matter what group you're born into, you should get a fair shake if your files are in order. You conservatives leap back and forth between collectivist and hyper-individualistic societal philosophies as it suits your fancy, and it's really very annoying.

What if my father or other relative was a huge debtor and criminal? Would it be okay for a bank to say, "Well, it looks like you have horrible qualities in your blood, innately, so we're going to make a judgment call about you despite the contrary evidence you're providing us."

But I'm sure you're also in favor of across-the-board racial profiling in all cases because you're a proud idiot.

[TarukShmaruk]

Actually, if it came in at all it would be because the defendant in a criminal case typically gets more of a pass when it comes to getting potentially unfairly prejudicial evidence. The rules of evidence is more concerned about a defendant being unfairly prejudiced than a victim.

Here, what you worry about, as a judge I would imagine, is that the evidence of MJ use would lead the jury to believe, as many people on these boards have suggested, that TM is a dead beat kid who, even if murdered, isn't much use to society, etc. That type of conclusion, of course, is unfairly prejudicial.

Moreover, you have other issues. Even if the evidence makes it 1% more likely TM would act hyper aggressively, you would still have to show that he was affected by the drug at the time, which i am not sure there was evidence of that. That too would substantially diminish the probative value of the evidence. It would also take time to put on experts to have a trial within a trial in regards to how likely it was that TM was effected by the MJ at that time. All the while, the subtext is how TM is a dead beat druggy.

Moreoever, this evidence itself is only conditionally relevant to the issue at stake here, which is whether or not Zimmerman reasonably feared for his life. Yes, perhaps it would make it marginally more likely that TM acted in a manner consistent with Zimmerman's story, and thus he acted reasonably in fearing for his life. But the Jury has other ways to evaluate the truthfullness of Zimmerman's story, without the state's case being subjected to an impermissible and irrelevant character assault.

Dolic

I think the issue I have here is that any drugs or alcohol in Zimmerman's system at the time would have been brought into the trial, but drugs or alcohol in Martin's system could have had the same affect (perhaps made Martin more aggressive or reckless in his assault on Zimmerman).

That said I'm pretty sure nobody in the history of the world has tried to kill someone *because* they were high.

[Malice_Mizer]

I think the issue I have here is that any drugs or alcohol in Zimmerman's system at the time would have been brought into the trial, but drugs or alcohol in Martin's system could have had the same affect (perhaps made Martin more aggressive or reckless in his assault on Zimmerman).

That said I'm pretty sure nobody in the history of the world has tried to kill someone *because* they were high.

Good thing the definitely not-racist Sanford Police Department drug tested the dead body of Trayvon Martin but didn't bother asking a thing of the ZimZam. He could have been on PCP for all we know. That would actually shed a lot of light on this case.

[Supreme]

Good thing the definitely not-racist Sanford Police Department drug tested the dead body of Trayvon Martin but didn't bother asking a thing of the ZimZam. He could have been on PCP for all we know. That would actually shed a lot of light on this case.

Toxicology reports come from the coroners office.

I would like to spin this event though. Lets say that Zimmerman was a woman...and everything happened EXACTLY like it has been explained.

Would you still hate a lady Zimmerman?

[Frieza_Prexus]

Good thing the definitely not-racist Sanford Police Department drug tested the dead body of Trayvon Martin but didn't bother asking a thing of the ZimZam. He could have been on PCP for all we know. That would actually shed a lot of light on this case.

They also failed to get Spengler and Venkman to come down with Tobin's Spirit Guide and a PKE meter to check for class VII wandering possessors.

[Malice_Mizer]

Toxicology reports come from the coroners office.

I would like to spin this event though. Lets say that Zimmerman was a woman...and everything happened EXACTLY like it has been explained.

Would you still hate a lady Zimmerman?

I don't hate Zimmerman. I wouldn't hate hypothetical "lady Zimmerman."

And the pro-Zimmerman zeal would be even more intense and even more insanely racist if it was a white woman. Good Christ-- can you imagine typical southern American populism if it had a white woman vs. scary black man scenario on its hands? Sounds like a famous novel turned into an Oscar-winning classic movie, but the name escapes me.

P.S.: Speaking of lady Zimmerman, have you seen his sister? Holy God she looks EXACTLY LIKE HIM. It's quite shocking, actually.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/george-zimmerman-sister.jpg

[Malice_Mizer]

If it were a white woman, Florida would do some legal acrobatics and this would be a trial of Trayvon Martin in absentia for the assault and attempted rape of Lady Zimmerman. They would then collectively quarter, behead, and burn Martin in effigy.

That's just the way it is.

