or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by NameBack

Well, I don't claim to be a legal expert, but it seems to me that a lot of the outrage originates with the notion that Zimmerman provoked the confrontation. That Martin felt the need to defend himself due to Zimmerman's unreasonable actions. I think people find the idea very distressing that you could theoretically cause an altercation, and then kill the person you provoked without being found legally culpable. It seems like a strange loophole. I'm not sure how to close...
And so, because he committed no crime, there is no grounds for outrage, dismay, sadness? Because he committed no crime, there is no place for desire that such behavior be classified as criminal in the future? Because he committed no crime, there is no place for doubt as to whether the law would have been applied equally fairly to a black defendant? Because he committed no crime, it is impossible to suggest his actions were influenced by racial bias?
You yourself have said that you believe Zimmerman bears a moral responsibility for what happened, right? So do many other people. Those people are dismayed or outraged that such a moral responsibility was not addressed by the state. I think that is fair and reasonable. You may disagree on the extent of the moral responsibility, but I think many people are indeed convinced, and not unreasonably so, that Zimmerman did something wrong, and that the system either could not or...
And what actual facts are you suggesting don't matter, Harvey?
Can you explain this? It's very vague.
I think the sadness is that the law as written and applied did not allow for the punishment of what many see as a clear moral wrong. I think that is a fair thing to be sad or angry about. I think that is something that many people get angry about, when the law is applied fairly and yet what seems to be a clear wrong goes unpunished.
No, I agree, I think most everyone does consider it tragic on some level. I just think that sometimes that gets lost in the vitriol of political debate, and that it's sad to lose sight of the fact at the core of this event--that an innocent boy on the verge of adulthood lost his life unnecessarily. I think we do all agree on that when we are brought back to it, when we are asked to remember it.I've seen people, and I don't mean specifically SF (though somewhat in this...
Also, let's be clear--there is indeed a great deal out of outrage about black-on-black crime and black teenagers being killed by their peers. There are hundreds of protests, events, fora, and marches about this every year in the black community nation-wide. It is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. The question is why do more people beyond the local, directly affected communities not pay attention to this issue? Why does it not get play in the media? Why are so many people...
I'm sort of shocked that people don't understand the basic idea here: People clamored for a trial because they believed Zimmerman bore some moral culpability--which is not an unreasonable position. In fact, I think it's hard to argue that it is not the most reasonable position. It was not, as Harvey states, immediately certain that Zimmerman was innocent. The prosecutors knew that the case would be difficult and conviction would be unlikely--but that's not the same thing...
Piob, you're sort of right but also mostly wrong on why inequality has increased, but I'll agree with you that Obama won't actually succeed in doing much to address it. My point was that his voters believe that he will address it, and he believes he will address it. You characterized this as Obama using a "bogeyman" of high-income earners and big business to get elected, but what I'm suggesting to you, if you would take off your partisan blinders for a moment, is that...
New Posts  All Forums: