Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, March 12, 2012

Kansas City Royals All-Star Mike Sweeney Endorses Santorum for President

Forgive me for posting this.

The Rick Santorum for President campaign is proud to announce that it has received the endorsement of All-Star Major Leaguer Mike Sweeney.

Mike Sweeney said: “I take great pride in the success I’ve had on the baseball field, but even greater satisfaction in knowing that I have spent my entire life embracing Godly principles and instilling these values into the everyday lives of my children, family and friends. After personally getting to know Rick Santorum, I am absolutely convinced that he is the only candidate in the 2012 Presidential race that shares these same core values! The moral decline of our great country must stop now and this can only be achieved through real leadership and real solutions. I believe Senator Santorum has the wisdom, passion and vision to bring our country back to global excellence with those core Christian beliefs that our Founding Fathers envisioned, including protecting the rights of the unborn child, in mind.  This election is the most important in my lifetime and as a father, husband, and American I am proud to play on Rick Santorum’s team!”

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 12, 2012 at 10:55 AM | 2194 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: general

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 22 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 20 21 22
   2101. Something Other Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:08 AM (#4091998)
§ 776.012. Use of force in defense of person
[A] person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself . . . or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to § 776.013.
As I think was noted upthread this doesn't allow someone to provoke a situation, to instigate a situation, where he reasonably believes he's about to be grievously harmed, murders his counterpart, and go home that night. At least, it's not supposed to happen that way.
   2102. Something Other Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:10 AM (#4091999)
Don't worry about it, your's, Sam's, and Something Other's desire to knock people around because they said something you didn't like puts you in the overwhelming majority. See for reference: entire human history of violence over idiotic crap.
Wow. You're an idiot.
   2103. Lassus Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:12 AM (#4092001)
Wow. You're a ####### idiot.

Clever.
   2104. formerly dp Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:13 AM (#4092002)
Sad to say, non-violence is often an invitation to more violence.

Non-violence in response to violence, yes. But that's not what's being discussed here-- we're talking about non-violence in the face of non-violence (words not actions). Some people want to thump their chests. Let them. But don't play into their hands by responding in kind, unless what's motivating you isn't actually a fear for the safety of your body. I'm not talking about an Egyptian MP cracking you over the skull-- this is "guy insults you (or your mom!) at a bar," and your ability to react in a way that doesn't result in the both of you lying bloodied on the ground (or worse).
   2105. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 12:50 AM (#4092007)
I have never posted anything here that I would not say in person. I try to refrain from being a jerk because I care about being a decent human being, not because I'm afraid someone would strike me. This is as ridiculous a position as the idea that the only thing stopping us from killing one another is the moral code laid out in the Bible.

Same here. Aside from hopefully being a "decent human being," I find that posting under my real name is a manner of self-policing.* I don't mean this as an indictment of people who use an alias — I know a lot of people have no choice because they post from work, etc. — but without a doubt, the anonymity of the internet provides a lot of people with "keyboard cojones," so to speak.

(* That's not to say I never have to click the old "edit" button to revise and extend my remarks ...)

Sharpton is a buffoon,

I prefer "race-baiting poverty pimp." I know J.C. Watts said that about Jesse Jackson, but if the shoe fits, etc.

Non-violence in response to violence, yes. But that's not what's being discussed here-- we're talking about non-violence in the face of non-violence (words not actions). Some people want to thump their chests. Let them. But don't play into their hands by responding in kind, unless what's motivating you isn't actually a fear for the safety of your body. I'm not talking about an Egyptian MP cracking you over the skull-- this is "guy insults you (or your mom!) at a bar," and your ability to react in a way that doesn't result in the both of you lying bloodied on the ground (or worse).

Very well said.
   2106. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: March 29, 2012 at 01:56 AM (#4092020)
If he didn't believe the guy following him was armed and dangerous, then that eliminates the rationale for approaching Zimmerman and hitting him.
Exactly. Martin was seemingly concerned, but you didn't hear panic screaming over the phone, and he didn't call 911. If we're to assume that Martin hit Zimmerman first, then something had to cause it. Zimmerman initiated everything else that evening, it's reasonable to suppose that he either initiated physical contact, or provoked it in some way. If it was the latter (or even the former, depending) Zimmerman may not have done anything illegal, but it wouldn't be out of line to say that Zimmerman created a situation where violence — and with a gun present, lethal violence — was a likely outcome.
   2107. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 02:56 AM (#4092028)
If it was the latter (or even the former, depending) Zimmerman may not have done anything illegal, but it wouldn't be out of line to say that Zimmerman created a situation where violence — and with a gun present, lethal violence — was a likely outcome.

I'm with you until the "likely outcome" part. It's unclear exactly (1) how long Zimmerman followed Martin and (2) how long Martin was aware he was being followed, but unless it was a cat-and-mouse chase with multiple turns, etc., there's nothing unusual about contacts like this, whether it's inside a gated community, an apartment complex or HOA, college campus, etc. There are right ways and wrong ways to go about it, but the simple act of making contact with someone walking down a public street shouldn't have anything close to a "likely outcome" of violence.