[Splorf22]

What if my father or other relative was a huge debtor and criminal? Would it be okay for a bank to say, "Well, it looks like you have horrible qualities in your blood, innately, so we're going to make a judgment call about you despite the contrary evidence you're providing us."

Why not? I brought up the free market point before and it was never refuted. 1) There is no reason for banks to do dumb shit that would cost them money and 2) All it takes is 1 bank in your city that isn't full of bigots for you to get your loan. There is no need for the government to step in.

[stonez138]

would it be unreasonable to believe white home buyers, on the aggregate, have more experience with the housing market, whether it be through education or a more robust family history of home owners?

Would it be unreasonable to believe that white home buyers have better education and "a more robust family history of home owners" because people of color have been discriminated against in this country for hundreds of years? To the point to where they were forbiden to but homes in certain areas if permited to at all?

[stonez138]

buy*

[Kagatob]

People getting their panties in a bunch over fucking 3%. Give me a break.

[TarukShmaruk]

If it were a white woman, Florida would do some legal acrobatics and this would be a trial of Trayvon Martin in absentia for the assault and attempted rape of Lady Zimmerman. They would then collectively quarter, behead, and burn Martin in effigy.

That's just the way it is.

Actually if this were anything but white v black (which it actually isn't but you can thank the media for this representation - the leftwing media, actually) we would have never even heard about it.

Would it be unreasonable to believe that white home buyers have better education and "a more robust family history of home owners" because people of color have been discriminated against in this country for hundreds of years? To the point to where they were forbiden to but homes in certain areas if permited to at all?

This falls apart when you look at asians and africans who are both immigrants and tend to do much better here than our homegrown black americans.

[Daldolma]

Would it be unreasonable to believe that white home buyers have better education and "a more robust family history of home owners" because people of color have been discriminated against in this country for hundreds of years? To the point to where they were forbiden to but homes in certain areas if permited to at all?

no, that's the whole point. but we can't rewrite history. there's a significant difference between saying minorities are still suffering from the residual effects of historical racism and saying the current state of the real estate market is actively, pervasively, and uniformly racist without any evidence of racist practices on the part of any party with influence over the results of this specific data

[Alawen]

There are multiple studies that show active racism in the real estate industry. There are multiple judgments against prejudicial lenders. My patience, however, is exhausted and I'm going to focus on research and writing for people who, you know, pay me.

[Daldolma]

i can't speak to those studies, i haven't familiarized myself with them. from reading the abstract of the study you originally referenced, no active racism or prejudicial lending was found. what was found was an unexplained 3% premium on transactions in all markets, which did NOT correspond with any prejudice exhibited by the sellers or property markets. lending was controlled so as to eliminate access to loans as a variable entirely.

i find your exasperation unwarranted. you initiated the conversation and emphasized the particular study in question. it's not disproving racism in the real estate market, so there's no reason to grow defensive. it simply isn't proving it. the duke study seems to invite questions as to what hurdles minorities face in achieving an even playing field in the real estate market. but it doesn't prove or even necessarily suggest racism as one of those hurdles

perhaps other studies are more enlightening re: racism

[Splorf22]

Would it be unreasonable to believe that white home buyers have better education and "a more robust family history of home owners" because people of color have been discriminated against in this country for hundreds of years? To the point to where they were forbiden to but homes in certain areas if permited to at all?

I think its an extremely reasonable explanation. That is what Daldoma said earlier: suppose you run a regression and it turns out the "race" variable has a certain predictive power. What does that mean? Well there are three possibilities:

a) certain races are inferior
b) systemic racism
c) your study sucks

In other words you are not measuring something that is correlated with race for whatever reason that is affecting your results. Really it is impossible to prove from the data alone which is the case. You are suggesting 'C', which I think is by far the most likely explanation.

[Samoht]

Would it be unreasonable to believe that white home buyers have better education and "a more robust family history of home owners" because people of color have been discriminated against in this country for hundreds of years? To the point to where they were forbiden to but homes in certain areas if permited to at all?

yes

because everybody is granted the same opportunities at birth

but there's a problem with a few generations with their worship-of-poverty segregating themselves from normal society.

black men making babies and not helping with their rearing as a positive father figure or financial supporter is a statistical truth of our society. it's not racist.

the black men that emphasize the over-sexualization of women, their gang banger images, and their focus on illicit means of obtaining material wealth rather than education and finding real jobs put a stigma on the entire the black population that might not be true for all black people, but is definitely true for the group that actually does it.

still not racisim. because it's simply true.

end the worship-of-poverty... the black people segregating themselves from the rest of the population... and then the inequalities will disappear. because it's not racisim holding them back; it's themselves.

[Samoht]

a) certain races are inferior
b) systemic racism
c) your study sucks

d) worship-of-poverty

[Barkingturtle]

White people must just be a lot better at talking their way out of drug charges.

