I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
Lady T, thanks for sharing. I cannot even begin to imagine. It breaks my heart to think that someday people might be looking at little Amir the same way GZ looked at TM.
What TM did or did not do in the past is irrelevant, and the fact that it's being brought up here as some roundabout victim blaming is f'ucking infuriating.Unbelievable folks. Seriously.And BBJ, being called "stuck up" is a far cry from the Nword. And frankly, I doubt you daily feared for your life because someone said your daddy bought you a purse. Every 17 year old AA man in this country is right to be terrified for their safety right now.nbsp;It's not even apples and oranges. It's apples and carburetors.nbsp; Not even in the same category.
:slow clap:
Believe it or not I completely agree with you on this issue.
My eyeballs are bulging out of my head right now. I'm wondering how many more signs of the apocalypse I'm going to see today.
Lady T, thanks for sharing. I cannot even begin to imagine. It breaks my heart to think that someday people might be looking at little Amir the same way GZ looked at TM.nbsp;
It's sadly the reality for all my kids. Nene will be seen as a future teen mother. She will be seen as loose because she's a cheerleader. She's 6 and I have to deal with making sure no old men get sweet on her. I have to worry about keeping her innocence. For Amir I have make sure he's the model citizen. And even still one skip up. One too much fun in his car. He could get attested and be calling nee from jail because he was driving too slow, or fat or suspicious. Or his music is to loud.
I've seen lots of parents like the women in this bosses who are like well hr followed the law. The boy lived in this neighborhood so he deserved it. He must have done something to provoke it. I just pray none of your child see what mine will.
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
What TM did or did not do in the past is irrelevant, and the fact that it's being brought up here as some roundabout victim blaming is f'ucking infuriating.Unbelievable folks. Seriously.And BBJ, being called "stuck up" is a far cry from the Nword. And frankly, I doubt you daily feared for your life because someone said your daddy bought you a purse. Every 17 year old AA man in this country is right to be terrified for their safety right now.nbsp;It's not even apples and oranges. It's apples and carburetors.nbsp; Not even in the same category.
:slow clap: Believe it or not I completely agree with you on this issue.
My eyeballs are bulging out of my head right now. I'm wondering how many more signs of the apocalypse I'm going to see today.
Somewhere SCOUT has fallen over . . . somebody may need to check on her
Race/Non-race/Legal - We can all agree what happened was awful. I am more irritated by the lack of anything to currently change what is going on within the US. Where I live it doesn't matter if you have media or not . . . there are racist people and it is sad to me. I know my child will be exposed to these people and I pray and hope that she is strong enough to stand up for what is right and understand that racism is not acceptable.
Lady T - I had no idea nappy could be used in a derogatory way, I am glad you said that becuase I truly didn't know. I don't think I have ever heard it expressed in a derogatory way either but I am still glad you said something.
I think Florida needs new lawmakers and prosecutors. I don't understand how both Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman can get away with murdering children. It disgusts me.
EXACTLY!!! The justice system is the problem because that law is straight up fuuucked.
This is what I agree with. I don't believe that justice was served, and I think that Zimmerman should have been charged. However, the laws in Florida are written such that what Zimmerman did was legal, which is really really terrible.
BFP #1 9/2010 (lost our baby at 21 weeks)
BFP #2 8/2011 (ectopic pregnancy)
BFP #3 10/2011 (chemical pregnancy)
BFP #4 12/2011 (Abigail born 8/15/12)
BFP #5 5/2013 (Griffin born 1/23/14 with heart defects, now repaired!)
I was recently on a jury and it was hard.... like, hard hard. You can't presume to know what any of those jurors were thinking or how difficult the decision they made was. I respect the decisions of jurors because of my experience now.
I was on a criminal trial and we convicted the man of two crimes and he will be in prison for quite some time. There were arguements, tears and laughter shared in the deliberation room. But honestly, it was the hardest thing I have ever done and I have vowed to not judge a jury's decision. Honestly, you weren't there and you don't know what it took to get them to that decision. AND you probably would have come to the same decision had you been there, because that's the way it's meant to work.
