In case any of you haven't heard, George Zimmerman was just acquitted in the case of the manslaughter* of Trayvon Martin.

The verdict declared him not guilty, and I for one, felt there was racial profiling from it. Was just opening this up for thoughts, discussion, etc.

*He should have been charged for manslaughter, not murder, which is why the prosecutors didn't really give good evidence because the charge they were charging was legally correct, whereas murder is pre-determined/pre-planned killing, manslaughter is the opposite. There are different legal terminology from state to state however.

Oh gosh I knew somebody would make a topic on this. This trial has lots of fervor attached to it and the argument is reflective of the greater discussion of politics so, don't get all rowdy in this topic.

I for one, think the jury got it right/not wrong (Even if he was theoretically guilty, its better to declare a guilty person innocent than an innocent person guilty). I don't think any of us would be hearing about this if George Zimmerman was African-American or of course if Trayvon Martin was White or if they were both black.

This was something overhyped by the media, the President, the Justice Department (who all wanted a conviction presumably). It was a tragedy, yes, not a crime I don't think.


Zimmerman is far from any racist neo-nazi many will claim he is.


The prosecution didn't have much evidence or support for the manslaughter charge either other than the "George Zimmerman acted negligibly when the dispatcher told him not to follow (or whatever what was said)" argument.

Manslaughter would mean an accident, he meant to shoot him and therefore it's premeditated as I understand it

It's an important issue to discuss Bronx; it was, in a sense, racial profiling. I passed by the rally today, while I was in the city, and there was people such as myself that saw that Zimmerman should have been guilty and that his act, in a sense, was racial profiling, because he assumed Martin was a threat because of his race and appearance.

And racial profiling does exist and is present today; I was shook and grabbed intentionally by a police officer and asked what I was doing. I was heading to my grandma's house. I was 12. Only reason he grabbed me was because of my skin color (was a bit more tan when I was younger) and my race (latino-american). Is he a nazi? Hell no. But Martin's race did have an affect on Zimmerman's actions.

Now Deathdealer, that's actually the proper way to look at it; the way I looked at it was that murder is more premeditated, whereas manslaughter is more at the moment, if you know what I mean.

[EDIT:] Read that statement incorrectly; so basically I repeated. That's a good way of looking at it, but he didn't really plan ahead to kill Martin, whereas he killed him in the sense that he was a threat, so he stalked him.

who cares??? Zimmerman was found not-guilty by the law... deal with it.

Well, sure it is important to discuss. But we wouldn't be discussing the makeup of the parties involved were different races. And it's debatable as to whether or not it was racial profiling. Maybe Zimmerman was profiling him because the time of the incident and the history of past crimes in the neighborhood?


"Racial profiling" isn't as wrong as most people think it is I don't believe. My father and mother work in corrections and well there are a disproportionately higher number of hispanics and blacks in there, like 75%~, incarcerated (I didn't need to tell my parents' occupations though). I think affirmative action (called "positive" discrimination elsewhere lol) is more wrong than racial profiling.

It isn't as wrong, but none-of-the-less, it's wrong.

And red, that was uncalled for, and rude, because I care, as if this were a tragedy due to racial profiling, then it affects me, because it's been done to me, and my family as well, various times. I was 12 when I was stopped and held firmly by a cop because of my race. Never in my life I would've thought that would have happened to me. But it did, and since then, it shows that where you come from, matters, even if you have no control over it. And to think, I'm a citizen by birth, and part latino through my parents, and that happened.

well sorry that you experienced that. But it would have been different if you attacked the cop first.

But that's the thing. I didn't, and Trayvon Martin didn't do anything as well. Hell, I was going to my grandma's house (my house) coming back from basketball practice. In what way was I doing wrong? Same thing applies to this case; Martin was suspected as a threat because he looked like one; otherwise why would Zimmerman attack/kill him?

