In some ways yes, but in others, no. In both cases if a LEO was allowed to handle things no one winds up dead. We never got to hear Martin's story because he was dead, all the "details" were told by Z. We do know he was involved in a physical scuffle, but the whole "he was waiting and ambushed me" was corroborated by no one.I agree with Jaskalas with the info we have so far.
Very different cases and the title thread is misleading people to instigate arguments from their prior bias of Trayvon's case.
Because Arbery was "investigated" for something unrelated. Look at him. He's guilty of somethingWhat is really sick about this thread is that we have some real sicko`s who was this to be a justified assassination...
I agree with Jaskalas with the info we have so far.
Very different cases and the title thread is misleading people to instigate arguments from their prior bias of Trayvon's case.
I understand your comment was on this case. I quoted you because the arguments you're referring to are being influenced in the way I stated.My comment was concerning this present case! Obviously comprehension is not one of your strong suits!
The thread title is only misreading if you enter the thread without reading through the thread......duh
Both cases are simalarly sad in that a man (the pic of a younger Martin which was the only one shared widely was also misleading) died after unnecessary confrontations. I don't know how the conservative media will cover this (don't watch FNews or seek out right-wing websites) but I know the liberal media will use a broad brush as long as they can to paint the 2 cases the same way. I don't like the same thing being done on this forum.In some ways yes, but in others, no. In both cases if a LEO was allowed to handle things no one winds up dead. We never got to hear Martin's story because he was dead, all the "details" were told by Z. We do know he was involved in a physical scuffle, but the whole "he was waiting and ambushed me" was corroborated by no one.
In Martin's case.. a large guy in a hoodie, in the dark who's ready to do some damage to whoever is following him, and being black on top of it.. if the cops in any way "feared for their lives" they'd have shot him multiple times and it wouldn't even have made the national news.
I understand your comment was on this case. I quoted you because the arguments you're referring to are being influenced in the way I stated.
I said it is misleading in that it will affect people's arguments before they even read the thread, and reading the thread doesn't nullify the bias that will be brought in by referring to this case as a duplicate of a very different one which people have very strong opinions on which are immediately recalled by the thread title.
Separately, you seem to be prone to personal attacks. Any slaps on the wrist from the mods yet?
The Martin case can be boils down to a lying overzealous troublemaking dirtbag (proven by his post trial actions) neighborhood faux cop with a gun who concluded a young black man didn't belong in that neighborhood. Take away any of those, none of post factum events happen. A responsible neighborhood watch person would not have resulted in a dead Trayvon Martin.Jaskalas is correct in his statement when someone is looking at the deeper details, but not the surface details of both case. What I mean by that sentence is that the correlation people are pointing out is that they see the police/justice department not arresting someone who killed another person as being the same. On the surface it is, but the moment one looks at the details of the case that is not the same. However, with the Trayvon Martin case, we had an active sleazebag attorney, Crump, doctoring lies for the media to post to get an arrest and sway public opinion. We had the media following suit as well. The evidence the police and the local Florida justice department already had for the Trayvon Martin case was more than enough to prove self defense for Zimmerman which is why he was never arrested. This case however is a lot different. The Arbery case has a lot left to the interperate the actions of the McMichaels as well as application of the law for those actions. Was the citizen's arrest legal to affect and was proper use of force use if the arrest was legal? Those two situations are far very different than the Trayvon Martin case since Zimmerman was never affecting a citizen's arrest nor had his gun out initially. The Trayvon case should never have gone to trial based on Florida law, but this one should have. There is certainly enough probably cause to arrest and hash it out in court for the Arbery case. Where the police didn't want to arrest George Zimmerman, they did want to arrest the McMichaels. The details of the case are very different once you get past the surface level.
Zimmerman was fat. As you stated Martin was taller than he was. It was dark and Martin was wearing loose clothing, wouldn't look small.First off, Martin was not a large guy, Zimmerman outweighed him by 50lbs iirc though a couple of inches shorter. Second, the post was about if Martin's actions were viewed by a policeman INSTEAD of Zimmerman would Martin be dead?
EDIT: remember Zimmerman was told to stay in his truck & not follow by the dispatcher, though not a LEO command but a solid recommendation considering the outcome.
Zimmerman was fat. As you stated Martin was taller than he was. It was dark and Martin was wearing loose clothing, wouldn't look small.
If a policeman was on scene after the information Z gave on the phone, yeah I think there's a decent chance Martin would still be dead. If a policeman observed Martin without that information, I don't see why he would've even been stopped.. though cops stop people (black in particular) all the time without good reason.
The instruction to Z to stay in his truck was solid. Didn't need to know the outcome. But he had a big head and a gun.. similar to many police.
I'll respond to Woolfe as they're getting more to my original point about the thread title, I have no desire to continue rehashing Martin's case.
Edit: spelling
So the title of the thread is a straw man? (I know you're insinuating my argument is but the title is literally "Trayvon Martin all over again." That title isn't really one of a comparison.) How about "Arbery slaying - another Trayvon Martin?"The idea that when someone makes a comparison that they are saying the two things under comparison are identical is a straw man.
