Support NeoGAF

[Chariot]

Why are people arguing with the racist dude that got banned twice during the Zimmerman trial?

Because I didn't know he was a racist dude who was banned twice. Give some names information please.

 

[pompidu]

No that's not the discussion here. The discussion here is about Zimmerman now being in debt after being acquitted and how people feel about it. Zimmerman defenders are who want to make the discussion about "how the law sees it" - something they can hide behind.

That is true but i jumped in after that discussion had life in it.

 

[adamsappel]

Yeah, the black kid should have called the police. Like that's ever backfired.

 

[Pavaloo]

Man I can't believe people think Trayvon should have just called the police. How detached from everything do you have to be?

I mean, try and think of how hard it is for minorities to trust authority in america. The verdict of Zimmerman's case only reinforces the fear 1000%

Jesus christ.

 

[Van Owen]

Why are people arguing with the liar racist dude that got banned twice during the Zimmerman trial?

If I was really some lying racist do you really think my account would still be active?

I guess it's cool to for you to go around throwing out disparaging remarks. Whatever.

 

[commedieu]

If I was really some lying racist do you really think my account would still be active?

I guess it's cool to for you to go around throwing out disparaging remarks. Whatever.

Stop playing the victim here and acting like everyone is out to get you.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Eh, it's understandable to double back imo. If I were in that situation with a stranger stalking me at night, I'd be very hesitant to let them see me just walk in through my front door and know where I live in case they're planning on coming to my home where my family is for god knows what.

You are not supposed to go home if you're being followed. I was taught that as a child. It's SOP.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Yeah, the black kid should have called the police. Like that's ever backfired.

Not even once!

 

[Freakinchair]

Yeah, the black kid should have called the police. Like that's ever backfired.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Anyways. To be more on topic I'm actually surprised by the news - I would think he would be receiving tons of donations from his "supporters". He probably will now considering the news.

 

[Averon]

Absolutely ridiculous.

Anyways. To be more on topic I'm actually surprised by the news - I would think he would be receiving tons of donations from his "supporters". He probably will now considering the news.

I'm not surprised at all that

Many of the more prominent Zimmerman's supporters were just band wagoners that saw him as a useful tool to push their own agendas. After the trial was finished, Zimmerman stopped being useful.

I bet many of them are the same people who now supports Bundy in Nevada.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Considering the law has had a LONG history of fucking over people of a certain color I'm not sure why people here are acting like "Well the law said he's not guilty and that's that!" *wipes hands*? This is just another injustice.

And many in society blame the kid getting snacks but not the irresponsible grown man with a pistol. Outstanding.

Not even once!

There have been times when I absolutely refused to call the police because it's my word vs someone else's and I know for a fact the cops ain't gonna believe my big Black ass over dude in a nice business suit so why waste my time and get myself in trouble.

 

[vas_a_morir]

No that's not the discussion here. The discussion here is about Zimmerman now being in debt after being acquitted and how people feel about it. Zimmerman defenders are who want to make the discussion about "how the law sees it" - something they can hide behind.

You can't honestly dismiss discussion of the Law so easily when discussing a court case. It's pretty much the most important, logical discussion to be had. Everything else is born from emotion and presumptions, all-caps and red letters, signifying nothing.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Considering the law has had a LONG history of fucking over people of a certain color I'm not sure why people here are acting like "Well the law said he's not guilty and that's that!" *wipes hands*? This is just another injustice.

And many in society blame the kid getting snacks but not the irresponsible grown man with a pistol. Outstanding.




There have been times when I absolutely refused to call the police because it's my word vs someone else's and I know for a fact the cops ain't gonna believe my big Black ass over dude in a nice business suit so why waste my time and get myself in trouble.

I know that feeling, friend..I wish i didn't, but I do. This world ain't fair.

 

[vas_a_morir]

Huh. I guess money's not everything, because George seems pretty happy.

Somebody cut him a check or a book-deal. These kind of news stories don't just happen randomly. It was leaked! A set-up to get his name back in the news, perhaps as a sympathetic figure, or perhaps just for some good ole Schadenfreude.

Sympathy for some, Schadenfreude for others.

 

[joedan]

You can't honestly dismiss discussion of the Law so easily when discussing a court case. It's pretty much the most important, logical discussion to be had. Everything else is born from emotion and presumptions, all-caps and red letters, signifying nothing.