I can completely respect this. However, I think most people are appalled and angry not so much at the jury, but rather at the laws that made it very difficult for GZ to be convicted of what clearly should be a crime, and at the cultural and institutional racism that continues to allow these tragedies to happen. Right now the jury and their decision are taking the brunt of the anger, but it goes much, much deeper than that.
This is my thought too. I agree it would be very hard given the law to convict someone but the mere fact that it happened is a racial issue. As is the way the case was presented. The way GZ said "They always get away" says to me that he either makes a habit of chasing kids down or that black kids always evade the law. He can rot for all I care and I'm sad he won't get to learn all about what happens to racial profilers in prison. What an absolute POS. that's all he is and he gets to live freely while a teenager died for acting like a teenager. I shudder to think how awful it would be for have to add worry about Howell getting taken out simply for his skin color.
"Right, and that is what makes this so much worse, that we can get a
verdict like this not because the system is broken down, but because the I
system worked exactly as it's designed. nbsp;How does 2013 Florida have a law that seems cut and pasted from 1881 Tombstone?
Because let's be clear here. nbsp;According to current Florida law, you
can get a gun, follow an unarmed minor, call the police, have them
explicitly tell you to stop following them, then choose to ignore that,
keep following the minor, get into a confrontation with him, and if at
any point during that process you get scared, you can shoot the minor to
death, and the state of Florida will say, "Well, look, you did what you
could."
John Oliver
As long as your the right color that is. Marissa Alexander truly feared for her life and now will never see her kids grow up.
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
Confession: I woke up thinking today was a different day and wondered why the UO thread was so big for a Wednesday.
I read through the whole thread in about an hour. I'm not going to say who I agree or disagree with. I feel the topic has been beaten to death.
My UO: I can't stand the use of "andplusalso." Why not use something like "additionally" to prove your point of there being something to add on top of what you were saying? To me it's almost as annoying as double negatives and "could have cared less."
Why I allow myself to get so worked up is beyond me. I guess I just can't shake the idea that a mother lost her son just for being a kid. It makes me sick to think that could be one of our kids one day. I fully expect Howell to get into trouble. And I expect him to learn from the consequences, but those consequences shouldn't be death. Something is severely wrong with a justice system where that can happen and no one has to pay.
My UO: I can't stand the use of "andplusalso." Why not use something like "additionally" to prove your point of there being something to add on top of what you were saying? To me it's almost as annoying as double negatives and "could have cared less."
haha, that was me. I personally use all Internet speak [zomg, andplusalso, etc] ironically, at least in my mind. Whenever I use these words I do it in a sarcastic tone with a smirk on my face, I'm not using them in earnest. I don't actually think they are legitimate words, but I enjoy them.
FTR, I majored in English in university. I just think we can have fun with language and have gotten over the "zomg, technology is ruining language" deal. See what I did there?;] Then again, I don't spend a lot of time with teenagers, or I might rethink the bit about technology killing language.
There are others I've seen use it too :] I'm guilty of using Internet speak too but for some reason that one just really bothers me. It kinda popped up outta nowhere.
I was recently on a jury and it was hard.... like, hard hard. You can't presume to know what any of those jurors were thinking or how difficult the decision they made was. I respect the decisions of jurors because of my experience now.
I was on a criminal trial and we convicted the man of two crimes and he will be in prison for quite some time. There were arguements, tears and laughter shared in the deliberation room. But honestly, it was the hardest thing I have ever done and I have vowed to not judge a jury's decision. Honestly, you weren't there and you don't know what it took to get them to that decision. AND you probably would have come to the same decision had you been there, because that's the way it's meant to work.
Newbie here chiming in....within the last year, I was also in a criminal jury and I was convinced the guy was guilty. I was one of the two that did. Everyone else didn't. They were of the mind set that we didn't have the the kid's DNA on xxxx so we couldn't say for sure it was him. During the entire process, we heard at least a dozen times that we had to be absolutely positive this guy did it from the judge and the defendant's lawyer.