I'm not questioning your intelligence. Just stating the human tendency to carry bias over from cases where they already have their opinion staunchly made. Maybe this particular tendency doesn't apply to you, as many generalized statements don't apply to me. But this is a sizable community and the rehashing of Trayvon's case is happening.Right away when I read that thread title I knew the cases couldn't be identical in every relevant way because I'm not an idiot.
Don't really have much disagreement here. Beside the point that there are more parties involved (including the cameraman apparently) and it happened in broad daylight on a public street. Oh, and the McMichael's were in a truck which itself gave them a clear advantage.I was curious as to the OP's rationale for the comparison. As I read about the case, the following struck me as important similarities: black man making his way through a neighborhood is vaguely suspected of criminal activity by a person or persons in said neighborhood, said person or persons decide to act as vigilantes, pursuing the black man with firearms, which results in an encounter causing the black man's death.
The key point of dissimilarity is not really a dissimilarity per se. It's that in the Arbury case, we have a video of the final encounter which resulted in his death. While in the GZ case, there is no video, and literally no human being on earth knew how the altercation started between the two except GZ himself. Since he was charged with murder, his statements are properly viewed as self-serving. His defense was justifiable homicide premised on self-defense, and 100% of the merit of that defense hinged on the question of who started that fight, literally who first laid hands on the other. Predictably, GZ's story painted TM as the aggressor. We'll never know if his version was truthful or not. The jury had to acquit him because there was reasonable doubt.
But the commonality between them in terms of how the incidents started out raises issues. It's an extreme action for a citizen to take after someone with a gun based on in one case vague suspicions and on the other, evidence of misdemeanor trespass at best. Because these actions are otherwise difficult to explain, the suggestion of racial profiling is strong in both cases, though I would argue it's a little stronger in the Arbury case because we have seen video of white people walking onto that same construction site, and presumably not being chased down with shotguns thereafter.
I'm arguing the thread title should be changed. Not that the two can't be compared.The two cases are certainly not identical but I think you are overly dismissive of the comparison.
That human cockroach had not a single issue auctioning off the gun he used for a monster price of $250K, that about says all you need to know about this fucking swine.What the heck? Zimmerman wasnt fat that the time of the incident. There is footage of him the day after giving a reenactment to the police, and he is a skinny short man. He didn't gain weight until the legal troubles started. Like many people, he turned to eating to cope with the problems facing him. Many people turn to some sort of vice when they are faced with a troubling ordeal they consider outside their control. It is a normal human behavior.
Here is a picture of him after the incident but before the trial began
He weighed a little more than Trayvon as he was older and definitely not in shape. He wasn't fat at the time of the incident but ballooned out by the time of his booking. More so did he gain during and after the trial.
You can see the difference in just his face from time of the incident occurred to his booking picture.
Why do people doggedly cling to this false information even to this day? Trayvon Martin was physically taller than George at the time of the incident as well as wearing a very loose fitted hoodie which would make him appear even bigger in the dark on a rainy night.
why change the thread title? Because one shooting was deemed justified and the other shooting was an assassination?So the title of the thread is a straw man? (I know you're insinuating my argument is but the title is literally "Trayvon Martin all over again." That title isn't really one of a comparison.) How about "Arbery slaying - another Trayvon Martin?"
IMHO the dead man in this case's name should be in the title, not just an old case which was hashed out to death in another thread, but it's happening again here because of said title.
I'm not questioning your intelligence. Just stating the human tendency to carry bias over from cases where they already have their opinion staunchly made. Maybe this particular tendency doesn't apply to you, as many generalized statements don't apply to me. But this is a sizable community and the rehashing of Trayvon's case is happening.
Don't really have much disagreement here. Beside the point that there are more parties involved (including the cameraman apparently) and it happened in broad daylight on a public street. Oh, and the McMichael's were in a truck which itself gave them a clear advantage.
I'm arguing the thread title should be changed. Not that the two can't be compared.
So the title of the thread is a straw man? (I know you're insinuating my argument is but the title is literally "Trayvon Martin all over again." That title isn't really one of a comparison.) How about "Arbery slaying - another Trayvon Martin?"
IMHO the dead man in this case's name should be in the title, not just an old case which was hashed out to death in another thread, but it's happening again here because of said title.
I'm not questioning your intelligence. Just stating the human tendency to carry bias over from cases where they already have their opinion staunchly made. Maybe this particular tendency doesn't apply to you, as many generalized statements don't apply to me. But this is a sizable community and the rehashing of Trayvon's case is happening.
Don't really have much disagreement here. Beside the point that there are more parties involved (including the cameraman apparently) and it happened in broad daylight on a public street. Oh, and the McMichael's were in a truck which itself gave them a clear advantage.
I'm arguing the thread title should be changed. Not that the two can't be compared.