It's possible Zimmerman is a cold-blooded killer. It's possible Zimmerman is a hapless mall cop who unintentionally scared Martin into acting violently and then overreacted in response. And it's also possible that Martin, being a teenage kid, sensed that Zimmerman was a hapless mall cop and tried to turn the tables. I have no idea which one is true, and, unfortunately, we might never know.
   2108. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 06:23 AM (#4092053)
Your relentless whining is both amusing and sad, since it was you that chose to engage me several hundred posts ago, and not the reverse. Indeed, within a couple of posts of your recent simpering about personal oppression, you take another shot at me. Your sad projection by now should be obvious even to you.
Chose to engage you? I don't even know who the hell you are. I mean, you're not Retardo, who, while as nasty as you, had his own unique style, and didn’t pretend (to the best of my recollection) to know anything about the law. You're some anonymous nobody who's been chasing me around, yapping at my heels. "Noxious"? "Relentless whining"? "Corporal"? (*) What the hell are you even talking about? You seem to be entirely deranged, referring to imaginary conversations you think you've had with me, like David Letterman's stalker who thought he was sending her messages through the television based on the color of the tie he wore. She started breaking into his house afterwards; do I need to increase security around here?




(*) (That last one doesn't even make sense. It's not actually an insult, except in the case of Kevin it was a way to mock the fact that he was caught lying about having served in the military.)
   2109. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 06:53 AM (#4092057)
You're some anonymous nobody who's been chasing me around, yapping at my heels.

She started breaking into his house afterwards; do I need to increase security around here?


Nah, that would make you a girly-man. Do a little detective work, go to the source, and punch him out.
   2110. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 29, 2012 at 06:59 AM (#4092060)
But there had been trouble. In 2008, in correspondence to the local sheriff's department, Zimmerman said he was involved three years earlier in an "altercation with an undercover officer that was taking part in a … sting for underage drinking" near a university. He was charged with battery of an officer and resisting an officer with violence. Court records show the charges were reduced to a misdemeanor of resisting an officer without violence. A judge ordered him to a pretrial diversion program.

Court records also show that a woman filed a petition for an injunction against Zimmerman that same year, citing domestic violence. According to the Miami Herald, the woman, who was his ex-fiancee, said they fought and engaged in a pushing match. Zimmerman also filed a petition, and a judge ordered the couple to keep away from each other for a year.


I don't find a lot in this to condemn Zimmerman over. My recollection of the details I've heard on this suggest Zimmerman was heckling a cop that was arresting his a friend of Zimmermans, and that it wasn't anything violent. As for the pushing match, that's also not something I find disturbing. You'd rather it didn't happen, but it's a far cry from a report that Zimmerman had beaten someone smaller and weaker, or had gotten into even a single fistfight.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think I want someone like that either being allowed to carry a gun or patrol a neighborhood. I quoted Curtis Sliwa's take on Zimmerman upthread, and I think he hit the nail on the head: Untrained people have no business patrolling the streets, and untrained people with a history of confrontation patrolling the streets while armed are an explosion waiting to happen.

Zimmerman does make me think of Bernie Goetz, though. A fearful guy, probably somewhat paranoid, itching for some action, angry at his impotence ("They always get away"), wants to be involved with law enforcement, has a history of minor scrapes. Not strong or disciplined enough to really learn how to defend himself or how to operate while carrying a gun and what that means and the kinds of situations it creates. The trouble with carrying a gun often follows from when the person you're confronting doesn't back down. People who don't understand the practical enforcement of law or the dynamics of confrontation often become extremely dangerous in those situations. They assume that because you can see the gun in its holster that you'll do what they want. People often aren't intimidated, and instead become angry that you're threatening them, gun be damned.

There's little there to disagree with, but whatever you want to say about Bernard Goetz, he had infinitely more reason to fear imminent physical harm than Zimmerman. Not to mention that unlike Zimmerman, he didn't set his whole series of tragic events in motion by following around the four men who came up to him---they initiated it by surrounding him in the subway, blocking him off from the other passengers, and then "asking" him for 5 dollars.

The immediate cause of both tragedies was that both Zimmerman and Goetz were carrying guns; without that, no lives would have been lost and nobody crippled for life. But the underlying cause of both of these events was the initial unprovoked conduct of the instigators---Zimmerman and the four men who surrounded Goetz in a classically threatening manner. Goetz may have been a psychopath, and his gun wasn't even registered, but I can still identify with the situation he was in a lot more than I can identify with Zimmerman's.

Have we gotten his political affiliation yet?

I think that someone upthread said he was a registered Democrat, but that's neither here nor there. Unstable individuals come in all political persuasions.
   2111. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:10 AM (#4092062)
Alan Keyes told Ray that blacks think Sharpton is a buffoon.
   2112. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:11 AM (#4092063)
I think that someone upthread said [Zimmerman] was a registered Democrat, but that's neither here nor there. Unstable individuals come in all political persuasions.