Blacks so dum lol. Len2hideyostash, imo.

[Malice_Mizer]

yes

because everybody is granted the same opportunities at birth



Hey buddy: do you agree with the notion that, "It's not what you know-- it's who you know"?

Then you automatically admit that America is not some grand, purely meritocratic society that it's fantasized to be. The American Dream is a hoax. If you're going to tell me that some rich dick like Mitt Romney had the exact same chances of success as a child born to a single parent in downtown Detroit, you are seriously delusional.

Equality of opportunity is a lie, and you're too intellectually dishonest to admit it.

[Samoht]

so either you're mitt romney or you're eating out of the trash can with no middle ground? it's honestly irrelevant who you know if you put emphasis on dealing drugs and dropping out of school instead of attending college and having some moderate success in life. let's talk about the 1%-99% of americans and leave the extremes out.

[Splorf22]

The American Dream is a hoax.

No, the phrase was "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". No one was guaranteed anything. Everyone would start from different places. But at least the government/society wouldn't make it impossible for someone to rise in the social/economic order. That's less true nowadays though sadly.

[Samoht]

That's less true nowadays though sadly.

i can agree with this. citizens united gave control to ultra-conglomos that allows them to control the world and only allows members from their inner circle to become filthy rich.

but that alone can't stop everybody. and definitely cannot prevent moderate success.

[Malice_Mizer]

You guys are seriously confused. I love how conservative libertarians always bemoan the government, though their real beef should be directed at multi-national corporations.

In the definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth.

I know your own twisted tea party conception of the American Dream is rife with social Darwinist overtones, but that's simply not the general consensus.

And you can examine the poles of society as representative of the general disorder. If royal lines of inheritance and elite social circles exist, where all real economic, social, and political power are vested, how does every person truly have a shot at "rags-to-riches"?

I'm not arguing for equality of outcomes, I'm arguing for a more complete equality of opportunity. Economic, social, and political opportunity have been concentrated in a very specific sector of the population for a while now. And it's definitely not "the government's" fault. I love how "the government" is such a monolithic thing to you guys. It's cute.

[Samoht]

You guys are seriously confused

i'm honestly confused about the intent of malice_morons most recent post or how it's pertinent to the discussion.

I love how conservative libertarians always bemoan the government, though their real beef should be directed at multi-national corporations.

he includes ad hominem attacks against republicans (i'm a democrat in america but a socialist in reality), so is he just assuming everybody is a republican just because black people are capable of committing crimes?

In the definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth.

he defines american dream, but does not apply it to the situation.

I know your own twisted tea party conception of the American Dream is rife with social Darwinist overtones, but that's simply not the general consensus.

more ad hominem attacks but still no point

And you can examine the poles of society as representative of the general disorder. If royal lines of inheritance and elite social circles exist, where all real economic, social, and political power are vested, how does every person truly have a shot at "rags-to-riches"?

so he's still talking about the 1% and how if you're not a part of it, you must be eating out of trash cans?

I'm not arguing for equality of outcomes, I'm arguing for a more complete equality of opportunity. Economic, social, and political opportunity have been concentrated in a very specific sector of the population for a while now

they'd have to leave the ghetto, first. end the worship-of-poverty, end the inequality.

And it's definitely not "the government's" fault. I love how "the government" is such a monolithic thing to you guys. It's cute.

who the fuck blamed the government? i mentioned citizens united and how they gave the rights of corporations the same rights as individuals, but that's calling out the corporations and not government.

[Malice_Mizer]

I was talking to Sporf.

And you're definitely not a socialist. What's this "stop the worship of poverty" meme you're clinging to? Ignore the extremes of society? What the hell is that? The very fact that extreme poles exist within our society is a blatant display of the inherently unjust nature of our economic order.

For some reason you don't see how all of these issues intersect. Economics, race, politics, history-- nothing is in a vacuum. You're spouting social Darwinist attitudes on virtually every single issue I've seen you comment on.

[Barkingturtle]

For some reason you don't see how all of these issues intersect.

He's a teenage boy in Texas.

[Samoht]

reality check for you malice_moron:

many black people CHOOSE to live they way they do. there's no one to blame but themselves.

you cannot blame the white man for everything. sorry.

[Splorf22]

You guys are seriously confused. I love how conservative libertarians always bemoan the government, though their real beef should be directed at multi-national corporations.

No, the government is the root of the problem because it enables banks and big corporations and other special interest groups Goldman Sachs can't come to my door and demand I give them money or they will shoot me. But they can get their ex CEO to become Secretary of the Treasury and give them trillions of dollars on flimsy pretexts.
Liberals always think government will stick up for the little guy; in reality government will always be owned by the rich dudes.