Yet there was VIDEO of the guy and they had pictures (from FB) they had used back when the crime was committed to compare to the video. However, when the guy showed up to court he changed his appearance - ie no longer wearing glasses and lost all of his muscle weight. There were 2 eye witnesses who pointed their finger at this guy in (1) the 6 person lineup poster they made and (2) in open court.
The rest of jury pretty much badgered the other member and myself with 'how could we convict when we really couldn't tell it was the same guy' and 'the finger pointing in court can't be considered valid because the crime happened x years ago' and 'we can't say 100% that it was this guy because we don't have the DNA from xxxx.'
It was the worst feeling to go against everything I felt but I did. The other member ended up going with the rest as well and this guy walked away without having to pay for his actions. It was upsetting and every so often I feel like I made the wrong decision but I was up against 10 other people and they were pretty aggressive with 'if this was my son, I would want to make sure he got the fairest of trials and this evidence isn't enough to convict my kid'. I'm a believer in God and try to trust that if this kid really did it (which I really believe he did) then he will have to answer for it in the next life. Not the best decision I've ever made and I'm sure I'll get flamed for not speaking out more but trust me, I did. We deliberated for a long time before their opinions started to sway me.
As for the GZ/TM case, It's hard to know what happened during the trial for the jury members. Never mind with what they were presented with, but it's also hard when you are sitting in a room with 11 other people's opinions. And yes I say opinions because some people get caught up in theirs and turn them into the reason why they feel one or another, regardless of the 'real' facts.
The families and jurors are never going to be the same after this case.
I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
wait.... whut? Are you ME?
Guys, Jodegaard and me are the same person.
I didn't have tv until I was seven either, when my grandpa died and we moved into their house to care for my disabled grandma.
I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
wait.... whut? Are you ME?
Guys, Jodegaard and me are the same person.
I didn't have tv until I was seven either, when my grandpa died and we moved into their house to care for my disabled grandma.
And people make fun of me for the no screen time for Howell. If you two are what happens from limiting screen time, I am definitely making the right choice.
I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
wait.... whut? Are you ME?
Guys, Jodegaard and me are the same person.
I didn't have tv until I was seven either, when my grandpa died and we moved into their house to care for my disabled grandma.
I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
wait.... whut? Are you ME?
Guys, Jodegaard and me are the same person.
I didn't have tv until I was seven either, when my grandpa died and we moved into their house to care for my disabled grandma.
And people make fun of me for the no screen time for Howell. If you two are what happens from limiting screen time, I am definitely making the right choice.
Dawwww, thanks! ::blushes::
I am firmly cemented in the no screen time camp (he still sees my phone and the computer at times). Make fun, people!
Trayvon Martin wasn't an angel who was shot based on skin color alone. Zimmerman didn't set out to kill him; the situatiom escalated. BOTH parties could have also handled the situation differently. I'm not saying Trayvon deserved to be shot. He didn't. But, there are two sides and none of us were there to know the entire story in it's entirety. The jury made their decision based on the evidence presented.
I'm only to page 2 of this thread so I'm not sure what else has been said on this subject... but I agree with you, Cheerilee.
I watched THIS video the other day. It swayed to GZ's defense a bit too much for my liking (I am in NO WAY defending his actions- I think the guy is an ** to put it lightly), but it gave me a bit more perspective on the case.
Exactly. That video is information everyone should watch before they do a quick google search, come into this thread with solely basic facts, and accuse anyone that doesn't agree as being an "idiot" or whatever was said a few pages back.
The law may "suck," but it's the law. The jury had no choice but to follow it. I highly doubt we want juries around the USA picking and choosing what laws to follow just because some of them "suck."
Trayvon Martin wasn't an angel who was shot based on skin color alone. Zimmerman didn't set out to kill him; the situatiom escalated. BOTH parties could have also handled the situation differently. I'm not saying Trayvon deserved to be shot. He didn't. But, there are two sides and none of us were there to know the entire story in it's entirety. The jury made their decision based on the evidence presented.
I'm only to page 2 of this thread so I'm not sure what else has been said on this subject... but I agree with you, Cheerilee.
