Anonymous #1 17w

Idk, an old black man capped a white man with an automatic weapon who open fired on a group of children so it’s better to be safe!

12

Anonymous OP 17w

If this was in Chicago and done for gang reasons it wouldn't even make the news

-3

Anonymous #1 17w

Are you saying a white man screaming slurs as he open fires at a family event isn’t newsworthy? Thank goodness the second man was able to stop him before this became another Dylann Roof situation

13

Anonymous OP 17w

No I'm saying that the news cares more about his motivation (because they can sensationalize it) than the fact he killed black people

-1

Anonymous OP 17w

It wouldn't even matter to them if those same kids had died in a scenario thats less sensational

-1

Anonymous #1 17w

The same way you care more about sanitizing the image of whiteness than the safety of black people

12

Anonymous OP 17w

If I cared more about sanitizing the image of white people I would just cherry pick cases of white people being good people and black people being bad people, kinda like what you're doing but with the races swapped. What in the Anthony case makes you feel the need to sanitize the image of black people? I don't think he's representative of the whole race.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

But that is what you’re doing… why bring up Chicago at all?

11

Anonymous OP 17w

To defend my point that black people are more likely to be killed by black people than any other race

0

Anonymous OP 17w

Also to help explain why, despite that likelihood, the media still reports a huge amount of white-on-black murders

1

Anonymous #1 17w

To distract from the very real threat that white americans pose to black people

3

Anonymous OP 17w

No I mean I don't deny that there are racist people out there who black people might have to defend themselves against, but there's plenty of other people who are motivated by factors besides race that might want to cause harm to them, in fact statistically speaking there are a lot more of the ladder than the former.

5

Anonymous OP 17w

I just also don't think that the Anthony case is a premier example of this

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Which has to do with a post that encourages black people to exercise their constitutional rights how exactly? Bringing up media practices and Chicago could be written off as a senile non-sequitur, but I think it’s actually an attempt to shoehorn in a denigration of black people that you were holding in for some time-

7

Anonymous OP 17w

It connects to the topic via my first fucking comment lmao 😂. "True [as in I agree black people should use the 2a for self defense more] but it's a lot more likely they're gonna have to use it on another black person than any other race"

-1

Anonymous #1 17w

I fail to see how this is necessary input to the conversation… it still feels like a desperate jab at black people?

12

Anonymous OP 17w

The post makes it out to be like its some necessity because of racist violence, if you go into defending yourself thinking every instance is going to be some moral crusade against racism you're setting yourself up for failure

-1

Anonymous OP 17w

I think black people should defend themselves, even against the edge case of racist violence. I just also think they should be prepared to acknowledge the realities of that.

-1

Anonymous #1 17w

It comes from the necessity of any violence - including racial violence - though I know you’re desperate to distract from its inclusion lol

7

Anonymous OP 17w

...No? I just explicitly mentioned that black people should be able to defend themselves against racist violence

-1

Anonymous #1 17w

*latter, not ladder 😭

5

Anonymous #2 17w

I wasn’t gonna say anything but I also thought that was funny

8

Anonymous #2 17w

Mind you, #1 is in another thread defending George Zimmerman lmfao

5

Anonymous OP 17w

He has the same first name as me I gotta step up to the plate for the guy

-1

Anonymous #1 17w

It’s almost like ppl tend to live in communities that’s the same race as them…and when u live near ppl of the same race, if ur attacked the chances are ur gonna be attacked by the same race that u are. Holy shit dude I think u just cracked the case😭 like do yall just not think?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I mean thats all I was ever saying

2

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Self defense usually isn't some glorious moral crusade, and you should prepare for that reality instead of thinking that you'll be attacked by a racist randomly. I also said that Karmelo Anthony wasn't a good example of defending yourself.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Even still, we’re allowed to defend ourselves against non-white assailants. Like ur pulling a “well actually ☝🏾🤓” We see cases of us defending ourselves against white ppl and still somehow being made out to be the villain. That troglodyte thug George Zimmerman was following a teenager. I’d also freak tf out if some old white dude was following me home

