reply to post by introV
I'm not debating any of that. Treyvon was clearly a thug.
My question is: should someone who isn't a police officer - and doesn't possess the power and authority a badge and uniform projects - be allowed to
parole neighborhoods with a gun?
It's not a particularly difficult question. Guns are lethal weapons. Because police officers are "protected" by the aura of their badge and uniform,
it doesn't happen very often where they have to use a gun against thugs. Thugs get the point: they understand the system. They aren't retarded. Badge
& Uniform = a temporary submission to authority.
But how can we allow people who don't wield such authority to nevertheless parole neighborhoods?
I'm not necessarily demonizing George Zimmerman. That he was socially conscious enough to even take on the position of neighborhood watch demonstrates
where his interests were: he wanted to protect his community. Perhaps the deeper question is, how poor is the policing in his area that individual
civilians take up the position of neighborhood watch - and that these civilians feel the need to arm themselves?
This is a very deep question. I'm beginning to wonder whether it is even legitimate for neighborhood watch to carry guns given the lack of power and
authority their position is able to project. To clarify: I am NOT in the least bit opposed to the 2nd amendment. For self defense purposes, I am all
for it. But this situation is a little more than self defense. George Zimmerman instigated
the confrontation for following a 17 year black kid
around. And he did this knowing he had a weapon on him - and that the kid he was following was perfectly capable of attacking him. In fact, this may
have been the probabilistic response. In effect, George Zimmerman didn't exercise very good judgement when he decided to stalk someone who was
innocuously minding his business.
There is a myriad of potential other scenarios where George Zimmerman may have been justified in intervening. But the job of a neighborhood watch is
exactly that: to watch
. When they see illegal activity, there job is not to confront, but to call the police. By approaching someone under such
circumstances I believe he endangered the life of Trayvon Martin.
Also, people really need to cool it with this demonization of the opposition. George Zimmerman was not a monster, he just made a very poor decision by
deciding to stalk Trayvon Martin. At the same time, Trayvon was not a monster either. Perhaps being so removed from the world that Trayvon Martin's
come from insulates you from the fact that these are human beings subject to social circumstances that most people would respond similarly to. That he
was a thug is beyond question. That he needed better guidance, is also beyond question. What's unfortunate, however, is how people here are speaking
How did you act when you were 17? What neighborhood did you grow up in? If you were privileged enough to grow up in a neighborhood where clubbing and
partying was the "worse" that you could do, congratulations. Unfortunately, poorer communities, particularly black communities, have become inured to
a culture of gangs, guns and drugs. They're born as innocent as you and I; they have the same promise in life that you or I would have. Their only
misfortune is being born in an environment where being a thug gains you social status.
edit on 14-7-2013 by Astrocyte because: (no reason