I'm not dismissing the legal component of the case, I'm saying that the discussion isn't about the legal component. The legal aspect is a component in a wider discussion that involves the justice system, race, karma, sympathy, etc, etc.

 

[Enzom21]

If I was really some lying racist do you really think my account would still be active?

I guess it's cool to for you to go around throwing out disparaging remarks. Whatever.

Speedline's account is still active and he said "good luck finding a nice white man." in the Danny Brown blowjob thread so you being active isn't some proof that you're not a racist.
Based on your post history I am sure the two of you share some of the same beliefs.

All the evidence points to it - but I'm just looking at things logically based on whats presented. Emotions tend to run pretty high when discussing this case. I'm definitely a firm believer that both parties we're definitely at fault and its horrible that the conflict escalated as it did. They could have probably got Zimmerman on a manslaughter charge if they really tried.

Aside from Zimmerman's word what evidence points to Trayvon instigating the fight?

 

[EatinOlives]

I have forgot most details but did zimmerman physically keep him from going anywhere? Did zimmerman back him into a corner?

What's the difference? He's still the one who initiated the conflict by stalking Trayvon with a gun. Now you're just using an impossibly narrow definition of "conflict" just so you get to say "see? Zim wasn't the one who started it, therefore he had the right to defend himself".

Reading Freakinchair's and your posts exhibits a quite nasty pattern. The both of you are fixated on what Trayvon did, never applying those same rules to Zim. "Zim had the right to defend himself!", never thinking about Trayvon's right to defend himself. "Trayvon shouldn't have gotten physical!", never bringing up how Zim was relentlessly stalking him with an armed gun. "Trayvon should've just called the Cops! Gone into a store! Done X! Done Y!", never once saying "Zim shouldn't have profiled him and should've minded his own fucking business".

You two focus exclusively on the victim and what he did "wrong".

Absolutely ridiculous.

You honest to goodness think that a police officer in the deep south, presented with the word of a black male wearing a hoodie, against the word of a white male on the Neighborhood Watch, is going to side with the black male?

Dude, you don't even come close to having an idea of how this stuff works.

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Huh. I guess money's not everything, because George seems pretty happy.

Oh cool, good to know it's the real George Z and not some imposter account.

 

[Chariot]

Oh cool, good to know it's the real George Z and not some imposter account.

If it's fake I am really impressed, since this is a rather neutral post and not somethings that obviously pushes an agenda.
Maybe the name is a nod to his favorite black rapper Eminem.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Robert Zimmerman @rzimmermanjr

WATCH>> @BarackObama 's America: Where @TSA agents are unaware @washingtondc is part of USA http://t.co/r8mkNe2iR6 http://t.co/FyVndRxOIJ

Oh Zimmermans..

 

[Jado]

I wouldnt face him and question his motives. Id gtfo and call police.

It's nice to say that after the fact. Trayvon was a BLACK KID.

1. He has likely never called the police before and, as a kid, didn't know the situation was one where he needed to call in armed officers. Many boys feel "invincible," like they can escape or diffuse any situation on their own. The way people are placing the brunt of responsibility on him is ridiculous. At his age, I wouldn't have known some lunatic was following me because he thought I was a robber and a thug.

2. Black people don't trust the police and avoid calling them as much as possible for good reasons stemming from really awful personal experiences. It's a very real possibility that Trayvon calling the cops could've resulted in a scenario where LE just "assumed" he's the guilty party, roughs him up (or worse) and puts him in cuffs. It has happened before.

The fuck is this? How is he the one who initiated the conflict when he tried just leaving the situation until Zimmerman got out of his car and chased him down on foot, stalking him in the middle of the night? I guarantee if it was a 17 year old white kid being followed through a suburb in the middle of the night by an adult black man armed with a gun who pursued the kid on foot after the kid tried to get away, pretty much nobody on the jury would have been questioning the kid's right to defend himself and the man would be in prison for murder.

Right. Zim defenders insist Trayvon should not have "immediately" resorted to violence as the first line of action, conveniently ignoring that he actually tried to avoid a confrontation and run away.

I realize you have an agenda, but isn't the "child" stuff a bit much?

If a 17 year old had ever raped or killed someone you loved, would you call them a child?

Real fucking manipulative. Why are you drawing comparisons to murderers and rapists?

 

[Saint Gregory]

What's the difference? He's still the one who initiated the conflict by stalking Trayvon with a gun. Now you're just using an impossibly narrow definition of "conflict" just so you get to say "see? Zim wasn't the one who started it, therefore he had the right to defend himself".

