Oh God, It's happening. Obama Already Talkin

Having paid attention to the Zimmerman trial, and listening to the president speak the following can be stated:

1) As the President of the USA is against having a fire arm is the exact reason that everyone who is a citizen should go out and purchase one. Anything that comes out of a politician's mouth these days, especially from DC is a warning that we should do the exact opposite. They are full of it and with nothing more than self interest.

2) The people in DC are not interested in you or me, or even Martin for that matter. All they are interested in is votes and getting the public opinion on their side. The President should not speak at all on this topic and remain silent, perhaps speaking that we all should obey the law. That parents need to start being parents and that just maybe that the goverment is not the answer to all of the problems of society. It is called responsibility.

More laws and trying to legislate human behavior is not the answer. The answer lies with WE THE PEOPLE. And WE THE PEOPLE, need to start thinking in terms of being a manager of a company. If the employee is not doing the job, then get rid of the employee. We keep electing the same useless employee to the same position every time.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by ValentineWiggin

 

Here is a transcript of the call to police

He doesn't sound like a wild vigilante, and Martin doesn't sound like a sweet innocent boy simply buying skittles. The neighbourhood had repeated break-ins, which the other article was saying was happening once a week. Or police were being called about once a week.

There were home invasions, (A woman and her kid hiding in a room with two robbers going through her house), there were keys being stolen from inside a house and a car rental taken, and there were missing items from people's garages. Once of these incidents was by a group of kids who lived in the neighbourhood.

Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]


.....

Zimmerman:

Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]

911 dispatcher:

He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK.

Zimmerman:

Now he’s staring at me. [00:48]



Zimmerman:

Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band.

And he’s a black male.[1:03]

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is?

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens.

911 dispatcher:

Late teens?

Zimmerman:

Uh, huh.

Something’s wrong with him. Yep, he’s coming to check me out.

He’s got something in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

....


911 dispatcher:

Let me know if he does anything, OK?

Zimmerman:

OK.

...

911 dispatcher:

Are you following him? [2:24]

Zimmerman:

Yeah. [2:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK.

We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

Zimmerman:

OK. [2:28]

...

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?

Zimmerman:

Yeah.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, where are you going to meet with them at?

Zimmerman:

Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck. [3:10]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

Zimmerman:

Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

And probably the most important part of the transcript:

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? [3:42]

Zimmerman:

Yeah, that’s fine. [3:43]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, I’ll let them know you’ll meet them at …

Zimmerman:

Could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? [3:49]

911 dispatcher:

OK, that’s no problem.

Zimmerman lost track of Martin. He didn't even want to say his address out loud in case Martin overheard it. He wasn't stalking him like prey. He initially followed him for a second, was told to stop, did stop, and was then making arrangements to meet up with police.

There was a series of recent breakins in the neighbourhood, some by actual people who lived there (or their kids rather) and Martin was wondering around in the rain.

Just because he went to buy skittles for a family member doesn't mean he couldn't have been scoping out or participating in a break in. His behaviour was off according to Zimmerman and on the phone he made racist remarks about him.

If he was doing something like scoping houses, or breaking in to them he probably would have used his family as an alibi. He was involved in other illegal activities so who is to say he wasn't that night either?

I know plenty of kids that are stopped and asked questions by adults in different neighbourhoods, they don't go running away and spring up out of bushes. He could have just as easily directly approached Zimmerman and said "Hi sir, how are you doing tonight? I noticed you looking at me is there anything I can help you with?"

But he didn't, he was acting weird, took off into a place where Zimmerman lost track of him, and sprang up in front of him and initiated the events that happened.

Then my basis for where I believe Zimmerman committed a crime is totally shot. I am wrong. There are no stupid questions, I ask questions and challenge opinions to get to the truth, and that is why this site exists

Does this indicate that the president equates self defense with gun violence? Probably just an opportunist.

Originally posted by gimmefootball400
reply to post by poet1b

 

Carrying a gun around like that was just asking to be attacked.

did you mean to say the opposite?

Originally posted by CaptChaos
So he want's to "honor" the thug who was just PROVEN to be the criminal aggressor? Am I missing something here?

Trial by jury is one of the mainstays of civilization. He is subtly implying that this is wrong. It's all a massive mindf^%

Soon you will think trial and execution by Judge Dredd is good.

The ironic thing here, is that during the very wrong racial injustice 200 years ago, it was common for a white person to falsely accuse black people of crimes and they would be punished for them. (Ignoring actual evidence.)

In this case, the evidence shows Trayvon's criminal behaviour, it shows that Zimmerman called police out of suspicion, was told to wait and did so, it shows that Martin was at the house he was staying at but went back to confront Zimmerman. It shows that it was only Trayvon who made racist remarks.

It shows that Martin acted criminally that night, and was involved in criminal behaviour long before this night, but everyone supporting Martin wants us to ignore all these facts, and lynch Zimmerman.

Oh how the tables have turned.

Anyone supporting vigilante justice, or any type of action against Zimmerman, is supporting the very backwards thinking of 200 years ago.



Ignore the facts and lynch people in the streets I guess...

Originally posted by poet1b

When does he get to the part of putting out the message to young people, that it isn't alright to attack someone who is watching you, jump on top of them and pummel them, because you think they are a creepy old cracker.

When will Obama break the silence on the black on white crime epidemic?

When will the discussion on prejudice against white be addressed, and the word get put out that this is not ok, or justified?