I watched THIS video the other day. It swayed to GZ's defense a bit too much for my liking (I am in NO WAY defending his actions- I think the guy is an ** to put it lightly), but it gave me a bit more perspective on the case.
Exactly. That video is information everyone should watch before they do a quick google search, come into this thread with solely basic facts, and accuse anyone that doesn't agree as being an "idiot" or whatever was said a few pages back.
The law may "suck," but it's the law. The jury had no choice but to follow it. I highly doubt we want juries around the USA picking and choosing what laws to follow just because some of them "suck."
Who, exactly, in this thread, is saying the jury made the wrong decision? You're arguing against a straw man, what people are actually saying here is that the situation was caused by a sh!tbag trying to be Billy Badass, and that it sucks that there's no legal recourse for his actions. And I don't see anyone calling anyone an idiot.
Trayvon Martin wasn't an angel who was shot based on skin color alone. Zimmerman didn't set out to kill him; the situatiom escalated. BOTH parties could have also handled the situation differently. I'm not saying Trayvon deserved to be shot. He didn't. But, there are two sides and none of us were there to know the entire story in it's entirety. The jury made their decision based on the evidence presented.
I'm only to page 2 of this thread so I'm not sure what else has been said on this subject... but I agree with you, Cheerilee.
I watched THIS video the other day. It swayed to GZ's defense WAYYYY too much for my liking (I am in NO WAY defending his actions- I think the guy is an ** to put it lightly), but it gave me a bit more perspective on the case (and I only watched to 23:00)
Except one of the parties was a 17 year old kid and the other was an adult. Who should have walked away, let alone never walked up in the first place.
And again, TM was walking through a neighborhood. That's all he was doing before Zimmerman confronted him.
If I'm just walking down the street and some guy, who has been following me, gets out and asks me what I'm doing, the hell I owe him anything more than a middle finger and a mind your own business.
TM was breaking no laws. Zimmerman is 100 at fault for CREATING the situation in the first place.
If you listen to the 911 call, TM was walking around, circling houses, staring at houses, then looked at GZ, started coming towards GZ with his hand in his pocket, GZ sounds nervous, says that TM is still coming towards him, then TM turns around and starts running towards the other entrance (probably because he saw GZ on the phone, probably assuming it was the police). It was then that GZ got out of the car.
And if you don't think that it's possible for whites to be oppressed or ostracized in their community by minorities, then you're just as blind.
I am the idiot offender. I think I referred to my Facebook friends who defended Zimmerman as idiots and it was inferred to include BBJ. I can see why it would be. I did, however, refer to comments by BBJ and Cheerilee as asinine, which I stand behind.
The fact that someone can CREATE the situation that leads to their "fearing for their lives" and then face zero legal repercussions for acting with deadly force in response to a crisis of their own making is horrifying.
It's flat out horrifying.
All you Zimmerman apologists, what's your excuse for his myriad actions leading up to the shooting? What possible justification do you have for what he did to incite this tragedy in the first place?
What sort of law could punish someone for being an idiot? Serious question, not trying to be snarky.
The fact that someone can CREATE the situation that leads to their "fearing for their lives" and then face zero legal repercussions for acting with deadly force in response to a crisis of their own making is horrifying.
It's flat out horrifying.
All you Zimmerman apologists, what's your excuse for his myriad actions leading up to the shooting? What possible justification do you have for what he did to incite this tragedy in the first place?
What sort of law could punish someone for being an idiot? Serious question, not trying to be snarky.
Well, harassment, assault and manslaughter in this case. I feel if you create a situation that then makes it arguably necessary to exert deadly force to "defend yourself," it's manslaughter.
And if TM was guilty of assault as well, okay. He should have been arrested and given a trial as well, and faced the consequences for that crime. But he didn't get that chance.
Well said and I agree. I don't think many here would disagree, even those you called "Zimmerman apologists".
I went back just to re-read BBJ's original post just to make sure I wasn't missing something. She said solely she was happy with the verdict. To me that was saying she was glad the jurors upheld the actual law that was in the books, based on what they saw. I can get on board with that idea. All those that jumped on it seem to have shown discomfort with the actual law as it is written. I can get on board with that too, but jumping on her because she is glad the law as written was upheld is silly.