Typical libtard, pushing his socialist bullet giveaway scheme. It's hands up, not a handout.
   2113. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:20 AM (#4092064)
Goetz may have been a psychopath, and his gun wasn't even registered, but I can still identify with the situation he was in a lot more than I can identify with Zimmerman's.

You must be from New York, then. [/Lithgow, in "Terms of Endearment"]
   2114. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 29, 2012 at 07:44 AM (#4092065)
Goetz may have been a psychopath, and his gun wasn't even registered, but I can still identify with the situation he was in a lot more than I can identify with Zimmerman's.

You must be from New York, then. [/Lithgow, in "Terms of Endearment"]


Born there, and returned there many times in the 70's and early 80's. Never had any problem on the subways myself, but in those last years I was always glad to see one of those Guardian Angels around. Maybe if Zimmerman had trained with them we wouldn't be having this discussion.
   2115. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 08:32 AM (#4092080)
I suppose those bending over backwards to defend Zimmerman are digesting the newly released video showing Zimmerman in handcuffs with no visible injuries to his face and head. What will your spin be?
   2116. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 08:51 AM (#4092086)
2115 — Funny how the flip side of that apparently still hasn't occurred to you — i.e., that it was illogical to assume he was guilty before a shred of evidence had been released.
   2117. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 08:53 AM (#4092090)
Funny how the flip side of this apparently still hasn't occurred to you — i.e., that it was illogical to assume he was guilty before a shred of evidence had been released.


There's a ton of evidence available in the public square, and it all suggests strongly that Zimmerman is a murderer. It requires heavy squinting and a week's worth of hand waving to ignore the evidence the way you are intent to do.
   2118. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:06 AM (#4092101)
2117 — Until last night's tape, there was little or no evidence "available in the public square," just leaks and conjecture. But you knew that already.
   2119. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:06 AM (#4092102)
2115 — Funny how the flip side of that apparently still hasn't occurred to you — i.e., that it was illogical to assume he was guilty before a shred of evidence had been released.

I don't think I weighed in until weeks after the incident. I'm impartial. I'm reacting to everything I see and hear about it.

I'll admit to being irrational in this respect: When I see the usual suspects in here auditioning to play the role of "defense lawyer", it puts me off.

Here comes the bleating: "All accused are entitled to a lawyer, blah blah blah". Yes, this is very important. He needs a good attorney. But if Zimmerman is smart, he won't look here for one. (No offense to the many fine attorneys who post here...most of whom haven't commented, and those who have, haven't posted anything weaselly. Unless I missed something.)
   2120. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:07 AM (#4092104)
So all the doubt cast on Zimmerman's story was just another lucky guess, huh, Joe?
   2121. Zonk cooks his superfish with raisins Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:12 AM (#4092107)
Gettin' pretty surreal -- Sanford police threaten to arrest reporters...

Sanford Police threatened to arrest members of the media who approach or ask questions off the clock.

A press release sent out Wednesday said police would arrest journalists who attempt to make contact with city employees during non-working hours. They asked to not approach, call or email the city employees at home.

Some city staffers have been "followed or approached at their home or in settings outside of working hours," the release said.

"Law enforcement officials will not hesitate to make an arrest for stalking."


TFA doesn't say -- but I'm guessing that all city employees have been prohibited from purchasing skittles and iced tea, while a great number of reporters have applied for conceal and carry permits and appointed themselves block captains to avoid running afoul of the Sanford PD's zero tolerance for stalking.
   2122. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:13 AM (#4092109)
I don't think I weighed in until weeks after the incident. I'm impartial. I'm reacting to everything I see and hear about it.

LOL. No one here even knew about this until about four days ago.

So all the doubt cast on Zimmerman's story was just another lucky guess, huh, Joe?

Yes. Being "right" here is a 50-50 guess.

By the way, anyone know when Sarah Palin will be paroled for inciting the Tucson shootings? Are those Duke lacrosse rapists still in prison?
   2123. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:16 AM (#4092110)
I'm on record that I don't believe Zimmermann's story and that there was no repetitive head-pounding (*), but there was a blow-up still picture of the police video in the Daily News today where the back of his head looks like it might have had a wound. There were no bandages, though.

(*) A conclusion arrived at by evaluating evidence, not overlaying a worldview infused with ideology on the case and praying I'm right. Yes, if the usual suspects make the same irrational street claims and demands every time something like this happens, they're bound to stumble into being right now and then. It's still unclear that they are here.
   2124. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:22 AM (#4092115)
There's a ton of evidence available in the public square, and it all suggests strongly that Zimmerman is a murderer.

