• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Another Unarmed Black Man Killed

Because a lot of people don't care simply because it involves a non white victim. I guess some people can't grasp their mind around that concept though.

Let's be very honest. A lot of people don't care because it doesn't involve a white shooter. People only care when they can pin a racist charge on it, so the 8 a day go ignored while the one and two get feted in a celebration.
 
Last edited:
Let's be very honest. A lot of people don't care because it doesn't involve a white shooter. People only care when they can pin a racist charge on it, so the 8 a day go ignored while the one and two get feted in a celebration.

Zimmerman is half Latin... and what is this shooter's race? I am not aware of his race, and if the article pointed it out, I didn't pay attention to it. If this shooter is white, then why isn't this story isn't blowing up like the Trayvon Martin story?
 
Zimmerman is half Latin... and what is this shooter's race? I am not aware of his race, and if the article pointed it out, I didn't pay attention to it. If this shooter is white, then why isn't this story isn't blowing up like the Trayvon Martin story?

The fact that Zimmerman wasn't a Caucasian didn't come out for several days. Are you being intentionally dishonest or do you truly believe the ONLY reason these two cases are being discussed is for some reason OTHER than the shooters race? Really? :lamo
 
The fact that Zimmerman wasn't a Caucasian didn't come out for several days. Are you being intentionally dishonest or do you truly believe the ONLY reason these two cases are being discussed is for some reason OTHER than the shooters race? Really? :lamo

I am not interested in the story just because of race. In fact I was telling my brother in law about this case, and I didn't even mention race. I did it without realizing it, until somebody else starting talking about it too, and that person brought up race.

Zimmerman shot an unarmed person in self defense, and was unreasonably suspicious by most people's standards of the person he shot. Any parent, regardless of their race, would have serious questions and would be raising hell to demand an investigation and demand something be done other than letting him walk away. The family of Trayvon deserve answers, and Zimmerman deserves a fair trial. This should NOT be a racially tense issue at all. It's defiantly not a race issue for me.

You brought up race earlier with your comment about black and black violence... yes, there is a lot of black on black violence. Lots of areas are known for higher crime rates, lower income, gang activity, etc. Cabrini Green in Chicago was notorious for violence and that's where the black people lived. Gangs and violence go together. There are Asian gangs, white gangs, etc. There is white on white violence, and we discuss white violence a lot. A local police offer told me there is a ton of illegal aliens and Latin people involved with crime and black gangs, and they kill each other constantly, but it isn't constant nightly news.

Let me make up a statistic off the top of my head.... Before and since the Trayvon Martin case there there have been over 500 cases of white/Latin assailants assaulting or killing black victims, and those are not being discussed. Every time a white person or Latin person kills a black person, it's national news.

I really feel that when people make this a race issue and state the public concern only boils down to race... then you're kind of acting like discussing the case is taboo and we should sweep it under the rug. You're saying it doesn't deserve the attention it gets, but who are you to say that? Did Casey Anthony's case get more attention than necessary, the JonBenet Case, Natalie Halloway???

More than likely, race isn't at fault. More than likely the 24 hr news cycle and sensationalism is at fault. The media has spread false information. The media is definitely at fault and Nancy Grace was key to blowing Casey Anthony's trial out of proportion as well.

I don't see Trayvon's parents going to the media any different than Natalie Halloway's parents doing the same. They just want justice and answers, they are experiencing something no parent should ever have it, and they deserve answers, an investigation, and closure. If Zimmerman isn't found guilty but it leads to a change in SYG laws and changes in NW committees, then so be it. Having something done is going to give them closure as opposed to seeing nothing done.
 
The fact that Zimmerman wasn't a Caucasian didn't come out for several days. Are you being intentionally dishonest or do you truly believe the ONLY reason these two cases are being discussed is for some reason OTHER than the shooters race? Really? :lamo

Again, what's the shooters race in the article? Is the shooter white and did the article point his race out?
 
The argument isn't that you shouldn't be able to defend yourself. The argument is that when someone is outside of your house, you are inside of your house, the police are only a few hundred yards away and you leave to your house and then kill the person outside of it, your actions are questionable and perhaps irresponsible since there was no immediate threat to your safety and since those capable of handling the threat were so close.

And I respect your opinion and see your point of view, but thats not what the law says in most states. I know for sure that in Louisiana, if someone is on your property illegally you have a right to confront. However, if they step foot on your porch, in your house, anywhere in the dwelling itself, it's immediate shoot to kill, no questions asked. (shoot to disable I mean) If they are on your property you may confront them armed. If they do anything that would endanger your life such as lunge at you or reach for a weapon, shoot to kill.

You are on your own property and this person is there illegally. Does that mean shoot the UPS man when he delivers a package? Of course not, because when you confront him and he hands you the box, you know why he's there. It's the stranger, in the middle of the night, that you have a right to suspect they are there with ill intent. You have a right to protect your property, your HOME, from invasion as that is the one place you should feel safe.

Whether or not you agree with it is irrelevant, its what the law says. And I've been told this by the police. I asked them what do I do if someone threatens to harm me in my yard or home, and they said take 'em out, we'll come get the body.
 
Let's be very honest. A lot of people don't care because it doesn't involve a white shooter. People only care when they can pin a racist charge on it, so the 8 a day go ignored while the one and two get feted in a celebration.

That's the long and short of it. Not much else to say.
 
Again, what's the shooters race in the article? Is the shooter white and did the article point his race out?

According to some folks, the shooter is white. But, I'm sure he's only white, because the victim is black. We all know that had the victim been anything but black, no one would give a ****.
 
And I respect your opinion and see your point of view, but thats not what the law says in most states. I know for sure that in Louisiana, if someone is on your property illegally you have a right to confront. However, if they step foot on your porch, in your house, anywhere in the dwelling itself, it's immediate shoot to kill, no questions asked. (shoot to disable I mean) If they are on your property you may confront them armed. If they do anything that would endanger your life such as lunge at you or reach for a weapon, shoot to kill.

You are on your own property and this person is there illegally. Does that mean shoot the UPS man when he delivers a package? Of course not, because when you confront him and he hands you the box, you know why he's there. It's the stranger, in the middle of the night, that you have a right to suspect they are there with ill intent. You have a right to protect your property, your HOME, from invasion as that is the one place you should feel safe.

Whether or not you agree with it is irrelevant, its what the law says. And I've been told this by the police. I asked them what do I do if someone threatens to harm me in my yard or home, and they said take 'em out, we'll come get the body.
Yep. You have Louisiana law correct. The tricky part of property defense rather than domicile defense is that a jury has leeway to determine whether you were legally cleared to shoot, you have roughly a slightly better chance than a street shoot. In Texas I think you still have the right to kill if they don't leave your property, not sure but I know they are slightly better in their castle doctrine laws. Two things I do love here, third party defense is considered the same protection as self defense, and your vehicle is an extension of your home meaning no licensure to carry concealed in your vehicle, firearms and other weapons enjoy the same protections as your house.
 
Back
Top Bottom