Reading Freakinchair's and your posts exhibits a quite nasty pattern. The both of you are fixated on what Trayvon did, never applying those same rules to Zim. "Zim had the right to defend himself!", never thinking about Trayvon's right to defend himself. "Trayvon shouldn't have gotten physical!", never bringing up how Zim was relentlessly stalking him with an armed gun. "Trayvon should've just called the Cops! Gone into a store! Done X! Done Y!", never once saying "Zim shouldn't have profiled him and should've minded his own fucking business".

You two focus exclusively on the victim and what he did "wrong".

You've just described what happens in every instance where something bad happens to a person of color. The analysis always begins with what it was that they did wrong and why it was their fault.

It's pretty much why I stopped discussing the Trayvon Martin case with anyone at work. It was impossible to have a reasonable discussion because it always began from the standpoint that Zimmerman's explanation of events was correct for apparently no other reason other than a black kid was involved.

 

[PhantomFear]

Man, this thread. It's one thing to think someone committed a morally wrong/illegal act and should be held accountable. But I will NEVER understand how some people can wish endless suffering on other individuals.

Does George Zimmerman being homeless and broke change anything about the past? Does it bring Trayvon back to life and end his family's suffering? Does it do anything to address flaws in current laws or the legal process? Nope. Not one bit for any of those things.

There is a stark contrast between justice and revenge, and many in this thread have fully abandoned the former in hopes of the latter. I wonder if there would be a celebratory thread here if George Zimmerman were to be murdered.

Taking solace or pleasure in the suffering of others just seems so wrong to me, regardless of how disgusting or repulsive we may find their actions.

 

[vas_a_morir]

What's the difference? He's still the one who initiated the conflict by stalking Trayvon with a gun. Now you're just using an impossibly narrow definition of "conflict" just so you get to say "see? Zim wasn't the one who started it, therefore he had the right to defend himself".

Reading Freakinchair's and your posts exhibits a quite nasty pattern. The both of you are fixated on what Trayvon did, never applying those same rules to Zim. "Zim had the right to defend himself!", never thinking about Trayvon's right to defend himself. "Trayvon shouldn't have gotten physical!", never bringing up how Zim was relentlessly stalking him with an armed gun. "Trayvon should've just called the Cops! Gone into a store! Done X! Done Y!", never once saying "Zim shouldn't have profiled him and should've minded his own fucking business".

You two focus exclusively on the victim and what he did "wrong".

I'm trying to be fair, here. We simply don't honestly know what happened, so we don't know if Trayvon (or Zimmerman) actually DID have a legal right to defend himself. If Zimmerman did something criminally menacing, he absolutely would, and as a result, Zimmerman's slaying of Trayvon would have presumably been ruled 2nd degree murder. However, self-defense can be a tough defense; it's not granted. Zimmerman had an eye-witness who testified in open court that he saw him on the bottom, getting beaten, and screaming for help... and he STILL almost went to prison for decades for murder.

So, let's presume an alternate reality where the outcome of the confrontation was different. Trayvon hits Zimmerman and kills him. Could Trayvon claim self-defense for punching GZ for just following him? I honestly don't know. We would need somebody with knowledge of Florida state law to tell us, and I'd wager it's still open-ended. However, without a doubt, if Zimmerman assaulted him or illegally brandished his firearm in a menacing manner as some believe he possibly could have done, then Trayvon certainly would have a right to self-defense legally, I presume.

Zimmerman's actions initiated the chain of events that led to Trayvon's death. However, "Stalking with a loaded gun," is that illegal? If not, then I don't know how Trayvon could attack him and claim self-defense. Or at least, it would be an uphill battle. I feel like Zimmerman would have had to have done something criminally menacing. He very well may have, I don't know.

Two people saw the beginning of the fight, and one is dead, and the other lawyered up. Which is always the best choice, as cops can and will lie to people in order to scare them into confessing. I recall that one detective said on the stand that they told Zimmerman that they had the whole incident on tape in order to get him to confess. You can discuss what you think/wish might have happened, but unless you were there, it's a fruitless and disingenuous argument.

Either way, Trayvon did not deserve death (and did not deserve being followed and presumed a criminal because of his appearance), and this is the kind of outcome to which escalating conflicts will lead, when you allow people to carry instruments of death legally on their side.

 

[Lovely Salsa]

Why am I going to blame the kid for freaking out while being followed? Why would I fault him for wanting to protect himself? Have you ever been followed? I have..it's not fun. Unfortunately, being black and walking where I don't belong (earth) has this kind of result.

I've had guns pointed at me on many a Florida street, just for visiting a classmate for a project or to play NES. I'm not down with the "both at fault" crowd..so, fuck it, blame his mama too if we're going that route..

out of curiousity

Is it only white people that do this?

 

[vas_a_morir]

out of curiousity

Is it always white people that do this?

It's not about who does it, it's about who always seems to be on the receiving end of this kind of suspicion in America. Zimmerman wasn't white, but he is now the poster-child for the harm of racial profiling. According to many posters here who have experienced it, there would seem to be a negative perception of young black males that pervades throughout all of America, and not just limited to white people.

 

[Altered Juice]

excuse me while i search for A FUCK TO GIVE!

 

[GaimeGuy]

I'm trying to be fair, here. We simply don't honestly know what happened, so we don't know if Trayvon (or Zimmerman) actually DID have a legal right to defend himself. If Zimmerman did something criminally menacing, he absolutely would, and as a result, Zimmerman's slaying of Trayvon would have presumably been ruled 2nd degree murder. However, self-defense can be a tough defense; it's not granted. Zimmerman had an eye-witness who testified in open court that he saw him on the bottom, getting beaten, and screaming for help... and he STILL almost went to prison for decades for murder.

So, let's presume an alternate reality where the outcome of the confrontation was different. Trayvon hits Zimmerman and kills him. Could Trayvon claim self-defense for punching GZ for just following him? I honestly don't know. We would need somebody with knowledge of Florida state law to tell us, and I'd wager it's still open-ended. However, without a doubt, if Zimmerman assaulted him or illegally brandished his firearm in a menacing manner as some believe he possibly could have done, then Trayvon certainly would have a right to self-defense legally, I presume.

Zimmerman's actions initiated the chain of events that led to Trayvon's death. However, "Stalking with a loaded gun," is that illegal? If not, then I don't know how Trayvon could attack him and claim self-defense. Or at least, it would be an uphill battle. I feel like Zimmerman would have had to have done something criminally menacing. He very well may have, I don't know.

Two people saw the beginning of the fight, and one is dead, and the other lawyered up. Which is always the best choice, as cops can and will lie to people in order to scare them into confessing. I recall that one detective said on the stand that they told Zimmerman that they had the whole incident on tape in order to get him to confess. You can discuss what you think/wish might have happened, but unless you were there, it's a fruitless and disingenuous argument.

Either way, Trayvon did not deserve death (and did not deserve being followed and presumed a criminal because of his appearance), and this is the kind of outcome to which escalating conflicts will lead, when you allow people to carry instruments of death legally on their side.

The "beginning of the fight" isn't when someone threw a punch. It's when a reasonable person began to fear for their safety.

When you move away from a road becuase someone's following you, and that person's response is not to give up, but to park the car and chase you on foot, THAT is when you KNOW you're in danger. Trayvon's heart must have been racing a million miles an hour once he realized his pursuer was parking the car and following him on foot.

George didn't just follow someone. He chased after someone that was trying to get away from him, without making his intentions or identity known. That's a very threatening action.

 

[joedan]

Man, this thread. It's one thing to think someone committed a morally wrong/illegal act and should be held accountable. But I will NEVER understand how some people can wish endless suffering on other individuals.

Does George Zimmerman being homeless and broke change anything about the past? Does it bring Trayvon back to life and end his family's suffering? Does it do anything to address flaws in current laws or the legal process? Nope. Not one bit for any of those things.

There is a stark contrast between justice and revenge, and many in this thread have fully abandoned the former in hopes of the latter. I wonder if there would be a celebratory thread here if George Zimmerman were to be murdered.

Taking solace or pleasure in the suffering of others just seems so wrong to me, regardless of how disgusting or repulsive we may find their actions.

So there should be no punishment for any crime unless the punishment changes anything in the past? No murderer should go to jail because it doesn't change anything in the past? No arsonist should go to jail because it doesn't change anything in the past? No criminal banker should go to jail because it doesn't change anything in the past? No drunk driver should go to jail because it doesn't change anything in the past?

How would anything related to Zimmerman being in debt amount to 'revenge'? Do you know of anyone on NeoGaf or otherwise who have taken away Zimmerman's money? Zimmerman's financial problems are his own doing.

And one final question, what would you have considered ideal justice in the entire Zimmerman episode?