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I'd freak out if some old black dude was following me home, wouldn't assault him regardless. It's not about race.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

The difference is, if the races were swapped and George Zimmerman was an old black guy he would’ve faces prison time…the denial of racial prejudice within the justice system is the problem everyone is having. U realize that no?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

And yeah, you're allowed to defend yourself against anyone who puts you in a state of reasonable and immediate fear for your life, again it's not about race. You're also allowed to, as a security guard, follow people who you believe to be committing crimes.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

The 911 operator told Zimmerman to “not follow the person” the only thing Martin did was wear a hoodie with the hood up. How is that grounds for suspension if a crime?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No I seriously don't think if a white teenager assaulted an older black security guard who was following him, and the black security guard shot, he would even be charged with a crime had it happened in the same state

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Following someone in a space you're allowed to be in isn't any type of search or detainment, he doesn't even need suspicion of a crime, however in the Zimmerman case there were reported break ins prior with suspects who matched Trayvon's description.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Doesn’t matter what u think that’s what would’ve happened. We see that black ppl tend to get harsher sentences for the same crime compared to white ppl… https://www.nacdl.org/Content/Race-and-Sentencing And this is a heavily studied phenomenon within the judicial system

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Yeah, but there was no crime committed. The only reason it ever even got to an indictment or trial was public outcry, and Zimmerman was cleared regardless.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Had the suspect been a white teenager, there wouldn't have been the same public outcry.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

The operator on the phone told Zimmerman not to follow Treyvon. All I’m hearing is he was profiled? And he wasn’t a security guard 😭 bro was an under writer

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Neighborhood watch, security guard. Same difference

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Because if the suspect was a white teenager the perpetrator would’ve been arrested, convicted, and currently serving jail time 😭 even then, it’s not on other ppl of other races to call for out cry. When Treyvon died the black community banded together and pushed for change. White ppl don’t

1

Anonymous #1 17w

No…not the same difference at all lmfao

1

Anonymous #1 17w

The entire point of neighborhood watch is to watch for suspicious activity AND CALL POLICE. They are just the eyes and ears of police. They don’t have authority to follow or investigate ppl 😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Well sure but I can understand the frustration behind not catching B&E suspects, certainly makes up for following a guy in my mind.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Even the official neighborhood watch organization page says that members are supposed to leave investigations up to the police 😭 https://www.nnw.org/about-neighborhood-watch

1

Anonymous #1 17w

No, ur just proving my point lmfao. George Zimmerman was in the wrong. He racially profiled Treyvon Martin and broke his own rules. He was following home a Teenager who rightfully turned around to defend himself. Zimmerman was told not to follow Treyvon and even the organization he was apart of said not to follow or investigate ppl u suspect but to call and leave it up to law enforcement 😭😭

1

Anonymous #1 17w

So instead of lying and saying he was a security guard(which we established he wasn’t. Because ur trying to give him authority where he didn’t have any) let’s call it what it rlly is. An old white dude who was following a teenager home..

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Defending yourself ≠ assaulting a neighborhood watch member for daring to try and identify you

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Also 911 and the organization say stuff like that because they can be sued for liability, not because its illegal.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Also like yes, racial profiling is on the base tier of identifying someone. It's in no way racist to assume that a suspect is black because they were described that way.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

We’ve already established that Zimmerman wasn’t legally allowed to follow him…

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

What law prevented him from doing so?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I've yet to hear you state that let alone establish it to be true

1

Anonymous #1 17w

One can argue it falls under stalking. We’re ignoring how NNW.Org tells their members not follow suspects and that police are told not to follow suspects. No matter how u try to spin it George Zimmerman was in the wrong and advised not only by law enforcement but his organization not to follow him. You’ve doubled down on him being a security guard.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

To make it illegal for Zimmerman to follow him in a public place under stalking laws would need a protection order, no?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I still think the difference between neighborhood watchmen and security guards in this conversation is marginal at best, but if thats what you want to focus on, sure, I technically had the facts wrong for a few comments. I apologize.