DeadlyChaos09 wrote:

But that's the thing. I didn't, and Trayvon Martin didn't do anything as well. Hell, I was going to my grandma's house (my house) coming back from basketball practice. In what way was I doing wrong? Same thing applies to this case; Martin was suspected as a threat because he looked like one; otherwise why would Zimmerman attack/kill him?

Trayvon martin attacked zimmerman. and if you think otherwise.. well then. show me proof.
oh wait you can't..

Zimmerman didn't have proof he was attacked though did he?

Hello all.

Zimmerman actually had defensive wounds.

This trial should have been tossed out long ago due to the heavily racial sway by the gov., media, and other outlets.

Where is the media attention, and riots for the 13 year-old that was attacked by those of a darker color, by having gasoline poured on him, and then lit on fire?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/teenagers-poured-gasoline-boy-walking-home-school-set-fire-cops-article-1.1033062

How about the white couple that were car-jacked, then brutally raped, and murdered? No riots for them. NO media coverage, or presidential speakers fo them.

Anyone remember when the whites rioted after O.J. Simpson's acquittal? Me neither.

He had wounds on his nose and the back of his head. And to be quite honest, I would possibly attack/interrogate someone who is stalking me around, because THAT seems more as a threat than Trayvon Martin presented in the first place.

Splinter, those things happen, and I don't understand why the gov't necessarily started siding due to the racial component of this case, but either way, all those crimes have been wrong because they've portrayed the racial profiling. Apparently, this was just one that really affected the nation; not sure why, but I know why it affected me.

And on your statement of O.J. Simpson, in this case, it wasn't just African-Americans rioting; there were Latino-Americans, Asians, Europeans, etc.

DeadlyChaos09 wrote:

He had wounds on his nose and the back of his head. And to be quite honest, I would possibly attack/interrogate someone who is stalking me around, because THAT seems more as a threat than Trayvon Martin presented in the first place.

Splinter, those things happen, and I don't understand why the gov't necessarily started siding due to the racial component of this case, but either way, all those crimes have been wrong because they've portrayed the racial profiling. Apparently, this was just one that really affected the nation; not sure why, but I know why it affected me.

And on your statement of O.J. Simpson, in this case, it wasn't just African-Americans rioting; there were Latino-Americans, Asians, Europeans, etc.

well than.. i guess you would get shot too.

I'm sorry, but the first thing Bronx said was not to get rowdy, and you're starting to push my buttons, because all you have been in this thread is rude and unnecessary.

The whole point I'm trying to make is that Zimmerman presented a threat more than Martin did, and he was only considered a threat because of his race and appearance. If you think otherwise, then that is your opinion, and I'll respect it, but at least show some decency to respect mine, because all you have done is be ludicrous and vulgar about the topic.

I'm simply stating the facts.

redviper911 wrote:

who cares??? Zimmerman was found not-guilty by the law... deal with it.

redviper911 wrote:

well sorry that you experienced that. But it would have been different if you attacked the cop first.

redviper911 wrote:

well than.. i guess you would get shot too.

Facts? Facts provide logic and reasoning, not bias and opinion, which is clearly what you are presenting. In addition, it is extremely unnecessary for you to be that vulgar while stating your "facts". I'm curious to know why you are siding with Zimmerman. I accepted the verdict. Why can't you accept that, since you've been the only one that hasn't acted as civil as proposed.

[EDIT:]
2.11"The Respect and Civility Rule" - Be respectful at ALL times to anyone and everyone in the clan. These guys are your brothers and sisters and since we operate as a 'family;'' we want to treat each other like family too. This also means that we will not form cliques or unions in the clan. We don't want a certain group of people either standing against someone or something. This hurts overall Clan Policy. We must break down these barriers in the clan that hold hostage the most important aspects and values of it. Foul and abusive language is to be kept to a minimum. Outright disrespectful language and, well, disrespect, will not be tolerated.

.10 - NEVER make a complaint about someone or something in the Clan on the forum in public.
I rest my case.