 

[nateeasy]

He needs to just assume a new identity and move out of the country.

 

[Chariot]

Man, this thread. It's one thing to think someone committed a morally wrong/illegal act and should be held accountable. But I will NEVER understand how some people can wish endless suffering on other individuals.

Does George Zimmerman being homeless and broke change anything about the past? Does it bring Trayvon back to life and end his family's suffering? Does it do anything to address flaws in current laws or the legal process? Nope. Not one bit for any of those things.

There is a stark contrast between justice and revenge, and many in this thread have fully abandoned the former in hopes of the latter. I wonder if there would be a celebratory thread here if George Zimmerman were to be murdered.

Taking solace or pleasure in the suffering of others just seems so wrong to me, regardless of how disgusting or repulsive we may find their actions.

I am one of those who are quite glad that Zimmerman has a terrible lifephase, but I think this post is important.

 

[freeofgreed]

I am one of those who are quite glad that Zimmerman has a terrible lifephase, but I think this post is important.

Except no it's not.

Lets say for example someone killed a member of your family. You'd be completely fine with him walking free because him going to jail "wouldn't change the past"?

 

[SamVimes]

Except no it's not.

Lets say for example someone killed a member of your family. You'd be completely fine with him walking free because him going to jail "wouldn't change the past"?

Probably all this effort would be better spent making sure the legislation changes in a way that this kind of thing never goes unpunished again.

 

[Alchemy]

Absolutely ridiculous.

Anyways. To be more on topic I'm actually surprised by the news - I would think he would be receiving tons of donations from his "supporters". He probably will now considering the news.

His supporters only supported him because they wanted to push their own beliefs or businesses. They didn't give a shit about the actual humans involved in the situation.

 

[Chariot]

Except no it's not.

Lets say for example someone killed a member of your family. You'd be completely fine with him walking free because him going to jail "wouldn't change the past"?

Thing is, we're not a authority of law. Neither should be.

The law makes mistakes and we should discuss and critize them accordingly. But it could get wrong very fast when people just want to dash out justice themselves. This is more an general thing, than a specific, since - you could see that at my posts in this and other Zimmermann threads - I am definitly somebody who supports the notion that he is very guilty and the stand your ground law is utter bullshit.

But we're not discussing how to change the law, but how to happy we are with Zimmermann suffering and sometimes even people wishing him even worse things.

 

[freeofgreed]

Probably all this effort would be better spent making sure the legislation changes in a way that this kind of thing never goes unpunished again.

What effort? Also you can answer the question as well.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I find it funny when people say that you can't hit someone for following you. George ran after this boy, he didn't just follow along in his car. How would some of you grown ass men react if you notice someone following you, and when you start to run they get out of their vehicle and chase behind you? Would you still feel this is a perfectly legal and reasonable thing to do?

In a dark rainy night no less. Never identified himself and expected Trayvon to be subservient to his demands.

 

[Chariot]

What effort? Also you can answer the question as well.

Nice to see that at least one of us apparently put not effort in his posts to a important topic.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

He needs to just assume a new identity and move out of the country.

He's too broke to do that, and nobody would take him.

"Yeah, we want the paranoid nutcase who walks around with a gun on his person and shoots kids. Nice try, America!"

 

[SamVimes]

What effort? Also you can answer the question as well.

All this energy spent hating a piece of shit while missing the bigger picture, a system that allows such a piece of shit to walk away "innocent".
Your question is leading and every time someone tries to make shit personal reason loses.

 

[freeofgreed]

Thing is, we're not a authority of law. Neither should be.

The law makes mistakes and we should discuss and critize them accordingly. But it could get wrong very fast when people just want to dash out justice themselves. This is more an general thing, than a specific, since - you could see that at my posts in this and other Zimmermann threads - I am definitly somebody who supports the notion that he is very guilty and the stand your ground law is utter bullshit.

But we're not discussing how to change the law, but how to happy we are with Zimmermann suffering and sometimes even people wishing him even worse things.

Who is trying to deliver justice themselves? Everything that's happened to George Zimmerman is a result of his own actions. Also as you said the law isn't perfect, So when the law fails to deliver justice (like it clearly did with GZ) what is the problem with justice coming from a different source?

 

[Averon]

Zimmerman's situation is of his own doing. Zimmerman did everything possible at every step of the way to put himself in his current situation, assuming this is not an elaborate lie.

I have no problem deriving pleasure that a terrible human being is suffering solely through their own actions.

