Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Leave George Zimmerman alone!

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

President Obama made more comments on the Zimmerman case today.

 

 

 

“I think it’s important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that — that doesn’t go away,” Mr. Obama said in the briefing room. “There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me."
...Mr. Obama issued a statement shortly after the verdict. But on Friday, he talked more broadly about his own feelings about the verdict and the impact it has had among African-Americans. “You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son,” he said. “Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/us/in-wake-of-zimmerman-verdict-obama-makes-extensive-statement-on-race-in-america.html?hp&_r=0

Edited by thenelli01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am amazed that people are even entertaining the idea that it was a reasonable thought that George Zimmerman was potentially a rapist of a 5'11 black almost fully-grown 17 year old.

I think it's a reasonable statement, if your friend calls you and tells you someone is following and watching you, a reasonable response might be, hey, maybe it's some kind of rapist, you should probably be careful. Of course it does not follow that you should break the person's nose and slam their skull into the pavement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a reasonable statement, if your friend calls you and tells you someone is following and watching you, a reasonable response might be, hey, maybe it's some kind of rapist, you should probably be careful. Of course it does not follow that you should break the person's nose and slam their skull into the pavement.

 

I think that it might be a reasonable response as a joke, not something that a 5'11 black 17-year old needs to be worried about.

Edited by thenelli01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... not something that a 5'11 black 17-year old needs to be worried about.

"black"? ;)

But, I agree that Trayvon, who boasted that he had beat up some guy at school, but needed to do it again because he'd not seen enough blood, was not physically intimidated by Zimmerman. If he came and circled Zimmerman's vehicle, as the latter reported, it was probably to check out who he was dealing with (not exactly the act of someone who thinks he might become a victim). When he attacked Zimmerman, he probably thought he was going to fix this podgy little guy; and, he pretty much did so, up until Zimmerman shot him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's that far-fetched. The strangest part about this trial is trying to figure out why Martin attacked Zimmerman. Maybe it's as snerd says, maybe not. To me, it doesn't make sense that Martin would attack Zimmerman to 'teach him a lesson' or because he was 'thirsty for blood.' Notice that Martin didn't get violent until Zimmerman reached for a concealed item. (Zimmerman said he reached for his cell phone, but who knows if that's what he actually did. He could've gotten scared and reached for his gun, and when Martin saw it, he attacked him. Unfortunately, the evidence does not tell us the whole story, and we only have Zimmerman to fill in the gaps.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trayvon's out looking to rob someone; some guy calls 911 on him, so he tries to run home before the cops arrive.

As he's running the little snitch who told on him starts chasing him.

At some point I imagine Trayvon glanced behind himself, saw who was chasing him and thought something along the lines of "Who does he think he IS?!"

It's really not that far-fetched.

What's more farfetched is that he would respond to a gun with his fists (I have trouble believing him to be that stupid. . . Darwin Award) and what's absolutely asanine is that he may have attempted to beat Zimmerman to death- out of fear.

 

The only rational conclusion one could draw is that Martin was genuinely afraid of the police (for good reason!) but not of Zimmerman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that matters in this specific case, and any others like it, is whether or not while being assaulted an individual has the right to defend themselves from an aggressor.

Well no, that's not really the only thing that matters. I don't think anyone in here, or even most people in general, are denying the non-aggression principle or the right of self-defense in this case. Principles beyond NAP or self-defense alone are necessary for determining where my rights end and yours begin. People might be in the grip of a picture that will act as a conceptual filter for how they apply NAP/self-defense and who they recognize as victim and aggressor without, at the same time, formally contradicting NAP/self-defense. The point of a reasonable discussion is finding out what the picture is, and whereby they come about it, and what it commits them to believing.

Edited by 2046
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a reasonable statement, if your friend calls you and tells you someone is following and watching you, a reasonable response might be, hey, maybe it's some kind of rapist, you should probably be careful. Of course it does not follow that you should break the person's nose and slam their skull into the pavement.

