Why "All Lives Matters" is wrong

[Lexicus]

I'm not retyping it less than three posts later. I'm out for now. But I hope you have a nice night!

Sorry, that was too oblique, I'm far too stupid and not familiar enough with the case to "get it."

What facts did I get wrong?

@Sommerswerd already did a good job of dissecting your account of the incident. No real need to re-visit it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What facts did I get wrong?

Review the thread for yourself as this has already been answered repeatedly.

 

[Berzerker]

@Sommerswerd already did a good job of dissecting your account of the incident. No real need to re-visit it.

There is a need, you're making accusations and wont back them up... He ran away from his good job, he ignored my response and now you're running away... Sommers accused me of a contradiction, he said I claimed Zimmerman was watching Martin and that Zimmerman wasn't watching Martin. I said Zimmerman was not watching Martin after losing him in the complex. That 'fact' doesn't preclude Zimmerman watching Martin before losing him in the complex. But Sommers (and you) think it does... How does that work? If you're watching someone at 10 pm and not watching them at 10:15 pm, is it a contradiction to say you were watching them and then you weren't watching them? The hole he dug is deeper than the one you're in and he filled it with straw.

Fact: the 911 dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow and he obeyed their instruction. In actuality Zimmerman had already lost Martin by that time, he wasn't watching or following him.

Now Sommers would take the last 6 words of that and accuse me of arguing Zimmerman never watched or followed him.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

There is a need,

Not in any opinion but yours. The rest of us are satisfied that having watched you flip back and forth from "Zimmerman followed him" to "well, Zimmerman wasn't following him" faster than we could be bothered counting we can just dismiss you.

 

[Berzerker]

Not in any opinion but yours. The rest of us are satisfied that having watched you flip back and forth from "Zimmerman followed him" to "well, Zimmerman wasn't following him" faster than we could be bothered counting we can just dismiss you.

Did Zimmerman follow Martin to his hiding place?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Did Zimmerman follow Martin to his hiding place?

How far did he have to follow him to get credit for following him, in your esteemed opinion?

 

[Berzerker]

How far did he have to follow him to get credit for following him, in your esteemed opinion?

Until he's no longer following him... Now, did Zimmerman follow Martin to his hiding place?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Until he's no longer following him... Now, did Zimmerman follow Martin to his hiding place?

Other than you do you think anyone cares?

The guy was a creeper, following a kid around in his car until the kid was intimidated enough to get off the street. Then he got out of his car and followed the kid until the kid was intimidated enough that he felt the need to hide. While this may be fine upstanding behavior to you, as long as it's a white creeper and a black kid, of course, most people find it disgusting.

 

[Berzerker]

Other than you do you think anyone cares?

I thought you, Lex and Sommers cared... The 3 of you are claiming I flip flopped for saying Zimmerman was watching and following Martin until he lost him in the complex. But now you dont care? You cared a few posts ago. You cared until I asked if Zimmerman followed Martin to his hiding place. You wont answer because my question not only shows Zimmerman stopped following Martin, he stopped following him before the 911 dispatcher told him not to follow.

The guy was a creeper, following a kid around in his car until the kid was intimidated enough to get off the street. Then he got out of his car and followed the kid until the kid was intimidated enough that he felt the need to hide. While this may be fine upstanding behavior to you, as long as it's a white creeper and a black kid, of course, most people find it disgusting.

If the kid was so intimidated why did he stop hiding and not only attack 'the creeper' but did so face to face? Zimmerman was too slow to keep up with Martin, he wasn't trying to catch him. He looked to see if Martin was running down a path thru the complex or the parallel street. He thought Martin was headed for an entrance but didn't see him and he became concerned, he told the dispatcher he better not give his address because Martin could still be nearby.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I thought you, Lex and Sommers cared...

You were wrong. No one wants to give the creeper a "well, he did eventually STOP following him" pass but you. Everyone else seems united in the opinion that he shouldn't have been creeping after the kid in the first place. Only you seem to think that losing track of the kid is somehow the equivalent of having had a come to Jesus moment that turned him into something other than a creeper, and absolved him from having been following the kid in the first place.

I repeat.

ONLY

YOU

Now, please enlighten us on what it is that makes you so unique in this, because nothing I could suggest would be within the bounds of respecting the forums rules.

 

[Berzerker]

You were wrong. No one wants to give the creeper a "well, he did eventually STOP following him" pass but you.

Thats interesting, didn't ya'll accuse Zimmerman of following Martin after the 911 dispatcher told him not to follow? If he stopped following, wouldn't that make your accusation false?

Everyone else seems united in the opinion that he shouldn't have been creeping after the kid in the first place.

He wasn't 'creeping' after the kid, he was looking to see which direction he ran so he could direct the police to him faster.