That's the real "tragedy". Some kid resorted to a violent confrontation when he should have just kept going home. Everybody who doesn't like the verdict seems to amazingly to block that out of their memory. And the media will just gloss over that little unimportant fact as well.

reply to post by Maxatoria


The problem here in the US. is, all the laws have out-paced justice. The only time our government wants a "nation of law" is when it is in their favor. But when one of us "free people" (surfs) can use the law to be found "not guilty" then all the sudden we need "tougher laws". It's getting crazy here. Common sense, justice, morality,.... basically all that is good and righteous is now our social and civil enemy. This country is going to hell in a hand basket. If the founders of this nation were alive today,,, Oh my lord, I'd make a bundle selling tar and feathers, rope, ball and powder. The "tree of liberty" is looking pretty dry as of late.

reply to post by Astrocyte


Well, to be blunt here, the only thing a gun did in this situation was save George Zimmerman's life and shoot an attacker to death. Whatever I may think of it, that was the statement of the verdict. That was the message from the Jury and full acquittal doesn't mean there was wishy washy 'can't decide's' like a hung jury. All 6 agreed on the fact a gun was used in the role of self defense.

So take the President's mentioning the Trayvon case in the same paragraph with guns and gun violence for what you will, just as I will. The gun violence here was of the fully, legally and by jury decision, justified and life saving kind. Officially.

If he isn't looking to exploit this in a different political way, then his statement is actually confusing and contrary to that Jury verdict he also claims to respect. Two topics that don't relate.

reply to post by introV


Never let a crisis go to waste.

reply to post by cry93


While I agree with you, no one is forcing anyone to enlist and serve, we do have a serious economic situation and it is a well known fact that most of those sought after during the last year of high school and before by recruiters are those will little or no hope of a future.

I always find it interesting when I watch the Military channel documentaries, so many of the enlisted come from the same states, rural areas where there are no jobs and in such poverty that these kids wouldn't have any hope of furthering their educations any other way.

The other point I'm sure I won't be the only one to mention is that a lot of Americans take issue as to whether or not we are in Afghanistan and Iraq for the right reasons, or should we even be there at all? Without the actual conflicts in the first place, there would be nowhere to send our son's and daughters to die.

reply to post by introV


what the bleep ever..

White House Study Finds Guns Save Lives: “Consistently Lower Injury Rates Among Gun Using Crime Victims

To the surprise of the authors and those who would no doubt have used the report to further restrict access to personal defense firearms, the study found that gun ownership actually saves lives and those who have a firearm at their disposal improve their chances of survival and reduce their chance of injury in the event they are confronted by a violent criminal:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year… …
The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.

A different issue is whether defensive use of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self protective strategies.

Originally posted by Nephalim

Originally posted by cry93
1. He is the president.
2. This was a high profile case with national implications.

Had he said nothing at all would have garnered more attention. Some people can never miss an opportunity to take swipes at Obama.

what national implications?

National Implications being that black people everywhere might riot and cause further public damage senselessly because they just wanna create discord amongst us all.

Originally posted by cry93
1. He is the president.
2. This was a high profile case with national implications.

Had he said nothing at all would have garnered more attention. Some people can never miss an opportunity to take swipes at Obama.

If he'd had kept his mouth shut and not made a big issue out of it when it first happened, probably, this would never have become an issue!

Meanwhile, in his adopted hometown of Chicago, the promise he made a long time ago to help stop the violence, remains unfulfilled. 80 folks shot during the 4th of July weekend.

reply to post by ValentineWiggin

Something you said struck me as a little odd:

So what are you saying?

If you do get knocked down and beaten, because you got too close, it is your fault?

I think that is called common sense so yeah.

Would you apply the same analysis to a rape case? "If you get raped because you're wearing provocative clothes in a bad part of town after dark, is it your fault? I think that is called common sense, so yeah."

The law is also supposed to protect fools.

Its laughable for any US President in the last 30 years to talk about Gun Violence when we send our Military to shoot people with Guns.

Its almost like they speak out of both sides of there Mouth's. Hmmmmm.

reply to post by introV
Now here is a true what if thought , what if is was the other way around , would it be self defense or murder in the first, as it turned out not guilty, would it have been the same out come? A black man defending him self or murder in the first?

Every time Obama references 'honoring' Trayvon Martin, it just gives me an unsettling feeling deep down. It's as if he's trying to express, in the safest, most politically correct way possible, that he absolutely stands with these angry mobs of people who are protesting the verdict.

reply to post by cry93


it was a high profile case because idiot celibrities and main stream media made it one orginal da dismissed it rightly so as self defense.
and the president should be more worried about bank rupting our country trying to put his buddies in the muslim brother hood into power in mid east.

reply to post by cry93


what state do you live because in most of the ones i have seen the govement lets all the factory work be farmed out over seas . most construction companies only seem to hire latin americans and most people can't afford to live and raise a family on what you make working at walmart, mcdonalds or your local convience store out of the two factories in my area 70 percent of workers in hourly postions are either mexican nationals who were crecruited from mexico or burmese refugees who have been imported to our area by the factory i work at through our hr head who is a deacon at local church sponsoring them. so yes our children fresh out of school are signing up to military service because its one of the very few legal options open to them.

The only thing I really have to say is that if I were one of the jurors in this case, I would feel relieved in knowing I made the correct decision in this case.
There was much evidence that was not allowed in the trial that shows that Trayvon was not the innocent child victim as portrayed by the prosecution in this case.
Had I been on the jury and had the decision gone the other way, I would have a difficult time living with that decision after seeing all the evidence that wasn't allowed.

Just my thoughts on the matter

As far as the President getting involved. He has no business politicizing this case... There have been scores of murders in his hometown of Chicago over the past 16 months that he hasn't stepped into or voiced an opinion on.
Makes me question the motives of why would he make a stand, take a side on this one...