Wrong again -- the screams on the tape, if they're Zimmermann's, suggest very strongly, likely definitively, that Zimmermann is not a murderer.
   2125. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:30 AM (#4092120)
What about the alleged bloody or broken nose?
   2126. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:31 AM (#4092122)
Thank god for the ideologically blind. What a rare breed. How many of them are you? 2? 4?
   2127. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:34 AM (#4092123)
The only people who seem to be praying here are the ones who bend over backwards defending Zimmerman, presumably so that it would put to rest the discussion on race that would go against the world view that they overlay on the case.
   2128. Rants Mulliniks Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:37 AM (#4092125)
After seeing the tape of a spotless Zimmerman leaving the cop car, I think its pretty obvious he's lied about the whole thing, and that the police have grossly mishandled the whole thing. That's my last comment on this black hole of a thread.
   2129. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:41 AM (#4092128)
Thank god for the ideologically blind. What a rare breed. How many of them are you? 2? 4?

Reading 2119, then reading 2123 and your response to it is amusing.
   2130. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:42 AM (#4092129)
What about the alleged bloody or broken nose?

Nobody here ever guaranteed he had a broken nose. How the hell could any of us know one way or the other? All we've done is assume his claims were true for purposes of debating the case. Which part of that is so difficult to grasp?
   2131. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:46 AM (#4092132)
By the way, anyone know when Sarah Palin will be paroled for inciting the Tucson shootings? Are those Duke lacrosse rapists still in prison?


At least you can publicly admit that your only real concern his is partisan hackery and cultural resentment. That's a start.
   2132. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:48 AM (#4092136)
At least you can publicly admit that your only real concern his is partisan hackery and cultural resentment. That's a start.

Yes, I'm sure you were the voice of reason here during the Tucson and Duke lacrosse episodes.
   2133. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:49 AM (#4092138)
2129...having an ideology doesn't preclude one from being impartial, necessarily. Who doesn't have an ideology? All of those claiming to be impartial who defend Zimmerman can be accused of the same thing you seem to be accusing me of, if Joe's "50-50" proposition is accurate.

   2134. Ray (CTL) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:51 AM (#4092141)
Famed attorney and legal scholar Oprah Winfrey is outraged that George hasn't been arrested yet, and "we all know" he should have been arrested for murdering Martin by now.

Mob rule is pretty ugly.
   2135. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4092143)
Yes, actually.

Control for socio-economics and control for over policing and over prosecution of the AA community in general and you'll sort out that "disproportionate amount of crime" pretty quickly.


Why would we control for socio-economics when talking about profiling? Police don't often stop black men wearing suits.

And over policing is a joke. Black communities have much higher rates of crime, they are underpoliced. Victim surveys confirm the disproportionate amount of crime committed by blacks, and that has nothing to do with policing or prosecution. And law abiding black people suffer at the hands of black predators.

It's amazing that you want to portray the black criminals as the aggrieved parties in this situation, rather than the inncocent black people they prey on. Truly through the looking glass.
   2136. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:54 AM (#4092146)
Aw, Ray, and you were doing so well, by your normal standards, until now.
   2137. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:55 AM (#4092149)
2129...having an ideology doesn't preclude one from being impartial, necessarily. Who doesn't have an ideology? All of those claiming to be impartial who defend Zimmerman can be accused of the same thing you seem to be accusing me of, if Joe's "50-50" proposition is accurate.

We all have ideologies, and to be fair, I don't really believe what SBB said in 2123. I just don't really believe that you're impartial, either.

   2138. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:56 AM (#4092150)
All of those claiming to be impartial who defend Zimmerman

Are people really this dense or is it some sort of performance art?

If Zimmerman drove up and shot Martin in cold blood, then he's a murderer and there's nothing to debate. The only debate here is the possible self-defense angle. That's not the same thing as "defending" Zimmerman.
   2139. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4092151)
People have been arrested and held for less.
   2140. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:59 AM (#4092153)
I'm not impartial, anymore. Who can be? I was, at the beginning, but very soon into the story, something smelled. YMMV, but I can't see how, unless it's because of what I said in 2127.
   2141. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 09:59 AM (#4092154)
I suppose those bending over backwards to defend Zimmerman are digesting the newly released video showing Zimmerman in handcuffs with no visible injuries to his face and head. What will your spin be?


Now you're bigoted against mutant healing factor. Shame on you and your ilk, no wonder Magneto has such contempt for humanity.
   2142. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:00 AM (#4092156)
Mob rule is pretty ugly.

But Andy and others told us mob rule doesn't exist -- after all, we have elections -- and that the mere use of the term was provocative.
   2143. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4092157)
   2144. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4092158)
If Zimmerman drove up and shot Martin in cold blood, then he's a murderer and there's nothing to debate. The only debate here is the possible self-defense angle. That's not the same thing as "defending" Zimmerman.

Joe, I think it's semantics. I consider what you're describing there to be "defending" Zimmerman, even though I am fully aware that no one here at any point is suggesting that the best-case description of Zimmerman is anything more than "overzealous idiot directly responsible for the death of an innocent teenager."
   2145. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4092159)
To entertain the "self-defense" angle because of unsubstantiated claims of injury to Zimmerman smells. It reeks of wagon circling. And now that those claims are being exposed as nonsense...live with it.
   2146. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:03 AM (#4092161)
Yes, I'm sure you were the voice of reason here during the Tucson and Duke lacrosse episodes.