I am sorry but when juries start convicting people not based on the law is when I will get uncomfortable, because that would be them taking the law into their own hands. Wanting to see change in the law is one thing, but saying GZ should have been convicted *of murder* based on the laws in place and the evidence presented is wrong. I think it was a situation that could have been avoided, but as the law is written the conviction was as accurate as the jurors could be based on the evidence.
And Becc77, sorry but saying someone is assinine for saying that the law, as it is written was upheld is assinine in itself.
I went back just to reread BBJ's original post just to make sure I wasn't missing something. She said solely she was happy with the verdict. To me that was saying she was glad the jurors upheld the actual law that was in the books, based on what they saw. I can get on board with that idea. All those that jumped on it seem to have shown discomfort with the actual law as it is written. I can get on board with that too, but jumping on her because she is glad the law as written was upheld is silly.I am sorry but when juries start convicting people not based on the law is when I will get uncomfortable, because that would be them taking the law into their own hands. Wanting to see change in the law is one thing, but saying GZ should have been convicted of murder based on the laws in place and the evidence presented is wrong. I think it was a situation that could have been avoided, but as the law is written the conviction was as accurate as the jurors could be based on the evidence.And Becc77, sorry but saying someone is assinine for saying that the law, as it is written was upheld is assinine in itself.nbsp;ETA: wordsnbsp;
Well said and what I was not as eloquently getting at.
"To be able to practice five things everywhere under heaven constitutes perfect virtue...gravity, generosity of soul, sincerity, earnestness, and kindness."
I went back just to reread BBJ's original post just to make sure I wasn't missing something. She said solely she was happy with the verdict. To me that was saying she was glad the jurors upheld the actual law that was in the books, based on what they saw. I can get on board with that idea. All those that jumped on it seem to have shown discomfort with the actual law as it is written. I can get on board with that too, but jumping on her because she is glad the law as written was upheld is silly.I am sorry but when juries start convicting people not based on the law is when I will get uncomfortable, because that would be them taking the law into their own hands. Wanting to see change in the law is one thing, but saying GZ should have been convicted of murder based on the laws in place and the evidence presented is wrong. I think it was a situation that could have been avoided, but as the law is written the conviction was as accurate as the jurors could be based on the evidence.And Becc77, sorry but saying someone is assinine for saying that the law, as it is written was upheld is assinine in itself.nbsp;ETA: wordsnbsp;
Well said and what I was not as eloquently getting at.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
I went back just to reread BBJ's original post just to make sure I wasn't missing something. She said solely she was happy with the verdict. To me that was saying she was glad the jurors upheld the actual law that was in the books, based on what they saw. I can get on board with that idea. All those that jumped on it seem to have shown discomfort with the actual law as it is written. I can get on board with that too, but jumping on her because she is glad the law as written was upheld is silly.I am sorry but when juries start convicting people not based on the law is when I will get uncomfortable, because that would be them taking the law into their own hands. Wanting to see change in the law is one thing, but saying GZ should have been convicted of murder based on the laws in place and the evidence presented is wrong. I think it was a situation that could have been avoided, but as the law is written the conviction was as accurate as the jurors could be based on the evidence.And Becc77, sorry but saying someone is assinine for saying that the law, as it is written was upheld is assinine in itself.nbsp;ETA: wordsnbsp;
Well said and what I was not as eloquently getting at.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
But, Aggie. IT'S THE LAW, ZOMG, OK. THE LAW WAS UPHELD!!!1111!
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
The discussion has morphed. Semantics and all that jazz.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
But, Aggie. IT'S THE LAW, ZOMG, OK. THE LAW WAS UPHELD!!!1111!
Yeah, I don't see it that way because if it was just about "whites have it as hard as minorities" the posts wouldn't just keep coming back to the case. The posts would have tangented of into a different topic of discussion that didn't include the case. And yes poppy, you are so cool, because you can be sarcastic on the bump.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
The discussion has morphed. Semantics and all that jazz.