[Splorf22]

Also I am basically for equality. We have CEOs and shit being paid literally hundreds of millions of dollars and for what? So they can have luxury yachts and burn up our limited petroleum flying around to a different city every night? In the mean time we have billions of people living in abject poverty (note: almost none of them live in the United States). I read stuff like "an aircraft carrier could supply clean water to some huge number of people" and wince.

What you fail to understand, however, is that equality comes at the cost of liberty. Because the world isn't fair. If you are going to try and make it fair, it must come at the cost of taking from Peter to pay Paul. Now in and of itself thats not a knockout, but then we have the second problem: using the government to "fix" equality simply doesn't work. Big government is simply too corrupt and too inefficient.

Also WTF is up with you using some random dude writing a book in 1931 to supersede the Declaration of Independence as the definition of the American Dream? That's just weird.

[Malice_Mizer]

Also WTF is up with you using some random dude writing a book in 1931 to supersede the Declaration of Independence as the definition of the American Dream? That's just weird.

Not even going to touch your talking-points diatribe there. You've subscribed to the, "Big govurnmint sux" ideology and that's your problem. I disdain the immorality of excessive wealth more than I cling to some vague and naive concept of liberty or some political document drafted by slave-holders declaring that all men are equal. But I digress.

The "American Dream" isn't even referenced in the Declaration of Independence. It is the basis for it, sure, but the concept of the American Dream came after, and has changed radically as society changes. For instance, home-ownership became a vital aspect of the "American Dream" for many Americans after WW2 and the GI Bill. Graduating from college is a big part of the "American Dream" for many Americans. These are all new goals of importance and status to American society, developing roughly since the 1950's. The Founder's ideas of what success meant is radically different from our's. In fact, their ideas of what was ethical and moral in the face of unfettered economic pursuit is radically different from where Americans' values are today.

Stop the civic worship already. It's gross. I don't need Thomas Jefferson to tell me what's right or wrong. I don't get my morals from a political document.

[Samoht]

wait. wait. wait.

wait.

aren't you the one who brought "the american dream" into this?

wtf kind of circular logic shit are you trying to pull.

[Daldolma]

Not even going to touch your talking-points diatribe there. You've subscribed to the, "Big govurnmint sux" ideology and that's your problem. I disdain the immorality of excessive wealth more than I cling to some vague and naive concept of liberty or some political document drafted by slave-holders declaring that all men are equal. But I digress.

wow this paragraph is mind blowing in its departure from logic

[Malice_Mizer]

You're seriously dense, Samoht.

"because everybody is granted the same opportunities at birth" - You

That statement brought the American Dream into it. I only called it by its name-- you described its characteristics.

Nothing even remotely circular about that last post. I simply gave you some historical context.

Maybe if I used more pictures it would help.

[Malice_Mizer]

wow this paragraph is mind blowing in its departure from logic

There wasn't even anything "logical" for you to infer, dude. It was a statement of belief. I wasn't trying to prove anything, and I wasn't trying to be logically persuasive in my argumentation.

Do you know what logic is?

[Samoht]

i didn't mention any abstract bullshit idea like the american dream. maybe i was talking about manifest destiny.

so you bring it back to your idea that just because we're not all mitt romney we're eating out of trash cans.

at least we're not all trying to steal jewelry in white neighbourhoods in florida.

that would probably get more of us killed by overzealous, fatass mexicans with jewish names when we try to steal from his block.

[Samoht]

There wasn't even anything "logical" for you to infer, dude. It was a statement of belief.?

malice_moron admits there's no logic in his belief.

nice.

nothing more to see here.

[Daldolma]

wow this paragraph is mind blowing in its departure from logic

There wasn't even anything "logical" for you to infer, dude. It was a statement of belief. I wasn't trying to prove anything, and I wasn't trying to be logically persuasive in my argumentation.

correct

[Malice_Mizer]

i didn't mention any abstract bullshit idea like the american dream. maybe i was talking about manifest destiny.

so you bring it back to your idea that just because we're not all mitt romney we're eating out of trash cans.

at least we're not all trying to steal jewelry in white neighbourhoods in florida.

that would probably get more of us killed by overzealous, fatass mexicans with jewish names when we try to steal from his block.

... Ok.

First of all, Manifest Destiny was the political/religious ideology of the 19th century that justified the continued territorial expansion of the United States toward the Pacific coast, Texas, and American imperialism abroad. The philosophy stated that America is exceptional and that it had a duty to make the world over in its image. Not sure what that has to do with this conversation.