For a man ranting about his ruthless devotion to "evidence" out of one side of his mouth, you sure are spewing a diarrhetic gusher of unmitigated "make #### up entirely" out of the other side here.
   2147. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:04 AM (#4092162)
No, Alan, people have cast doubt on whether Martin was innocent. They've taken Zimmerman's story and declared it possible, in spite of no evidence that he's telling the truth. The false claims of his "injuries" prove that, unless the ideology you overlay here prevents you from admitting it. (Not you, you seem to be open minded.)
   2148. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4092163)
Why would we control for socio-economics when talking about profiling?


Because poor people commit crime.* Not poor _black_ people. Poor people. But poor black people are profiled and arrested for it more than poor white people, who are more likely to get a warning. Want a tangential example? George Zimmerman's domestic scuffle with his ex-fiance. If he's a black guy, he goes to jail for that for a little bit, probably.

*Rich people commit crimes too, of course. But when they commit crimes, for the most part, we're told that that's just how God's own favorite form of capitalism works, and that we're lucky to have them folks "creating wealth" for us in the first place, so shut up and #### off with your "fraud" and such. We're not criminals. We're _investment bankers!_
   2149. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4092164)
2141...I was always a bigger Titanium Man fan, anyway.
   2150. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4092165)
Then, Snapper, Zimmerman is a fool.

Well, nobody but nobody disputes that!
   2151. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM (#4092166)
To entertain the "self-defense" angle because of unsubstantiated claims of injury to Zimmerman smells.

You still don't understand the self-defense "angle." A citizen doesn't have to be actually injured to be entitled to self-defense or even to use deadly force. The audio tape clearly indicates genuine and deep fear in the voice of the screamer.

Zimmermann's claims of injury are not "unsubstantiated." The report of the immediately on-scene officers said he had blood and wounds and, as noted, the police video is not inconsistent with a wound on the back of his head.

   2152. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4092168)
No, Alan, people have cast doubt on whether Martin was innocent.


No they haven't. They've intently tried to, and people who are inclined to lean that way allowed themselves the easy out, perhaps. But they haven't actually cast doubt on Martin here. A guy standing over the kid he just shot to death with a gun telling the cops "but I had to, he was beating me up" isn't something that casts doubt on anyone else.
   2153. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM (#4092169)
Joe, I think it's semantics. I consider what you're describing there to be "defending" Zimmerman,

Debating his guilt or innocence isn't remotely the same thing as having a rooting interest, as the BBTF lynch mob has been implying if not explicitly claiming. I conceded on the first page that Zimmerman could be a racist murderer.
   2154. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM (#4092170)
If he's a black guy, he goes to jail for that for a little bit, probably.

You mean like Chris Brown did?
   2155. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM (#4092171)
I saw the police video, and I saw no wounds.

The witnesses who live nearby said they thought the screams were Martin's, didn't they?

You're reaching the end of the tether. The abyss is below.
   2156. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:15 AM (#4092172)
Chris Brown is rich. Sam talked about being poor AND black.
   2157. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4092173)
I saw the police video, and I saw no wounds.

Well that settles it then.

Go to the newstand and pick up a copy of today's NY Daily News.

The witnesses who live nearby said they thought the screams were Martin's, didn't they?

No. I think it's been reported that one witness said that, but she was inferring it from the fact that the screams stopped when the gunshot went off.

And I've already said that if the screams were Martin's, then he was murdered in cold blood -- and offered a possible scenario consistent with the 47 seconds of screaming that would fit the screams being his.

   2158. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM (#4092175)
The witnesses who live nearby said they thought the screams were Martin's, didn't they?

No. According to the earliest news reports, not even Martin's father thought the screams were from Martin. (He's since changed his position.)
   2159. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM (#4092176)
Go to the newstand and pick up a copy of today's NY Daily News.

You've said some unkind things to me in the past, but this...this is beyond all decency.
   2160. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:20 AM (#4092178)
Chris Brown is rich. Sam talked about being poor AND black.

And I didn't accept his limitation, since he ####### about race regardless of the wealth of the people involved.(*) Chris Brown's a black guy who beat the #### out of his girlfriend and didn't go to jail.

(*) E.g., a rite of adolescent passage for black kids, rich and poor, is "The Talk."
   2161. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:20 AM (#4092181)
I'll go with the video. Would the Daily News be above photoshopping?
   2162. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4092183)
2160...And the victim was a black woman. OPRAH!!!!! WE NEED YOU!!!
   2163. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:23 AM (#4092185)
I would encourage both sides in this to ask themselves the question essential to good critical thinking: what would it take to change my mind? If the answer is nothing can change my mind....

Would you change your mind if a witness turns up that says Zimmerman had Martin down and was beating him.... that Zimmerman approached Martin from his truck and drew his pistol first, resulting in Martin reflexively "jumping" him?

Looking at it from the other side, what if there was a witness who claimed that Zimmerman were heading back to his truck, his back to Martin, and Martin sucker-punched him from behind? Would that make a difference.