You're spot on. Blerg, I quit. I'm going to go have another coffee or something.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
This is exactly how I read the thread. The race piece plays a part in 'if TM was white, the verdict would have been different.'
"To be able to practice five things everywhere under heaven constitutes perfect virtue...gravity, generosity of soul, sincerity, earnestness, and kindness."
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
But, Aggie. IT'S THE LAW, ZOMG, OK. THE LAW WAS UPHELD!!!1111!
Yeah, I don't see it that way because if it was just about "whites have it as hard as minorities" the posts wouldn't just keep coming back to the case. The posts would have tangented of into a different topic of discussion that didn't include the case. And yes poppy, you are so cool, because you can be sarcastic on the bump.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
This is exactly how I read the thread. The race piece plays a part in 'if TM was white, the verdict would have been different.'
I am more from the camp that if he were white, he would still be alive.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
The discussion has morphed. Semantics and all that jazz.
You're spot on. Blerg, I quit. I'm going to go have another coffee or something.
The interwebz is hard work, dude.
It doesn't actually seem like the "sides" to this discussion disagree all that much. But it's so easy to have your words misconstrued over an internet forum.
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
This is exactly how I read the thread. The race piece plays a part in 'if TM was white, the verdict would have been different.'
I am more from the camp that if he were white, he would still be alive.
This is what I read, too. Not that the verdict would change, but that trayvon never would have been stalked in the first place.
I like a lot of the people I'm disagreeing with here, I just don't like their opinions.
White people can most definitely be discriminated against and if that hasn't been your experience, then lucky you.
But don't come on here and tell me it doesn't happen when you've never been cornered into a hallway and had the shitt beat out of you by 4 girls just because you were a "rich, white girl from the 'burbs."
Oh and I should mention that out of the 5 people involved in that fight, I was the only one that was suspended...for 3 days.
Also, that was my second day of school, I was an all A student, and had never been in trouble in my life beforehand.
So, ya know, I guess because I'm white I wasn't racially profiled, discriminated against, then bullied in a severe fashion....I was just in the wrong hallway at the wrong time.
ETA: I should mention that all girls involved, as well as both principals, and the school counselor were AA, if that matters.
Re: UO!!
I grew up not watching TV and MAYBE watching a movie once a week. We didn't even have a TV until I was seven.
I grew up in a town that is about 70-80% Mexican families. I didn't even know about stereotypes until I moved away at 18 and started watching TV on a regular basis.
UO: racism, racial profiling, stereotypes, etc. are all perpetuated by the media. It's not the only place the views come from, but I do believe it's the main source. Movies, TV, music, the news.....it's in there constantly.
I will be raising my kids in a similar manner. They will learn about people with their own eyes.
Lol
It's sadly the reality for all my kids. Nene will be seen as a future teen mother. She will be seen as loose because she's a cheerleader. She's 6 and I have to deal with making sure no old men get sweet on her. I have to worry about keeping her innocence. For Amir I have make sure he's the model citizen. And even still one skip up. One too much fun in his car. He could get attested and be calling nee from jail because he was driving too slow, or fat or suspicious. Or his music is to loud.
I've seen lots of parents like the women in this bosses who are like well hr followed the law. The boy lived in this neighborhood so he deserved it. He must have done something to provoke it. I just pray none of your child see what mine will.
Race/Non-race/Legal - We can all agree what happened was awful. I am more irritated by the lack of anything to currently change what is going on within the US. Where I live it doesn't matter if you have media or not . . . there are racist people and it is sad to me. I know my child will be exposed to these people and I pray and hope that she is strong enough to stand up for what is right and understand that racism is not acceptable.
Lady T - I had no idea nappy could be used in a derogatory way, I am glad you said that becuase I truly didn't know. I don't think I have ever heard it expressed in a derogatory way either but I am still glad you said something.
This is what I agree with. I don't believe that justice was served, and I think that Zimmerman should have been charged. However, the laws in Florida are written such that what Zimmerman did was legal, which is really really terrible.