And I'm not even going to touch your multi-pronged problematic racist statement. "White neighborhoods?" Mexicans with Jewish names? Do I also need to give you a history lesson about Judaism and the Jewish diaspora? Do you know why so many American Jews have German surnames? It is a German name, afterall. A true-to-form "Jewish name" would be of Hebrew origin.

I probably shouldn't get you started on some antisemitic tirade, though.

[Samoht]

don't try to confuse him

[Samoht]

First of all, Manifest Destiny was the political/religious ideology of the 19th century that justified the continued territorial expansion of the United States toward the Pacific coast, Texas, and American imperialism abroad. The philosophy stated that America is exceptional and that it had a duty to make the world over in its image. Not sure what that has to do with this conversation.

I know what manifest destiny is. do you know what a hyperbole is, mr. moron?

And I'm not even going to touch your multi-pronged problematic racist statement. "White neighborhoods?" Mexicans with Jewish names? Do I also need to give you a history lesson about Judaism and the Jewish diaspora? Do you know why so many American Jews have German surnames? It is a German name, afterall. A true-to-form "Jewish name" would be of Hebrew origin.

I probably shouldn't get you started on some antisemitic tirade, though.

moron takes bait. stay angry, young moron. buzzwords clearly hit a nerve with you, but remember - they're just words.

[Malice_Mizer]

That's some curveball you got there. Keep it up!

[Splorf22]

You've subscribed to the, "Big govurnmint sux" ideology and that's your problem.

No, I have empirically noticed the vast and numerous failures of big government literally everywhere it has been tried (China's bridges to no where and empty cities, the collapse of the soviet union, Italy/Spain's ongoing economic collapse, US bank bailouts, Nazi Germany, the list just goes on and on). Big government has never worked - probably your best case is Scandinavia and they are a) racially homogenous and b) very small. Unfortunately it seems to be unavoidable given the asymmetry of information between the voter and the bureaucrat.

[Samoht]

come back when you're mature enough to discuss the talking points rather than making baseless ad hominem attacks and when you're willing to admit that your political correctness indoctrination unnecessarily puts women and minorities on a pedestal instead of viewing everybody* equally.

*white men included

[Kagatob]

Thread delivering.

[Massive Marc]

Can we get back on track with Fat Mexicans shooting Black kids.

Thanks,

MM.

[Kagatob]

He wasn't all that fat when it happened.

[Kruel]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey-criminally-120000903.html

I thought this was relevant

[Arclyte]

It will be great when he gets off, the negros riot (in their own neighborhoods), and he becomes a millionaire from sueing media networks for blatantly falsifying reports and leaking his personal information

[Kagatob]

It will be great when he gets off, the negros riot (in their own neighborhoods), and he becomes a millionaire from sueing media networks for blatantly falsifying reports and leaking his personal information

The best part is when the black people go on a rampage you don't even really have to worry about getting shot, they all point their guns sideways.

Thug life is hard when your gun isn't even useful. :(

[TarukShmaruk]

Honestly I don't expect there to be that much rioting. Certainly not like Rodney King.

[Malice_Mizer]

Honestly I don't expect there to be that much rioting. Certainly not like Rodney King.

I bet you were on the wrong side of history on that one, too.

"THEY WERE JUST DOING THEIR JOB..."

[Daldolma]

I bet you were on the wrong side of history on that one, too.

"THEY WERE JUST DOING THEIR JOB..."

you are worse than hbb

enjoy the 100% correct decision to acquit

[Kagatob]

I bet you were on the wrong side of history on that one, too.

"THEY WERE JUST DOING THEIR JOB..."

Let me guess, you only felt that way because he was black. If he was white you wouldn't give a fuck, in fact you'd probably sit back and HBB your way into an "about time" stance.

Don't taze me bro.

[TarukShmaruk]

I bet you were on the wrong side of history on that one, too.

"THEY WERE JUST DOING THEIR JOB..."

I was 9 years old in 1991 so no.

Nice try at shitty trolling since you gave up making shitty arguments that kept getting countered I guess?

[Kagatob]

I was 9 years old in 1991 so no.

I was six, doesn't mean I'm not allowed to read up on those events and have an opinion about them. Cops can be assholes, sometimes they can be worse.

[TarukShmaruk]

I was six, doesn't mean I'm not allowed to read up on those events and have an opinion about them. Cops can be assholes, sometimes they can be worse.

King was a lowlife scumbag who provoked the cops in more ways than one.

That said, police brutality is a real thing and I prefer the cops getting in trouble for abuse of power.

FYI King died, from drowning, with like 4 different drugs (including PCP) in his system.

[Malice_Mizer]

King was a lowlife scumbag who provoked the cops in more ways than one.

That said, police brutality is a real thing and I prefer the cops getting in trouble for abuse of power.