It is unreasonable because it is arbitrary. It has no basis in fact. Then again, Treyvon's actions were irrational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is unreasonable because it is arbitrary. It has no basis in fact. Then again, Treyvon's actions were irrational.

That's... not corresponding with my understanding of "arbitrary." Surely, most everyone knows that there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, to piggyback on the previous report of Pres. Obama's "Treyvon speech," many libertarians have pointed out the irony of Obama's apparent dislike of unwanted surveillance and the application of drug laws when he makes the following statements:

 

"There are very few African-American men in this country who have not had the experience of being followed when they are shopping at a department store. That includes me," the president said.

 

and

 

"The African-American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws, everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws," he said

 

Seeing as how Rachael Jeantel, Trayvon's friend who was on the phone with him that night, told Piers Morgan on CNN that "creepy ass cracker" is not a reference to race, but means "a person who act like they a police," it stands to reason that perhaps Treyvon would consider President Obama to be a pretty huge "creepy ass cracker" for ordering NSA surveillance and for opposing state decriminalization of drugs.

Edited by 2046
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Notice that Martin didn't get violent until Zimmerman reached for a concealed item.

Notice? Notice where? You mean in Zimmerman's statement? You want me to treat Zimmerman's statement as fact? Or do you want me to dismiss Zimmerman's statement, in which case, the question stands: Notice where?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ It's been corroborated by Martin's friend who was on the phone listening to the confrontation.

 

Then again, Treyvon's actions were irrational.

 

No, Martin's actions only appear irrational because we don't know what his motivations were.

Edited by mdegges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So George Zimmerman's testimony is unreliable, because he's the accused in this case, but the testimony of that 'person' IS reliable?

 

I know there's a principled foundation to this but it seems very wrong to me.  Especially when you consider that Trayvon Martin was also on trial here, since HIS actions are the difference between Zimmerman's guilt or innocence.

 

There is something wrong with that reasoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's... not corresponding with my understanding of "arbitrary." Surely, most everyone knows that there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims.

That's the problem these days. Everyone is a potentially homosexual nazi member of the Mexican mafia with transgender rage. There are arbitrary concepts and then there are arbitrary propositions. Yours is an arbitrary proposition and hence should be treated as though nothing has been said. It has no basis and even a court would dismiss it as so much unsupported nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the problem these days. Everyone is a potentially homosexual nazi member of the Mexican mafia with transgender rage. There are arbitrary concepts and then there are arbitrary propositions. Yours is an arbitrary proposition and hence should be treated as though nothing has been said. It has no basis and even a court would dismiss it as so much unsupported nonsense.

I'm sorry, I don't get you. The proposition "there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims" has no basis in actual events that happen in reality, according to you? Okay... well... I would simply just have to disagree with that.

 

I mean, here's an instance of that Rapist follows his victim "This CCTV footage shows Opemipo Jaji following his 11-year-old victim off a bus before he went on to rape her in a nearby park."

Edited by 2046
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't get you. The proposition "there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims" has no basis in actual events that happen in reality, according to you? Okay... well... I would simply just have to disagree with that.

 

I mean, here's an instance of that Rapist follows his victim "This CCTV footage shows Opemipo Jaji following his 11-year-old victim off a bus before he went on to rape her in a nearby park."

I haven't clicked the link. I hope it's just a popup with the text "I'm just [email protected]#$ng with you. You didn't honestly think a human being can be that unreasonable, did you, stupid?". Edited by Nicky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't clicked the link. I hope it's just a popup with the text "I'm just [email protected]#$ng with you. You didn't honestly think a human being can be that unreasonable, did you, stupid?".

I'm sorry, I don't get you. Either there are instances of rapists following their victims, which I would think is a proposition that most everyone generally has knowledge of, or there isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't get you. Either there are instances of rapists following their victims,...