Can you comprehend something in some other way besides just picking and choosing what you assume confirms your bias? I ask this of those on either side of this.
   2164. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:23 AM (#4092186)
I'll go with the video. Would the Daily News be above photoshopping?

I don't know, but the headline was something like "Bombshell Video Disproves Shooter's Story."

I thought it did, too, but then I looked closely at the pictures.
   2165. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4092187)
I would need to hear from someone who actually saw Martin instigate the whole thing. Not just after he was approached by Zimmerman, because Zimmerman had no business approaching Martin in the first place, given that Martin was in a place he had every right to be, and was not, IN FACT, doing anything illegal, nor in possession of anything illegal. If Zimmerman kept his Barney Fifed-monkey ass where it belonged, we're talking about Christie Brinkley's public humiliation instead of this.
   2166. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM (#4092191)
No, Alan, people have cast doubt on whether Martin was innocent. They've taken Zimmerman's story and declared it possible, in spite of no evidence that he's telling the truth. The false claims of his "injuries" prove that, unless the ideology you overlay here prevents you from admitting it. (Not you, you seem to be open minded.)

Even those choosing to assume that Zimmerman's version of events are true all seem to readily acknowledge that what led to all of this were idiotic and unnecessary actions taken by Zimmerman.

edit: Point being, those people aren't suggesting Zimmerman is some sort of hero. They're playing devil's advocate to the angry mob that has gathered. No series of events suggested here is based on any sort of solid evidence, because nothing that happened once the two starting interacting with each other is really clear.



   2167. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM (#4092192)


2165

Is that your assessment of what the law is?
   2168. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4092194)
2166...but it still seems as if they're rooting for Zimmerman to somehow come out as the "good guy".
   2169. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM (#4092195)
Maury...no. And the audition is two rooms down, on the right.

edit...2165 is how I would have behaved. I would have kept my Barney Fifed monkey ass where it belonged. In my car, or home. Minding my own business.
   2170. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM (#4092196)
Would you change your mind if a witness turns up that says Zimmerman had Martin down and was beating him.... that Zimmerman approached Martin from his truck and drew his pistol first, resulting in Martin reflexively "jumping" him?

I conceded both of these on page 1 of the debate and what seems like a dozen times since. If Zimmerman initiated* any physical confrontation and was always in the offensive position, he's guilty of murder or manslaughter or some other form of homicide.

(* Meaning the specific act of approaching Martin on foot, not the "Zimmerman followed Martin, so he's strictly liable for anything ensuing therefrom" argument being employed by some other people here. As discussed extensively, simply following Martin at a non-threatening distance almost assuredly wasn't a crime.)
   2171. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM (#4092197)
See that link to the McClain's. Didn't Spike Lee act pretty much like you think Zimmerman acted? If something happens to the McClains or to that other Zimmerman, do you think Lee is culpable? Of what?
   2172. Lassus Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM (#4092198)
LOL. No one here even knew about this until about four days ago.

Yeah, no. I was rather surprised it took this long to become a STORY story.
   2173. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:35 AM (#4092201)
I would need to hear from someone who actually saw Martin instigate the whole thing.


So if Martin were, as a witness has said, beating the crap out of Zimmerman, he had no duty to stop under any circumstances? And Zimmerman had no duty to defend himself at that point under any circumstances?
   2174. JPWF1313 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:37 AM (#4092203)
They've taken Zimmerman's story and declared it possible, in spite of no evidence that he's telling the truth.


That's not quite fair.
Up until the video even I thought that Z's story was somewhat plausible (not likely, or even the least unlikely, but plausible).
Someone was screaming "help"- Z said it was him- a witness said it was him (of course every other witness claimed it was too far/dark to see who was what)

There were reports that Z had a broken nose, was bleeding, grass stains n his back, etc. etc. etc.

I think Z's version is far less plausible now than yesterday of course.

Random speculation- Z was not charged and the case seemingly dropped because someone in the chain of decisioning essentially gave Z the benefit of every doubt- was that appropriate to do in this instance (seems not) - would that person have given Z the benefit of every doubt if the dead guy was not a black teenager- or if Z was black?
OTOH doesn't someone in the chain if decisioning HAVE to look long and hard at whether the "suspect" is guilty/likely guilty? Where do you want the error to fall? The flip side of this may be the Duke Lacrosse case- In the Duke case the DA essentially disregarded everything the suspects said, and when corroborating evidence came in, well he didn't revisit the "perp's" story, he started hand waving/explaining away (and of course when they was no longer enough he began actively suppressing evidence).

I think here, someone simply decided, gut sense or whatever, that Z was not guilty- and once having decided that, was not going to be so easily swayed.

But as I said, this is just random speculation.

   2175. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:38 AM (#4092204)
Chris Brown's a black guy who beat the #### out of his girlfriend and didn't go to jail.