Repot the thread title to the mods If it bothers you that much. Otherwise whining about it is just nit picking instead of addressing the larger issues here.So the title of the thread is a straw man? (I know you're insinuating my argument is but the title is literally "Trayvon Martin all over again." That title isn't really one of a comparison.) How about "Arbery slaying - another Trayvon Martin?"
IMHO the dead man in this case's name should be in the title, not just an old case which was hashed out to death in another thread, but it's happening again here because of said title.
I'm not questioning your intelligence. Just stating the human tendency to carry bias over from cases where they already have their opinion staunchly made. Maybe this particular tendency doesn't apply to you, as many generalized statements don't apply to me. But this is a sizable community and the rehashing of Trayvon's case is happening.
Don't really have much disagreement here. Beside the point that there are more parties involved (including the cameraman apparently) and it happened in broad daylight on a public street. Oh, and the McMichael's were in a truck which itself gave them a clear advantage.
I'm arguing the thread title should be changed. Not that the two can't be compared.
So when someone says "Trayvon Martin all over again" you take that to mean the two cases are literally identical such that when you first find out that the victim's name was Ahmed instead of Trayvon that means the title is bullshit? Think about that. You may think I'm being cute here, but actually that's what you're doing. You're being hyper literal and I'm using a reductio ad absurdum to illustrate the point. The fact is, people tend not to speak or write in a hyper-literal manner.
Yes, I'm interested in guilt and any following legal changes. That's what matters to the parties involved in the matter (as you stated).I think the problem is you're mired in certain details which might affect the ultimate guilt or innocence of the parties involved, and you think that is the most important issue here. Yet it's only the most important issue for the people directly involved. For everyone else, there are broader issues which are more important, and which do not in either case depend on ultimate legal guilt or innocence.
Does it really matter if GZ struck the first blow, or if instead Travyon did so because he was angry that GZ seemed be following him because he was black? Similarly, does it matter whether the McMichaels end up guilty or innocent based on the intricacies of GA's laws of assault, felony murder, or citizen's arrest? To the men involved it matters a ton. I will admit that the issue of guilt or innocence is interesting and certainly worth discussing, but I don't think it's what matters most to the outside world in either case.
Well said and as you probably anticipated I agree on the issues you raised.What really does matter is this: both victims were very likely racially profiled by these men and both would likely still be alive had they been white. That issue is tremendously important to black Americans, and it should be to the rest of us as well.
And there's another issue. Even had both victims been white, what does it say about the case for responsible gun ownership when we have people with guns running around their neighborhoods like they're Wyatt Earp? Vigilantism is one of several reasons why I think the right to carry outside one's home needs to be handled more strictly and background checks need to be exhaustive and applied to every sale.
You can agree or disagree with me about either of those issues but both are important issues and these two cases are essentially identical, or close to it, in relation to those issues. What I'm saying is, the two are identical in the ways that matter most to society, and whatever lessons we may learn are essentially the same for both.
The OP already responded to me in the thread. I think his response was reasonable, but I think rehashing the Trayvon Martin case is beating a dead horse, and is a distraction from the fact this is a separate case that should be weighed on its own merits.Repot the thread title to the mods If it bothers you that much. Otherwise whining about it is just nit picking instead of addressing the larger issues here.
The assumption of guilt because of dark skin is a horse that is not dead but needs to be continuously beatenThe OP already responded to me in the thread. I think his response was reasonable, but I think rehashing the Trayvon Martin case is beating a dead horse, and is a distraction from the fact this is a separate case that should be weighed on its own merits.
I don't think I need to go over the OP's discretion on this (and I've never done that before..). And you're right in that I've made my point. If some of the more reasonable posters don't fall into bringing up old irrelevant crap, I'll just ignore it from the others.
So new information on the Arbery killing:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04/us/mcmichaels-hearing-ahmaud-arbery/index.html
They hit him with the truck when he tried to run past judging from dents and fibers found on the truck.
Racial slurs were also used after the shooting.
Guess hitting someone with your truck is all part of a legitimate citizens arrest.
Article also said body cam footage showed a confederate flag sticker on McMichaels toolbox in the truck. (Excuse me a sticker denoting McMichaels interest in history, southern pride and states rights in a completely non-racist way)shockedpikachu.jpg
Eagerly awaiting HumblePie to explain to us how this wasn't racist and was said in the heat of the moment.
Article also said body cam footage showed a confederate flag sticker on McMichaels toolbox in the truck. (Excuse me a sticker denoting McMichaels interest in history, southern pride and states rights in a completely non-racist way)
I’m sure that certain posters will be here to explain that Arbury was the real racists for incorrectly determining that the armed individual who jumped out out of the truck with a confederate flag that had chased him down, blocked him and hit him was intending to harm him.
Or that sometimes people just get carried away and say shit like "f***ing n****r" after confronting black peopleshockedpikachu.jpg
Eagerly awaiting HumblePie to explain to us how this wasn't racist and was said in the heat of the moment.