Now, please enlighten us on what it is that makes you so unique in this, because nothing I could suggest would be within the bounds of respecting the forums rules.

A jury acquitted him

 

[Timsup2nothin]

A jury acquitted him

Because being a creeper isn't a crime. It certainly is disgusting to everyone but you, but it isn't a crime. Thanks for the clarification, your reasons for being unique here seem to be exactly what I expected.

 

[Berzerker]

Because being a creeper isn't a crime. It certainly is disgusting to everyone but you, but it isn't a crime. Thanks for the clarification, your reasons for being unique here seem to be exactly what I expected.

Because Martin's attack was unjustified... I'm not unique 'here' or out there.

Only you seem to think that losing track of the kid is somehow the equivalent of having had a come to Jesus moment that turned him into something other than a creeper, and absolved him from having been following the kid in the first place.

I never said he had a Jesus moment, I said he not only stopped following Martin, he stopped before the dispatcher told him to stop and I explained why - he lost him. Why is that relevant? Because people 'here' are accusing Zimmerman of following Martin after the dispatcher's instruction not to follow.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Because Martin's attack was unjustified... I'm not unique 'here' or out there.

Please point out who agrees with you that attacking a creeper in self defense is never justified. Here. I know there are plenty of places where "but it's a white creeper" is more than sufficient, but we're not talking about more comfortable locales for you, we are talking here.

 

[Berzerker]

Please point out who agrees with you that attacking a creeper in self defense is never justified. Here. I know there are plenty of places where "but it's a white creeper" is more than sufficient, but we're not talking about more comfortable locales for you, we are talking here.

I said some people here agreed Martin's attack was unjustified. Why are you changing what I said again? Now you want a list of people and I cant even get you to answer simple yes or no questions? Ryika, Skele and Km argued Martin was unjustified, even Traitorfish was borderline.

 

[Synobun]

Citing justification is a slippery tactic. It's a black and white way of trying to definitively label a grey issue.

If we were to say it was unjustified, you'd be vindicated in your opinion when it's not warranted. If we were to say it was justified, you'd paint us as supporters of attacking people on the street.

It would perhaps be better to approach the subject of Zimmerman/Martin from the perspective of why they did what they did. Can you fathom a reason why Martin may have attacked someone who was following him? If he were truly a thug as many portray him, then someone following him is an imminent danger. If he were merely acquainted with that side of urban life, someone following him is an imminent danger. If he were involved in some spats in school, someone following him is an imminent danger. There are several scenarios where being followed means danger, especially since being followed is rarely if ever an innocuous act.

In many areas of the US, waiting for someone to make the first strike is often a fatal mistake. At the very least, you do not want someone following you to follow you to your home or somewhere you frequently congregate.

The simple fact of the matter is that both bear responsibility for the events that unfolded, but these events would have never needed to unfold had Zimmerman refrained from overstepping his duties as neighbourhood watch. Neighbourhood watch does not entail following people and a proper dispatcher will never ask you to follow someone. It is a threatening action to take against someone and people rarely respond with nonchalance to a threat.

Is attacking someone you think is following you generally not wise? Sure. But think about why Martin needed to hide and needed to attack Zimmerman to begin with. The cause lies with the one wielding the gun and conducting the chase.

 

[Berzerker]

If we were to say it was unjustified, you'd be vindicated in your opinion when it's not warranted. If we were to say it was justified, you'd paint us as supporters of attacking people on the street.

No paint is needed, at least 2 people already said they'd attack a neighborhood watch person for doing what Zimmerman did.

Can you fathom a reason why Martin may have attacked someone who was following him?

No, I cant... He came out of hiding to attack him. According to the evidence Zimmerman asked Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood before the fight broke out. Thats not what a 'creeper' would ask, its what a concerned neighbor would ask. Now, I can fathom why Martin didn't like being viewed as a possible criminal, that would be my reaction too. But I would not react as if this neighbor concerned by my presence was a 'creeper' intent on doing me harm. I'd actually feel a sense of relief upon learning why he was there and I'd try to muster up the humility and maturity to thank him for serving the neighborhood.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'd try to muster up the humility and maturity to thank him for serving the neighborhood.

Well! Doesn't being the privileged class make one a noble soul! Man, would I love to shake your hand and clap you on the back!

 

[Synobun]

I'd actually feel a sense of relief upon learning why he was there and I'd try to muster up the humility and maturity to thank him for serving the neighborhood.

You would feel relief that someone was following you and targeted you as a danger to the community?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You would feel relief that someone was following you and targeted you as a danger to the community?

Nobility baby, nobility. It comes with privilege. Kinda like the omniscience to know that the creeper following you is a neighborhood watch creeper, not just a creeper. That too comes with privilege.