1

Anonymous #1 17w

It’s not marginal lmao. Security guards are not only trained individuals but they are hired and given authority over specific areas. Security guards HAVE TO intervene when conflict arises in the area they are given power over. Neighborhood watch are regular civilians with no authority….there is no small difference between the two. Neighborhood watch are not supposed to follow, intervene, detain, ect so that situations like this don’t happen in the first place

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Security guards don't necessarily have training, and they're given no more authority than the owner of a piece of land is, in that they can legally trespass people.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Neither are anywhere near police, and at best their job is to identify you, maybe ask what you're doing, and then call the police or leave.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

None of this changes the fact that if you assault them while they are in the process of doing this, they're both perfectly allowed to defend themselves in whatever way your state permits.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Even then, the argument of him being a security guard falls flat because they didn’t happen near an establishment/business. This happened in a neighborhood. So had Zimmerman been a security guard(which once again, hella stark difference between a guard and neighborhood watch) he would’ve been off duty seeing he’d be at home

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Never claimed they were close to being police either. A security guard once again, still has authority over a specific area and the whole job is to protect a business. Security guards are only allowed to follow u as long as u are on that property they’re supposed to be working on. So again, the security guard argument falls flat

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Even then, the argument that he shouldn't have followed Trayvon because he wasn't an "on duty security guard" falls flat because anyone can walk in the same direction as anyone else in public places

1

Anonymous #1 17w

U can make all the arguments u want for him following Treyvon, but everyone is stating ur not supposed to. The police tell Neighborhood Watch not to and security guards are only allowed to follow u while u are on the property of the area they’re hired to guard 🫩

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

The 911 operators and organizations can recommend against it all they want, I know its just for liability reasons.

1

Anonymous #1 17w

The difference is, he wasn’t walking in the same direction because he was trying to get home. He followed Treyvon Martin, and the dispatcher told him not to😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Zimmerman actually organized the neighborhood watch 😳 Maybe he was aware of this too?

1

Anonymous #1 17w

So he broke the rules of neighborhood watch then…

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Because he knew he only put them in place for liability reasons, and was liable for his own actions regardless

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Ok, so he shouldn’t have followed him😭 it’s rlly that simple

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No law against it and he felt he should have, could have all ended happily if Martin didn't assault him

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Martin could have even sued the organization and got that restraining order we talked about a little while ago since he hadn't actually done anything wrong up until that point

0

Anonymous #1 17w

The situation wouldn’t have happened if he didn’t follow Martin. It’s rlly THAT SIMPLE. Martin didn’t assault him. Martin was walking to his residence and a person was following him home. Martin was allowed to defend himself

1

Anonymous #1 17w

A grown man shouldn’t have been following a child home. It’s rlly all that simple 😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Again, self defense isn't assaulting someone for following you and asking you questions. He broke the guys nose, cracked his head open, and fucked up his back over a verbal altercation. Zimmerman had plenty of reason to both follow him (matching suspect descriptions) and defend himself.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Never asked Treyvon any questions 😭 Martin’s gf who was on the phone with him said that Martin confronted Zimmerman about following him

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Asking “why are you following me.” Zimmerman didn’t ask him any questions regarding a break in…

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Thats not true Zimmerman's testimony alleges that he responded to Trayvon's question with a question, asking him "What are you doing?" prior to being assaulted

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Now again I say, Zimmerman shouldn’t have been following Treyvon. Even the police said that Zimmerman had the chance to end the encounter before it ended with violence lmao. Police say his actions were inconsistent with someone supposedly afraid of Martin. First he followed him in a car, then followed him on foot.