FYI King died, from drowning, with like 4 different drugs (including PCP) in his system.

Do you know what the word "justice" means? It does not mean, "Well, that person deserved what was coming to them." Or, "Well, that person seemed like a bad dude for whatever judgmental reasons I concoct, so karma's a bitch." If you're the victim of police brutality, would it be just for the state to rummage through your personal life, find a ton of ultimately irrelevant information about "bad things" you've done, and use that as a case to say that you got what was coming to you? I understand that they attempt to do this all of the time, but destroying the character of a person who's not on trial does not make sense in the scope of criminal justice.

Now tell me that you throwing in that bit about his death wasn't an underhanded attempt at just that.

It reminds me of the maid with Strauss-Kahn a few years back. Just because she may have been in this country illegally, lied at various times in her life, and/or came here under "dubious circumstances" does not mean that she is not protected by the law. The law is there to protect people, regardless of who you are.

I was three when King happened. It stands as a hallmark of racial tension in this country, and is important regardless of your proximity.

[Daldolma]

and has absolutely nothing in common with the zimmerman case

lot of people trying to make this case something it's not

[Ektar]

hey guys, long time reader first time poster.

wtf is this thread about? haven't opened it yet and it's on like page billion. hbb can you summarize with big words, or kagatob post an anime picture most representative of the main idea? or maybe alawen can use full sentences and correct punctuation in a summary for me

[Samoht]

It reminds me of the maid with Strauss-Kahn a few years back. Just because she may have been in this country illegally, lied at various times in her life, and/or came here under "dubious circumstances" does not mean that she is not protected by the law. The law is there to protect people, regardless of who you are.

do you know what credibility is? maid had none. king had none. trayvon had none.

[Malice_Mizer]

So, the standard of justice is that you have to be the most upstanding member of your community and have a squeaky clean history in order to be protected by the law. You can say, "It's not that polar!" but you're utilizing a selective double-standard that honestly does not make sense.

George Zimmerman has very, very little credibility (several run-ins with the law, assaulting a cop, literally hiding money from the court, restraining order filed against him, etc.), and he's the one actually on trial, bud. Trayvon is not on trial, despite what this thread has been derailed into positing. The victim of a crime is not on trial, and it is not their responsibility to prove anything. It's the burden of the state prosecutors to prove something-- but that doesn't mean that the victims of said crime have to prove they're worthy of justice or something...

[Splorf22]

and has absolutely nothing in common with the zimmerman case

lot of people trying to make this case something it's not

100% agree. So many people in this thread are projecting really hard.

[Aaron]

The victim of a crime is not on trial, and it is not their responsibility to prove anything. It's the burden of the state prosecutors to prove something-- but that doesn't mean that the victims of said crime have to prove they're worthy of justice or something...

Your bias is showing. It's not been shown that Trayvon was the victim of a crime. Referring to him as such denotes the guilt of Zimmerman.

[Aaron]

Also, the last 3 posts are literally all I have read in this thread. I'm sure there are plenty of young lawyers on both sides of the issue speaking very knowledgeably on things they know little about.

[Malice_Mizer]

Your bias is showing. It's not been shown that Trayvon was the victim of a crime. Referring to him as such denotes the guilt of Zimmerman.

Was Rodney King not the victim of a crime? Was the Strauss-Kahn maid not the victim of an alleged crime?

I was speaking generally about the nature of justice. Also, a "victim" only carries the connotation that they were harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action. I'd say that covers Trayvon, who was shot in the chest by George Zimmerman. The question of this trial was whether or not Zimmerman was just in his deadly use of force, not whether or not he killed Trayvon.

[Rhambuk]

The question of this trial was whether or not Zimmerman was just in his deadly use of force, not whether or not he killed Trayvon.

Just or not, definitely not imo, according to styg afaik it you simply have to say you feel your life was in danger and you can kill the other person.

What a great law in this day and age with so many calm level headed people in society...

[Aaron]

"Victim of a crime" does not denote "victim of accident or event."

lulz

[Malice_Mizer]

"Victim of a crime" does not denote "victim of accident or event."

lulz

You apparently ignore everything you can't respond to with a mouth-breathing quip.

You're doing great!

[Malice_Mizer]

"Victim of a crime" does not denote "victim of accident or event."

lulz

Also: the very fact that the state of Florida charged George Zimmerman with a crime surrounding this altercation automatically makes Trayvon a victim of a crime. The state has deemed it a crime. Just because you support the defense doesn't change anything about this case or the parties to it. Trayvon's relationship to this case is that of victim of crime, and George Zimmerman as that of offender.

[Aaron]

Why isn't Zimmerman in jail then? He committed a crime. So obvious.