This is my thought too. I agree it would be very hard given the law to convict someone but the mere fact that it happened is a racial issue. As is the way the case was presented. The way GZ said "They always get away" says to me that he either makes a habit of chasing kids down or that black kids always evade the law. He can rot for all I care and I'm sad he won't get to learn all about what happens to racial profilers in prison. What an absolute POS. that's all he is and he gets to live freely while a teenager died for acting like a teenager. I shudder to think how awful it would be for have to add worry about Howell getting taken out simply for his skin color.
As long as your the right color that is. Marissa Alexander truly feared for her life and now will never see her kids grow up.
I read through the whole thread in about an hour. I'm not going to say who I agree or disagree with. I feel the topic has been beaten to death.
My UO: I can't stand the use of "andplusalso." Why not use something like "additionally" to prove your point of there being something to add on top of what you were saying? To me it's almost as annoying as double negatives and "could have cared less."
Why I allow myself to get so worked up is beyond me. I guess I just can't shake the idea that a mother lost her son just for being a kid. It makes me sick to think that could be one of our kids one day. I fully expect Howell to get into trouble. And I expect him to learn from the consequences, but those consequences shouldn't be death. Something is severely wrong with a justice system where that can happen and no one has to pay.
There are others I've seen use it too :] I'm guilty of using Internet speak too but for some reason that one just really bothers me. It kinda popped up outta nowhere.
Newbie here chiming in....within the last year, I was also in a criminal jury and I was convinced the guy was guilty. I was one of the two that did. Everyone else didn't. They were of the mind set that we didn't have the the kid's DNA on xxxx so we couldn't say for sure it was him. During the entire process, we heard at least a dozen times that we had to be absolutely positive this guy did it from the judge and the defendant's lawyer.
Yet there was VIDEO of the guy and they had pictures (from FB) they had used back when the crime was committed to compare to the video. However, when the guy showed up to court he changed his appearance - ie no longer wearing glasses and lost all of his muscle weight. There were 2 eye witnesses who pointed their finger at this guy in (1) the 6 person lineup poster they made and (2) in open court.
The rest of jury pretty much badgered the other member and myself with 'how could we convict when we really couldn't tell it was the same guy' and 'the finger pointing in court can't be considered valid because the crime happened x years ago' and 'we can't say 100% that it was this guy because we don't have the DNA from xxxx.'
It was the worst feeling to go against everything I felt but I did. The other member ended up going with the rest as well and this guy walked away without having to pay for his actions. It was upsetting and every so often I feel like I made the wrong decision but I was up against 10 other people and they were pretty aggressive with 'if this was my son, I would want to make sure he got the fairest of trials and this evidence isn't enough to convict my kid'. I'm a believer in God and try to trust that if this kid really did it (which I really believe he did) then he will have to answer for it in the next life. Not the best decision I've ever made and I'm sure I'll get flamed for not speaking out more but trust me, I did. We deliberated for a long time before their opinions started to sway me.
As for the GZ/TM case, It's hard to know what happened during the trial for the jury members. Never mind with what they were presented with, but it's also hard when you are sitting in a room with 11 other people's opinions. And yes I say opinions because some people get caught up in theirs and turn them into the reason why they feel one or another, regardless of the 'real' facts.
The families and jurors are never going to be the same after this case.
I hate Singamajigs. They are ridiculously ugly toys and Mina is terrified of the one she has.
Yes.and Yes!!!
Guys, Jodegaard and me are the same person.
I didn't have tv until I was seven either, when my grandpa died and we moved into their house to care for my disabled grandma.
And people make fun of me for the no screen time for Howell. If you two are what happens from limiting screen time, I am definitely making the right choice.
Dude. WE'RE TWINS!
You're a pretty cool person to be twins with!
Dawwww, thanks! ::blushes::
I am firmly cemented in the no screen time camp (he still sees my phone and the computer at times). Make fun, people!
Exactly. That video is information everyone should watch before they do a quick google search, come into this thread with solely basic facts, and accuse anyone that doesn't agree as being an "idiot" or whatever was said a few pages back.