1. Chris Brown went to jail. He did not stay there for long.

2. Because *wealth* distorts justice far more than race, and fame + wealth even more so.

Which, if you sit down and think it through without putting your "I hate Sam Hutcheson with the heat of a thousand suns" blinders on, is actually in line with my arguments regarding controlling for socio-economics (none dare call it *class* in America, of course.)

Being poor and black is a "go to jail immediately, even if you didn't do anything notable" card. (See BBC's experiences of being made to lay prostrate on the ground while having her car searched, and ask yourself, do you *really* think there was probable cause to have *BBC* on the ground on the side of the road?) Being a young black man doubles that ante.

Wealth is literally your get out of jail free card. Not having to rely on overworked, overstressed public defenders is actually quite helpful to avoiding wrongful incarceration, it turns out. Fame is a multiplier of wealth.

Being middle to moderately upper class and white is a position of privilege, because you don't have to worry about wrongful incarceration in your day to day life. In that it's a privilege that is negatively experienced - I don't feel the drain of looking over my shoulder all the time - it's a privilege that is ignored, forgotten and ruthlessly denied by the demagogues of the partisan base that aligns near universally with the middle to moderately upper class white demographic. (I.E the GOP/Tea Party)
   2176. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:40 AM (#4092205)
If something happens to the McClains or to that other Zimmerman, do you think Lee is culpable?


Yes.*

*for the slow among us, let me repeat - I rarely if ever debate legalism.
   2177. tshipman Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:42 AM (#4092206)
Wrong again -- the screams on the tape, if they're Zimmermann's, suggest very strongly, likely definitively, that Zimmermann is not a murderer.


Setting aside the analysis here (which is really dumb), isn't it extremely unlikely that Zimmerman is the person who was screaming?

Zimmerman had the gun. If there was a physical altercation, Zimmerman looked fine within an hour at the police station. Zimmerman was the aggressor in the group dynamic. There is no modulation in volume or pitch on the scream indicating physical activity. The screams ended after the gunshot.

If Zimmerman is the one screaming, he is the easiest-to-scare little runt in Florida. If he's so easily frightened, you would expect the screaming to continue after the shot--shooting someone who was attacking you is pretty terrifying.
   2178. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM (#4092207)
LOL. No one here even knew about this until about four days ago.

Yeah, no. — Lassus

What do you mean, "Yeah, no"? This discussion got started here on March 24, which was five days ago.
   2179. JPWF1313 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM (#4092209)
Not just after he was approached by Zimmerman, because Zimmerman had no business approaching Martin in the first place


So let's say I'm walking down the street, and someone is ahead of me, walking a bit slower, until I essentially catch up...
so I have no right to say, "excuse me do you know what time it is?"

Ok, that's not what happened here, but people walk up to and interact with strangers on public streets all the time without any escalation into violence.
   2180. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4092210)
So if Martin were, as a witness has said, beating the crap out of Zimmerman, he had no duty to stop under any circumstances?


If Martin had subdued Zimmerman physically and walked away, Zimmerman would have gotten what he deserved for following Martin.

If Martin had beaten Zimmerman to death in a fit of rage, Martin would be a murderer.

If Zimmerman pulls a gun on Martin and shoots him dead, he's a murderer.

The third option occurred in the world.
   2181. Lassus Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4092211)
Shame on you and your ilk, no wonder Magneto has such contempt for humanity.

Speaking of Magneto and Chris Brown, Michael Fassbender beat his girlfriend worse than Brown did Rihanna, see how much you (plural) have heard about that case and its nothing outcome.
   2182. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4092212)
Maybe, maybe not. It seems clear that he was a gung ho (and maybe passive-aggressive) neighborhood watch guy. But whether Zimmerman or Martin initiated the confrontation remains a matter of debate. Beyond that, people are trying to have it both ways with some of the facts. It's been cited time and again that Zimmerman called 911 "47 times" in recent months or years, including many times for suspicious persons, but I haven't seen a single report of Zimmerman initiating a confrontation with anyone prior to Martin.
Yeah, but remember what he said on the call: "I'm sick of these ######## getting away," or something along those lines. So he's called many times, nothing ever happens because police don't move very quickly, so he gets frustrated and decides to take a more active role.

A guy who calls 911 because of an open garage door doesn't seem like much of a vigilante.

It sounds like a guy who wants to initiate some sort exercise of martial power.
No, it sounds like a desperate wanna-be. He wants to be a hero, he wants approval from the cops; he wants to hear them saying, "Great job, Mr. Zimmerman. Most people would have missed that, but because of your vigilance, we caught the perps." He's so eager for that sort of pat on the back that he'll call over the smallest thing, like an open garage door. Or, at least, that's my armchair psychology.
   2183. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:45 AM (#4092213)
What do you mean, "Yeah, no"? This discussion got started here on March 24, which was five days ago.


He means that the start of this discussion on BTF is not the point where he, nor many of us, "knew about this."
   2184. JPWF1313 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:46 AM (#4092214)
Setting aside the analysis here (which is really dumb), isn't it extremely unlikely that Zimmerman is the person who was screaming?