1

Anonymous #1 17w

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/police-say-zimmerman-had-chances-defuse-situation-shooting-martin-flna846806 “What are you doing here” isn’t inquiring about a crime. The police themselves said that Zimmerman could’ve avoided the whole situation had he identifies himself(as he was the one following Martin) and by not following him. Literally everyone is saying Zimmerman shouldn’t have followed Martin even the police handling the situation

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Yeah, I'm not saying it was unavoidable, I actually already have mentioned another way that could have avoided all of the negative effects of this situation, Trayvon not assaulting Zimmerman. I'm saying it was justified self defense regardless of Zimmerman (perhaps even wrongly) not heeding the 911 operator's advice.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Once again, Treyvon wouldn’t have “assaulted” Zimmerman had he not followed Martin idk why that’s so hard to grasp. Zimmerman according to law enforcement was the entire reason this situation happened not Martin lmfao

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No I completely understand that, it actually was impossible for Treyvon to assault him while he was in the car because he was too far away. I'm saying that Zimmerman following Martin doesn't justify Martin assaulting Zimmerman.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

You clearly think somehow it does justify that, and I'd hate to have to coexist in a space where going in the same direction as you means I'm open to being assaulted.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Again, the police blame Zimmerman. Zimmerman got out of the car to follow Martin too. He didn’t sit in the car the entire time 😭

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Ur trying to over simplify an issue that’s not that simple. Zimmerman didn’t “go in the same direction” coincidentally, he himself admitted to FOLLOWING Martin 😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Yeah, on some level I do too, I wouldn't get out of the car against the 911 operators advice, but that doesn't justify the assault.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

On Martin’s part it does. It can be argued he was defending himself. Ur being followed 😭 like it’s all Zimmerman’s fault.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Well following someone is not a whole lot different from going in the same direction as them, it relies on intent, and thats something you're not going to be able to ascertain just by looking at somebody.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Hence why you aren't allowed to assault people just for following you

0

Anonymous #1 17w

No it’s very different lmfao. Ur trying to compare things that aren’t the same at all 😂 going in the same direction as someone is a coincidence. Following someone is purposeful like where’s the disconnect bud?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

How are they very different besides the intent?

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Mmmm but u are if u feel as tho ur life is in danger…

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Tf do u mean besides the intent? THE INTENT IS THE MAIN DECIDER IN WHAT MAKES THEM DIFFERENT😂😂😂

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

If a reasonable person would feel as though their life was in danger in your circumstances, clearly you shouldn't be thinking of yourself here.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

So that’s what’s known as ✨self preservation✨ how does one think of others if u two are the only ones around at the time? Lmfao

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No, because you can't tell me the physical difference between someone following you, and someone walking in the same direction as you (spoiler alert there isn't one), and think that despite that, you should be able to use deadly force against people for doing so. Again, clearly not reasonable in your use of self defense, hence why you should ask yourself if another more reasonable person might do the same.

1

Anonymous #1 17w

I literally did tell u…the difference is INTENT MOTHERFUCKER holy shit 😭 and Martin didn’t use deadly force, actually Martin is the only one who didn’t have a weapon. And police say that both men were fairly matched actually…soooooo?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Not to even mention the fact that there are plenty of lawful and just reasons to follow somebody, and Zimmerman didn't even know it was nonconsensual until he was in the altercation

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

How are you going to visually ascertain if someone is intentionally following you or going in the same direction?

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Easily, they go in the same direct as u in a car and then get out to follow u…like Zimmerman did 😭

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Ok, so again it’s Zimmerman’s fault like dude 😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

That doesn't prove anything lol. Plenty of people get out of cars and walk past or near a place they just drove by, have you ever parked before?