I assume he's commenting on the mismatch of talking about Trayvon, but linking to the case of a 11 year old girl. Do you really think Trayvon might seriously have thought Zimmerman was stalking him to rape him?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume he's commenting on the mismatch of talking about Trayvon, but linking to the case of a 11 year old girl. Do you really think Trayvon might seriously have thought Zimmerman was stalking him to rape him?

Yes I would think Trayvon would probably not match an 11 year old girl. Please feel free to point out where I said otherwise so that we can make all the necessary corrections.

 

In any event, either there is basis in reality for the proposition "there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims" or there isn't. It seems to me there is basis for it, and I would have thought that to be a common item of knowledge among most people. How it follows from that that Trayvon must be linked to the case of an 11 year old girl escapes me.

 

You ask me what I think Trayvon might have been thinking. And I don't know, we only have Jeantel's cellphone conversation to indicate what he might have been thinking, wherein she replies (basically) that, hey, maybe it's some kind of rapist, you should be careful, which I think is a reasonable reaction. To wit, she also said that he didn't want a "creepy ass cracker" going to his father or girlfriend's house, where his little brother was. Other than that, I find your statement in #129 to be reasonable.

 

If you want to summarize, here's what all I actually said instead of what you want to pretend/imagine/assume I said:

1. there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims, which is common knowledge to most people. (#136. #144)

2. if your friend calls you and tells you someone is following and watching you, a reasonable response might be, hey, maybe it's some kind of rapist, you should probably be careful, the basis of that being (1) (#127)

3. If we believe Jeantel's account of the cellphone conversation with Trayvon, it's reasonable to assume he was creeped out at being followed and thus confronted Zimmerman rather than allowing him to follow him to his father's home

 

Here's a list of things I didn't say, just in case people were wondering:

1. Trayvon is the same as an 11 year old girl

2. Trayvon has anything to do with an 11 year old girl

3. Trayvon had a reason to believe he was going to be raped

4. Trayvon was justified in smashing Zimmerman's skull on the pavement

5. Zimmerman is a rapist

6. Zimmerman can likely rape Trayvon

7. Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon

8. Zimmerman was trying to rape Trayvon

Did I miss anything?

 

It seems to me that, contra the ethics of discourse, people want to treat discussion as if it were some kind of sport wherein one scores points, rather than a search for the truth. I think that reduces discussion to sophistry and argument from intimidation, which is all we see mainly out of some people. Representing what someone says accurately is an absolute necessity for responding to what someone actually said, and responding to only what someone actually says instead of pretending they said something else and responding to that is the only helpful way to proceed for participants seeking the truth, not to mention that such tactics are deductively invalid.

Edited by 2046
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't get you. The proposition "there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims" has no basis in actual events that happen in reality, according to you? Okay... well... I would simply just have to disagree with that.

 

I mean, here's an instance of that Rapist follows his victim "This CCTV footage shows Opemipo Jaji following his 11-year-old victim off a bus before he went on to rape her in a nearby park."

 

Your proposition "there are instances of rapists following, stalking, watching their victims" and subsequent posting of that article has no relevance to the claim that Trayvon (a 17 year old 5'11 male) may have reasonably thought that George Zimmerman was going to rape him. You are diverting the issue.

 

Your proposition should be: There are instances of young adults being raped by older men. And then post an article like this one: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/man-abducted-from-train-and-raped-1557478.html.

 

However, my response would be: It is very uncommon as it only happens on rare occasions, so it wouldn't be a proper or reasonable profiling of George Zimmerman. And if Trayvon did really believe that GZ was a rapist, his proper response would be to avoid confrontation as it would be very unlikely that GZ would be able to rape him unless he had some sort of weapon. In every example of men raping other men that I have read, there was the use of a weapon - either a knife or a gun - used as a threat to force them to comply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this rape talk is a distraction that wouldn't have existed if Pierce Morgan was willing to put professional ethics before his crusade against guns. Feel free to continue with it if you think there is some real value there, but I suggest we drop it. It is a reasonable possibility that Martin thought Zimmerman was interested in assaulting (not raping) him. That might be worth a short discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...