Zimmerman had the gun. If there was a physical altercation, Zimmerman looked fine within an hour at the police station. Zimmerman was the aggressor in the group dynamic. There is no modulation in volume or pitch on the scream indicating physical activity. The screams ended after the gunshot.

If Zimmerman is the one screaming, he is the easiest-to-scare little runt in Florida. If he's so easily frightened, you would expect the screaming to continue after the shot--shooting someone who was attacking you is pretty terrifying.


It's possible that M had Z in an MMA style submission hold for the duration of the screaming....
   2185. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:47 AM (#4092216)
2166...but it still seems as if they're rooting for Zimmerman to somehow come out as the "good guy".

I think everyone talking about it wants justice in the end. It's just that the Nieporents and DiPernas of the world want the Hutchesons and something others of the world to look foolish in the end, and vice versa. It leads to a handful of people on both sides acting like jackasses and assuming things to be true that they have no way of really knowing. It's not unique to this particular discussion at all. This one has just gotten especially ridiculous because everyone is going on conjecture.

So I don't think it's really about Zimmerman. If it was, this discussion about an event where there are so few known facts couldn't possibly have dragged on for 1,000 posts.
   2186. JPWF1313 Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:49 AM (#4092217)
FWIW since this *is* a Santorum thread, Romney is leading in the polling for Wisconsin, and is now tied with Santorum in PA. That represents a shift in both states away from Ricky- if that holds up we may finally be seeing the typical shift of primary voters towards the frontrunner.
   2187. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:49 AM (#4092218)
No, it sounds like a desperate wanna-be. He wants to be a hero, he wants approval from the cops; he wants to hear them saying, "Great job, Mr. Zimmerman. Most people would have missed that, but because of your vigilance, we caught the perps." He's so eager for that sort of pat on the back that he'll call over the smallest thing, like an open garage door. Or, at least, that's my armchair psychology.


David is right.

Someone cue the Mayans.
   2188. Jim Furtado Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:50 AM (#4092220)
I am closing the thread. First, it isn't even tangentially related to the original thread. Second, when I come across statements about writing for the slow ones, the thread serves no constructive purpose.
   2189. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM (#4092222)
2179..I'm not talking about any random day on any random street. That night, that residential neighborhood, that purpose that monkey assed Barney Fife had in mind. He had no business.
   2190. Zonk cooks his superfish with raisins Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:52 AM (#4092223)
But if you do that, Jim -- then Dan wins...
   2191. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM (#4092225)
Jim, I don't disagree with the decision. I think you're about 4 or 500 posts too slow to do so, to be honest, and I was opposed to the other recent thread closings.
   2192. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM (#4092228)
Can we have a Christie Brinkley thread?
   2193. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4092230)
I always write for the slow ones, man.
   2194. Morty Causa Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4092233)
*for the slow among us, let me repeat - I rarely if ever debate legalism.


Which is almost the definition of "slowness" when it comes to legal matters, which is what this is about, I thought.

It's like arguing about the George Brett tar bat instrument and taking pride in not debating the baseball "law".
   2195. tshipman Posted: March 29, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4092234)
I am closing the thread. First, it isn't even tangentially related to the original thread. Second, when I come across statements about writing for the slow ones, the thread serves no constructive purpose.


This is a good idea.
Page 22 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 20 21 22

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 June 18: How Life Imitates the Congressional Baseball Game
(328 - 10:17am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (World Cup)
(540 - 10:15am, Jun 19)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogFormer MLB pitcher Kevin Brown reportedly held two mail thieves at gunpoint until police arrived
(146 - 10:14am, Jun 19)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(3731 - 10:14am, Jun 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogDodgers' surprise ace makes All-Star case in win over Giants
(73 - 10:12am, Jun 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogGrumpy Gossage Napalms His Bridges:BWitz:NYT (reg req.)
(71 - 9:54am, Jun 19)
Last: Smitty*

NewsblogJuan Soto Makes His Second MLB Debut Tonight
(17 - 9:34am, Jun 19)
Last: eric

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Summer Potpourri (finals, draft, free agency, Colangelo dragging)
(1209 - 9:17am, Jun 19)
Last: JJ1986

NewsblogDeadspin: Former Blue Jay Kelly Gruber Disinvited From Canadian Baseball Hall Of Fame Festivities
(13 - 9:05am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 6-18-2018
(25 - 9:04am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

Sox TherapyA Pleasant Trip So Far
(7 - 8:30am, Jun 19)
Last: SandyRiver

NewsblogMetBblog: Mets reportedly ready to entertain trade offers for 'virtually everyone'
(27 - 2:11am, Jun 19)
Last: This is going to be state of the art wall

NewsblogIt's not a crime when OMNICHATTER does it! for June 18, 2018
(77 - 1:40am, Jun 19)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Astros voting thread
(17 - 10:29pm, Jun 18)
Last: . . . . . .

Gonfalon CubsClicking
(48 - 9:27pm, Jun 18)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.6213 seconds
46 querie(s) executed