I already know how this trial will end. Spoiler alert: Zimmerman will not be found guilty of murder (even though he was charged with it, which, by your logic, makes him a murderer).

This case is open and shut. The only reason you're talking about it is because the media told you too.

[Rhambuk]

This case is open and shut

Unfortunately theres no evidence so he'll walk, at least oj had his glove.

Waiting for street justice.

[Aaron]

Let's talk about this case. (http://fingerlakes.ynn.com/content/top_stories/540723/judge-finds-daren-venable-not-guilty/)

Black kid stabbed another black kid to death and was found not guilty because of self-defense.

Meh, why talk about that one though? We can't throw around the race card.

[Daldolma]

Unfortunately theres no evidence so he'll walk, at least oj had his glove.

Waiting for street justice.

gonna be a long wait, zimmerman gonna get rich off lawsuits and move to some white suburb a thousand miles away

[Barkingturtle]

gonna be a long wait, zimmerman gonna get rich off lawsuits and move to some white suburb a thousand miles away

A uniquely American Dream, imo.

[Frieza_Prexus]

You apparently ignore everything you can't respond to with a mouth-breathing quip.

You're doing great!

I think his point was mostly meant to call out the fact that you keep deriding anyone and everyone who, in your mind, is impermissibly bigoted because they've drawn a conclusion that's different from yours. For example, you take severe (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020829&postcount=415) exception to anything you think is a blanket statement that doesn't judge individuals by their own merit.

The dissonance is that you've (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017404&postcount=195) made (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017435&postcount=202) more (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017439&postcount=205) sweeping (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017474&postcount=215) generalities (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017486&postcount=218) and (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1022686&postcount=443) prejudicial (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020657&postcount=405) condemnations (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020186&postcount=388) than anyone else here.

Just know that you're a bleeding hypocrite.
That's just the way it is.

Indeed.

[Malice_Mizer]

I think his point was mostly meant to call out the fact that you keep deriding anyone and everyone who, in your mind, is impermissibly bigoted because they've drawn a conclusion that's different from yours. For example, you take severe (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020829&postcount=415) exception to anything you think is a blanket statement that doesn't judge individuals by their own merit.

The dissonance is that you've (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017404&postcount=195) made (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017435&postcount=202) more (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017439&postcount=205) sweeping (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017474&postcount=215) generalities (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017486&postcount=218) and (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1022686&postcount=443) prejudicial (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020657&postcount=405) condemnations (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020186&postcount=388) than anyone else here.




Indeed.

Painstakingly researched and full of loving passion.

Thank you. I love you, too.

[Samoht]

Trayvon is not on trial

self-defense case. trayvon very much is on trial.

Was the Strauss-Kahn maid not the victim of an alleged crime?

did you not answer your own question when you had to specify it was alleged? did a crime occur or not?

[Kruel]

Trayvon is on trial and he was found guilty. His sentece was already carried out.

[Kagatob]

Trayvon is on trial and he was found guilty. His sentece was already carried out.

I see what you tried to do there.

[Splorf22]

I think his point was mostly meant to call out the fact that you keep deriding anyone and everyone who, in your mind, is impermissibly bigoted because they've drawn a conclusion that's different from yours. For example, you take severe (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020829&postcount=415) exception to anything you think is a blanket statement that doesn't judge individuals by their own merit.

The dissonance is that you've (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017404&postcount=195) made (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017435&postcount=202) more (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017439&postcount=205) sweeping (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017474&postcount=215) generalities (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1017486&postcount=218) and (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1022686&postcount=443) prejudicial (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020657&postcount=405) condemnations (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1020186&postcount=388) than anyone else here.




Indeed.

I'm sure we're about 10 pages away from Malice posting "HAHAHA I TROLL U" or something to that effect. It's become the classic way for people to squirm out from under the weight of their own douchebaggery and stupidity.

P.S. Malice I suggest you read Barkingturtle's posts. He's a straight troll but at least funny most of the time.

[Splorf22]

Also, did anyone else notice that in Aaron's article no one makes any mention of the race of either the stabber or the stabbee? I wonder why all of our race crusaders aren't crusading against racism in the media.

[TarukShmaruk]

Painstakingly researched and full of loving passion.

Thank you. I love you, too.

Aww did you get publicly humiliated and now want to hide behind the 'lol just trollin' defense?