The law may "suck," but it's the law. The jury had no choice but to follow it. I highly doubt we want juries around the USA picking and choosing what laws to follow just because some of them "suck."
SCANDAL!
Who, exactly, in this thread, is saying the jury made the wrong decision? You're arguing against a straw man, what people are actually saying here is that the situation was caused by a sh!tbag trying to be Billy Badass, and that it sucks that there's no legal recourse for his actions. And I don't see anyone calling anyone an idiot.
If you listen to the 911 call, TM was walking around, circling houses, staring at houses, then looked at GZ, started coming towards GZ with his hand in his pocket, GZ sounds nervous, says that TM is still coming towards him, then TM turns around and starts running towards the other entrance (probably because he saw GZ on the phone, probably assuming it was the police). It was then that GZ got out of the car.
And if you don't think that it's possible for whites to be oppressed or ostracized in their community by minorities, then you're just as blind.
SCANDAL!
What sort of law could punish someone for being an idiot? Serious question, not trying to be snarky.
Well said and I agree. I don't think many here would disagree, even those you called "Zimmerman apologists".
I went back just to re-read BBJ's original post just to make sure I wasn't missing something. She said solely she was happy with the verdict. To me that was saying she was glad the jurors upheld the actual law that was in the books, based on what they saw. I can get on board with that idea. All those that jumped on it seem to have shown discomfort with the actual law as it is written. I can get on board with that too, but jumping on her because she is glad the law as written was upheld is silly.
I am sorry but when juries start convicting people not based on the law is when I will get uncomfortable, because that would be them taking the law into their own hands. Wanting to see change in the law is one thing, but saying GZ should have been convicted *of murder* based on the laws in place and the evidence presented is wrong. I think it was a situation that could have been avoided, but as the law is written the conviction was as accurate as the jurors could be based on the evidence.
And Becc77, sorry but saying someone is assinine for saying that the law, as it is written was upheld is assinine in itself.
ETA: *words*
Well said and what I was not as eloquently getting at.
Oh my god.
I really think I hate, like, 40% of the people on this board.*
(Exaggeration. I'm just aghast at this thread.)
Would you like to join me in ramming our heads into the wall?
Holy hell, it's like in taking crazy pills. WHO is saying that he should have magically been convicted of murder? Nobody is arguing that! This turned into a shitstorm because people started saying that white people have it just as bad as minorities, etc, NOT because anyone thinks the jury fcked up the verdict!
The discussion has morphed. Semantics and all that jazz.
Yeah, I don't see it that way because if it was just about "whites have it as hard as minorities" the posts wouldn't just keep coming back to the case. The posts would have tangented of into a different topic of discussion that didn't include the case. And yes poppy, you are so cool, because you can be sarcastic on the bump.
You're spot on. Blerg, I quit. I'm going to go have another coffee or something.
This is exactly how I read the thread. The race piece plays a part in 'if TM was white, the verdict would have been different.'
Ok, weirdo. Thanks.
I am more from the camp that if he were white, he would still be alive.
The interwebz is hard work, dude.
It doesn't actually seem like the "sides" to this discussion disagree all that much. But it's so easy to have your words misconstrued over an internet forum.
This is what I read, too. Not that the verdict would change, but that trayvon never would have been stalked in the first place.
I like a lot of the people I'm disagreeing with here, I just don't like their opinions.
I'm out.
White people can most definitely be discriminated against and if that hasn't been your experience, then lucky you.
But don't come on here and tell me it doesn't happen when you've never been cornered into a hallway and had the shitt beat out of you by 4 girls just because you were a "rich, white girl from the 'burbs."
Oh and I should mention that out of the 5 people involved in that fight, I was the only one that was suspended...for 3 days.
Also, that was my second day of school, I was an all A student, and had never been in trouble in my life beforehand.
So, ya know, I guess because I'm white I wasn't racially profiled, discriminated against, then bullied in a severe fashion....I was just in the wrong hallway at the wrong time.
ETA: I should mention that all girls involved, as well as both principals, and the school counselor were AA, if that matters.
SCANDAL!