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Even still that argument falls flat. Why are u parking at a house u dont live in and then getting out to follow someone?😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Some of them might even look at you too! Oh my god the horror... whatever will you do about this oppression without deadly force? 🤣

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Like I can't imagine the level of stress you get at Walmart or Costco if this is seriously how you think

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Ok so again, he went in the same direction as him in a car then parked at a home he didn’t live at to go in the same direction as him on foot. I wanna see the mental gymnastics for this one lol

1

Anonymous #1 17w

So at Walmart right, ppl going in the same direction as me is coincidental…but if they’re going down all the same exact isles as me eating they aren’t picking anything up…yea that’s more than likely me being followed bud😭

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

So you look at every person in walmart and if they follow you for a few aisles you beat the shit out of them? Lmao sure

0

Anonymous #1 17w

A few isles is different from EVERY isle I go on…reading isn’t ur strong suit mate

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

But you do look at every person to visually ascertain that they aren't following you?

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

That sounds like paranoia my guy

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Not until I notice they’re literally walking behind me into every isle I go into. If I make 4 right turns and they’re still behind me…pretty sure u can assume they’re following me lmfao

1

Anonymous #1 17w

I love how u have to misrepresent my argument to try and seem logical lmfao. Ppl can easily identify ppl going the same way as u because y’all’s routes are similar vs being followed 💀💀

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Rlly quick…u believe Zimmerman didn’t follow Martin?

3

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No I never said that, I said following and going in the same direction aren't a whole lot different, to the point where you would have to make a determination about intent and be paying attention to everyone around you completely. I believe you understand this, but I didn't think people typically get to that level of rationality just to be like "hurr durr if you follow me anywhere I'm going to use deadly force" because you have to also understand that's not how the law works or has ever worked.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Ok, so all that doesn’t matter when Zimmerman admitted to following Treyvon so all that we can go ahead and scrap.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Nor is it a justified line of thinking, or anything of the sort. You have no expectation of privacy in public.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

I don’t think u understand the difference between following and going the same direction. If we agree that Zimmerman followed Martin based on the information we have it’s safe to say Martin also came to the same conclusion based on what was happening. Especially with Zimmerman saying multiple times he followed Martin, which again, multiple ppl say he shouldn’t have done lmfao

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Privacy in public and being followed are different. U can have the expectation of not being followed, especially if u aren’t doing anything..so?

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I don't disagree that Martin was being followed by Zimmerman or that he knew about it, I disagree that being followed in a public place is justification for an assault that breaks bones.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Again, the interaction is Zimmerman’s fault. If we agree that he shouldn’t have been following Martin we agree that the death of this child is his fault and there’s no reason to defend him lmfao

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Yeah sure, the verbal altercation is Zimmerman's fault. The assault is solely on Martin.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

I'm not gonna tell you one man should be held accountable for what another does with his fists

0

Anonymous #1 17w

No, the assault is still on Zimmerman. As we have established and the police have established he shouldn’t have followed Martin

1

Anonymous #1 17w

Cool, Martin wasn’t a man lmao he was a minor. A teenager

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

He was 17 not 6, he knew what country he was in, that people owned guns, and that you're not supposed to assault others. If you're seriously arguing he didn't, he should have.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

17 is still a minor Brodie. He obviously would still have more common sense than a literal toddler, but still won’t always make the best choices lmfao. Zimmerman was like 34-35 years old decades of years ahead of Martin. He should’ve known following someone could lead to someone getting hurt. This situation still falls on Zimmerman..

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Following someone doesn't lead to anyone getting hurt unless they unjustly and unlawfully attack you, which is why Zimmerman brought his gun and yelled for help while being beaten before firing.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

I’m sorry, pretty sure the reason that police tell u not to follow a suspect is so that u DONT get hurt. Again, Zimmerman’s fault dude lmfao

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

No, they tell you so they're not liable for you getting hurt.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

They didn't even tell Zimmerman "you shouldn't do that", they said "you don't need to do that"

0

Anonymous #1 17w

They ADVISED him not to. And yes, so that u or anyone else gets hurts. At 35 years old he should’ve known that like I said

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 17w

Yeah, but he dealt with the likelihood of getting hurt, making sure that the threat didn't end his life.

0

Anonymous #1 17w

Zimmerman was the threat the entire time. Who would’ve knew

1