I'm not complaining. I'm simply stating facts. You're being rude and offensive, and I'm making you aware of that. This discussion was for thoughts, in a civil manner, to be put out. Then you tell me to "deal with it". That was uncalled for. You don't know me, and I don't know you. So why would you come in and tell me it doesn't matter, when to me, it does?

The rule you used is similar to, "DeadlyChaos is annoying, has no skill, eats all the pie, etc.", whereas I'm calling you out for how obscene and inconsiderate you've been.

well i'll stop commenting before I upset you more.
good bye

Hey guys lets keep things calm and just talk about the topic at hand.
If you have a problem with something or someone just speak with the appropriate authority in this clan to figure out the problem and help to find a solution. From past experiences arguing does nothing but make the situation even worse and cause unnecessary drama. Lets keep not only this thread but all threads respectful, nice, and understanding of one another.

We are family after all

At the end on the day the court has decided so there's really no point for people to complain as the court won't change it just because people are upset

totalwarrior6780 wrote:

At the end on the day the court has decided so there's really no point for people to complain as the court won't change it just because people are upset

But the federal government will try.

It's obvious that Eric Holder and his f... buddy Obama aren't pleased and consider Trayvon's death "unnecessary" and probably support the civil rights charges against him. I mean how the hell are they suppossed to know that it was unnecessary? They weren't there.

Btw for all you wondering about whether it was pre-meditated murder (i.e. A guy/girl going to his/her ex's house to shoot him/her). Please note that George Zimmerman was a member of the Neighborhood Watch and had no history of being a racist or neo-nazi, whatever. Maybe even the leader of the NW for his community, but I'm not sure about that.

So if he REALLY just wanted to kill Trayvon because he was black, don't you think he would NOT have called 911 and just followed him, then the second he saw Trayvon was black shoot him? Also note the wounds found on GZ and the fact that there was grass stains on Trayvon's pants (possibly from being on top of GZ).

The only "evidence" or lack thereof that the prosecutors had against Zimmerman and the main reason people jumped to conclusions was that he didn't do what he was told and got out of his car. That does NOTHING to support their case for pre-meditated murder. All that says is that George made a mistake. They had no evidence to prove that once GZ got out of that car, he had the sole intention of ending Trayvon Martin's life. The jury got it right.

Now move on.

totalwarrior6780 wrote:

At the end on the day the court has decided so there's really no point for people to complain as the court won't change it just because people are upset

Not that the court "won't" change it, but it can't as that is called double jeopardy and is against the 5th amendment in the Constitution.

Federal court can charge them but if they do that'll be a real injustice....



A guy I'm friend's with on Facebook who is a liberal and takes up a liberal view on everything stated this:

Quote :

Trayvon Martin was a delinquent. He had previously been suspended on 3 different occasions for spray painting lockers, possessing stolen diamonds, and having an empty bag that previously contained marijuana. Also, Martin posted several pictures on social media of him smoking dope and posing with guns in poses that imply criminal intent. In addition to his criminal activity, he also was close to failing out of school. During the trial it was proven (both the defense and prosecution acknowledged) that Trayvon had broken Zimmerman's nose and slammed his head with a concrete slab. Also, Martin was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot as the bullet wound was proven to be at a 90 degree angle and point blank range. It was midnight in a town with an 8 o'clock curfew and Zimmerman (a member of the neighborhood watch) had every legal right to question Trayvon's activities in the neighborhood regardless of his skin color. If you look at the facts, how is it even a question that he was found not guilty?

Who said Trayvon Martin was an angel?

[EDIT:]
I also forgot to mention that while visiting the rally, that there were a lot of people blaming that if Zimmerman didn't have the gun, he couldn't kill Martin, which shocked me really bad, even though the guy talked a lot of rubbish stating that there are more guns than there are people in the country, everyone who owns a gun is white, blah, blah, blah.