[Samoht]

yeah that's the thing about malice_moron

as you've clearly noticed, he doesn't handle opposition very well. if he cannot bury his poor retort in troll posts or completely made up ad hominem attacks, he just ignores you

[The Situation]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BOsQZa2CcAAk3IC.jpg:large

https://o.twimg.com/2/proxy.jpg?t=HBgpaHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0cGljLmNvbS9zaG93L2 xhcmdlL2QxbHdhaC5qcGcUkAMUrAIAFgASAA&s=1ZR3GevQZX1wQ-7be3Rs8aNAIY1RyISW4WbEs9Yo1Gk

[Alawen]

hey guys, long time reader first time poster.

wtf is this thread about? haven't opened it yet and it's on like page billion. hbb can you summarize with big words, or kagatob post an anime picture most representative of the main idea? or maybe alawen can use full sentences and correct punctuation in a summary for me

Thanks for your post and your loyalty, long-time reader. This thread is ostensibly about Florida v. Zimmerman, a second-degree murder trial. Some analysis was offered early in the thread to clarify the burden of proof in this case and the strategy being employed by Zimmerman's defense. That was followed by critique of the witnesses for the prosecution, which have been collectively deemed somewhat shaky.

That intelligent discussion devolved, unfortunately, into accusations and denials of racism, followed by arguments over what words mean, and, ultimately, into the typical RnF personal attacks and generic insults. As always, the people who want to argue about the meanings of words tend to be careless with their own word selection. So far, no one has invoked Hitler.

The loudest voices seem to think that Zimmerman should be legally acquitted and that he has on solid moral and ethical grounds as well; some go so far as to hope that he gets rich from publishing and defamation lawsuits. Personally, I've been too busy to follow the case, so I'm abstaining from the conversation.

Hope this helps!

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
natural human tendency to prefer people like them

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
What exactly are those reasons?

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
multiculturalists

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
multiculturalists made a bad assumption (blacks and whites have identical genes environments and culture on average)

[Hasbinbad]

Things misogynists say:
feminists have been whining for years

[Hasbinbad]

Things misogynists say:
It's obviously bullshit

[Hasbinbad]

Things idiots say:
if that were true, the smart play would be to found a company that employs only women, pay them 0.85 on the dollar, and be hugely profitable.

[Hasbinbad]

Things bigots say:
discrimination is a relatively small problem

[Hasbinbad]

Which is why I hate government in general and ours in particular.
OK now that we can agree on.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
I'm curious about what those reasons could be in this day and age.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
Racism, sexism, whateverism.


All bullshit, of course 2 people who look,act, speak, develop (mentally and physically) are going to hate eachother when they're forced to live, work, and go to school together.

[Barkingturtle]

Moo.

[Hasbinbad]

Things funny people say:
Genetic tendency toward bling, imo.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say, given that the context of the statement is modern era USA:
basically the issue is that you're seeing systemic inequality and calling it systemic racism without proving the latter. inequality isn't inherently racist.

[Hasbinbad]

Would you still hate a lady Zimmerman?
If lady zimmerman, armed with a loaded gun, followed a 3.7gpa honors student walking home at night, shot him, yes.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
yes

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
everybody is granted the same opportunities at birth

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
worship-of-poverty

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
segregating themselves

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
normal society

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
their worship-of-poverty segregating themselves from normal society.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
black men

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
the black men

[Hasbinbad]

The last two were because of the context, not because of the words. Of course it is not racist to say "black men," etc., but it certainly is racist to blame black men for the problems of men. As if deadbeat dads and oversexualization of women were uniquely black problems. Give me a fucking break, racist.

[Hasbinbad]

Things racists say:
it's not racisim holding them back; it's themselves.

[Hasbinbad]

No, the phrase was "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
Actually, it was "life, liberty, and the pursuit of property."

It got changed when the powerful realized property was finite, and they didn't want just anyone owning it.

Idiot.

[Hasbinbad]

Things people without critical thinking skills say:
you cannot blame the white man for everything. sorry.
"Can" is a question of ability.

One is perfectly able to blame anyone for anything they so desire.

[Hasbinbad]

OK I'm caught up now.

[Splorf22]

things idiots say: 50 consecutive posts in one thread with 0 content

[Kagatob]

things idiots say: 50 consecutive posts in one thread with 0 content

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/d/dc/Combo-breaker-2.jpg

[Malice_Mizer]

want to hide behind the 'lol just trollin' defense?

50% of what I've said have been genuine rebuttals, the other 50% is frustrated outrage at this particular thread and the nature of racism in America today. I'm happily called out about flames, but it doesn't make the content of this thread any less intolerable, nor you any less flaming.



Also: Hitler.

[Kagatob]

It would be an interesting experiment to give African Americans their own communities and see if things improve or remain stagnant.

[Malice_Mizer]

It would be an interesting experiment to give African Americans their own communities and see if things improve or remain stagnant.

It's called The Republic of Liberia.

[Hasbinbad]

things idiots say: 50 consecutive posts in one thread with 0 content

http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/d/dc/Combo-breaker-2.jpg
omg you are like the wonder twins