 

[freeofgreed]

All this energy spent hating a piece of shit while missing the bigger picture, a system that allows such a piece of shit to walk away "innocent".
Your question is leading and every time someone tries to make shit personal reason loses.

What energy? people are discussing this like anything else on Gaf. Should people also stop discussing video games so they can put that effort towards reforming the law? Also why do you assume that people can't hate GZ and also work on reforming the law simultaneously? and the reason you haven't answered my question isn't because it would "make things personal" it's because you know your entire argument would fall apart if you do.

 

[speculawyer]

He's too broke to do that, and nobody would take him.

"Yeah, we want the paranoid nutcase who walks around with a gun on his person and shoots kids. Nice try, America!"

I feel bad for laughing at that.

Well, it most countries he would probably not be able to get a gun.

 

[Chariot]

Who is trying to deliver justice themselves? Everything that's happened to George Zimmerman is a result of his own actions. Also as you said the law isn't perfect, So when the law fails to deliver justice (like it clearly did with GZ) what is the problem with justice coming from a different source?

There is a reason vigilante justice is illegal. Exactly this thought made Zimmerman do what he has done. The thought that justice wouldn't do what the thought was right and that he should do it then, instead.

 

[Averon]

Man, this thread. It's one thing to think someone committed a morally wrong/illegal act and should be held accountable. But I will NEVER understand how some people can wish endless suffering on other individuals.

Does George Zimmerman being homeless and broke change anything about the past? Does it bring Trayvon back to life and end his family's suffering? Does it do anything to address flaws in current laws or the legal process? Nope. Not one bit for any of those things.

There is a stark contrast between justice and revenge, and many in this thread have fully abandoned the former in hopes of the latter. I wonder if there would be a celebratory thread here if George Zimmerman were to be murdered.

Taking solace or pleasure in the suffering of others just seems so wrong to me, regardless of how disgusting or repulsive we may find their actions.

If Zimmerman were to be murdered, it would be an act against his will. So, yeah I could understand your view if that happened.

However, this is not the case. Zimmerman is suffering through his own bone-headed actions, and he has shown no signs that he changed or will change his ways to get him out of said situation.

I see no problem of deriving satisfaction that a bone-headed, terrible human being that's unwilling to change is suffering.

 

[joedan]

Thing is, we're not a authority of law. Neither should be.

The law makes mistakes and we should discuss and critize them accordingly. But it could get wrong very fast when people just want to dash out justice themselves. This is more an general thing, than a specific, since - you could see that at my posts in this and other Zimmermann threads - I am definitly somebody who supports the notion that he is very guilty and the stand your ground law is utter bullshit.

But we're not discussing how to change the law, but how to happy we are with Zimmermann suffering and sometimes even people wishing him even worse things.

Why pretend that there hasn't been discussions about the Stand Your Ground law on NeoGaf or elsewhere? There have been countless discussions on those type of laws, how to get those type of laws changed. There have been efforts to make those laws changed as well.

Even more importantly people can discuss and work on multiple issues at the same time. No need to shut down discussion about one topic to focus on another.

 

[Chariot]

Why pretend that there hasn't been discussions about the Stand Your Ground law on NeoGaf or elsewhere? There have been countless discussions on those type of laws, how to get those type of laws changed. There have been efforts to make those laws changed as well.

Even more importantly people can discuss and work on multiple issues at the same time. No need to shut down discussion about one topic to focus on another.

Sure, but "I want him to be raped by two black men" isn't a discussion.

 

[freeofgreed]

There is a reason vigilante justice is illegal. Exactly this thought made Zimmerman do what he has done. The thought that justice wouldn't do what the thought was right and that he should do it then, instead.

Did you even read the post you quoted? I don't think so, so i'll ask again, what vigilant justice has been done to GZ? People taking satisfaction in GZ being homeless isn't the same thing as people going out on the street and actively harming him.

 

[vas_a_morir]

Except no it's not.

Lets say for example someone killed a member of your family. You'd be completely fine with him walking free because him going to jail "wouldn't change the past"?

It's not a hypothetical for my family. Revenge, justice... all that takes a back seat to fear that the murderer who shot my Grandfather and his brother in a robbery attempt will hurt our family again. If it wasn't for that, I don't think we'd give that animal too much consideration. Hard to imagine, but fear of reprisal is 100 times more pressing in my Mom's mind than justice, because justice is for society, but there can be no true justice for the victim's family.