I Want What Geraldo Rivera Is Smoking

Post Reply  
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 33496
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003
Sand$: 15,716.86
elven wrote:my jaw aches if i eat too many skittles.


it destroys the roof of my mouth....maybe black people have some evolutionary guard against this.
_______________________________________

currently consulting my FF appraiser/advisor
Moderatorbaiter
Posts: 24492
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005
Sand$: 6,209.30
HurricaneNamedDitka wrote:
elven wrote:my jaw aches if i eat too many skittles.


it destroys the roof of my mouth....maybe black people have some evolutionary guard against this.


Destroys my tongue and I can't taste anything for a week. It also makes my teeth hurt and makes them extremely sensitive to cold.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 44419
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 43,158.26
Stankweasels 3000 wrote:Anyone who's saying that a kid wearing a hoodie to keep warm on a brisk February evening is begging to get murdered is a moron. What the hell is wrong with you dopes?


My reading comprehension must really suck, who at all said that?
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 27236
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003
Sand$: 4,298.54
pwbowen wrote:
Stankweasels 3000 wrote:Anyone who's saying that a kid wearing a hoodie to keep warm on a brisk February evening is begging to get murdered is a moron. What the hell is wrong with you dopes?


My reading comprehension must really suck, who at all said that?


anyone saying that a hoodie has anything to do with it.
_______________________________________

Image
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 43141
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 12,282.12
beerbarian wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
beerbarian wrote:
Elmagister wrote:So the kid is to blame for wearing a hoodie. And a woman is to blame for being raped if she wears a skirt.


No they're not. I didn't say they were. I'm saying the same thing as someone else said...perceptions are real. You need to be aware of the perceptions and understand how to mitigate them. Don't wear a "leaglize pot" t-shirt to your job interview. Clean your car before you pick up your date. If you're walking into a convenience store to buy something, lowering your hood and/or removing your sunglasses for 10 min. will lower the cashier's anxiety. You can still run into some crazy a-hole who will just find another reason to focus his attention on you...but if nobody ever acknowledges that the perceptions can lead to real consequences then the risk for a bad outcome increases.

The kid isn't to blame for wearing a hoodie. But wearing a hoodie might have drawn the attention of a dangerous individual. Maybe he would have drawn that attention just because he was black. He's just as dead either way...but if he had been aware of the perceptions, and had mitigated the risk he might be alive today.


Right, and a woman should be aware that a skirt might attract the attention of a rapist.


Do you think there is a reason why police detctives don't wear the uniform that patrol officers wear? Is there a reason why doctors wear labcoats that are white? Any special reason why the people behind the counter at McDonald's wear the same shirt and same color pants?

You seem bent on denying something that has been proven time and again to be a truism of human perception, and you seem to be angry that someone dared to point it out (although to be fair, he did so in a douchey and sensationalist way that basically ruins the message). There's no reason not to be upset that the perceptions are wrong/unfair/whatever. But denying they exist does nothing to combat them.


If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 7950
Joined: Wed Sep 4, 2002
Sand$: 5,421.78
Elmagister wrote:
beerbarian wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
beerbarian wrote:
Elmagister wrote:So the kid is to blame for wearing a hoodie. And a woman is to blame for being raped if she wears a skirt.


No they're not. I didn't say they were. I'm saying the same thing as someone else said...perceptions are real. You need to be aware of the perceptions and understand how to mitigate them. Don't wear a "leaglize pot" t-shirt to your job interview. Clean your car before you pick up your date. If you're walking into a convenience store to buy something, lowering your hood and/or removing your sunglasses for 10 min. will lower the cashier's anxiety. You can still run into some crazy a-hole who will just find another reason to focus his attention on you...but if nobody ever acknowledges that the perceptions can lead to real consequences then the risk for a bad outcome increases.

The kid isn't to blame for wearing a hoodie. But wearing a hoodie might have drawn the attention of a dangerous individual. Maybe he would have drawn that attention just because he was black. He's just as dead either way...but if he had been aware of the perceptions, and had mitigated the risk he might be alive today.


Right, and a woman should be aware that a skirt might attract the attention of a rapist.


Do you think there is a reason why police detctives don't wear the uniform that patrol officers wear? Is there a reason why doctors wear labcoats that are white? Any special reason why the people behind the counter at McDonald's wear the same shirt and same color pants?

You seem bent on denying something that has been proven time and again to be a truism of human perception, and you seem to be angry that someone dared to point it out (although to be fair, he did so in a douchey and sensationalist way that basically ruins the message). There's no reason not to be upset that the perceptions are wrong/unfair/whatever. But denying they exist does nothing to combat them.


If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.


It should piss you off, and it shouldn't matter...but it does. Geraldo in his own douchey way is just saying "If you wear a hoodie, you attract the attention of the cop-wannabee vigilante crowd". Some of them are unstable. If you think there are only one or two of them and your risks are low, don't worry about it. But that's small consolation when the decision can get you killed.

The courts will settle it. They'll decide who did what. Maybe the victim is innocent, maybe not...doesn'treally matter when you're dead.

Hate Geraldo for being a douche, but don't hate him for telling folks how to mitigate the risk.
_______________________________________

Image


What women really want is security. I know because every time I approach a woman at a bar, that is what she starts screaming.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 43141
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 12,282.12
beerbarian wrote:It should piss you off, and it shouldn't matter...but it does. Geraldo in his own douchey way is just saying "If you wear a hoodie, you attract the attention of the cop-wannabee vigilante crowd". Some of them are unstable. If you think there are only one or two of them and your risks are low, don't worry about it. But that's small consolation when the decision can get you killed.

The courts will settle it. They'll decide who did what. Maybe the victim is innocent, maybe not...doesn'treally matter when you're dead.

Hate Geraldo for being a douche, but don't hate him for telling folks how to mitigate the risk.


Sorry...you weren't arguing what I thought you were arguing.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 8775
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007
Sand$: 16,714.50
Elmagister wrote:
If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.



If an eye witness and the police are to be believed, if the 17 year old wouldn't have punched the guy in the face and started to beat his head on the sidewalk he would still be alive today.

I'm not saying the kid deserved it, but we don't know what happened. The whole country is going apechit with one side of the story.

You ever notice that all the pictures of this kid are years old? Funny how they show pictures of the kid when he was 13-14 and not recent pictures. They don't want to show recent pictures of he kid with his grill and tats. They want to portray the poor honor student, not the kid suspended from school for drugs who went by the twitter handle NO_LIMIT_N*** who tweeted about beating up people and got tweets from his friends asking to buy weed.

Now I'm not saying that means he attacked the guy or that he deserved to die. I'm saying that at least part of the story is not as presented and for all we know none of the story is as presented.
_______________________________________

It was purgatory.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 43141
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 12,282.12
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.



If an eye witness and the police are to be believed, if the 17 year old wouldn't have punched the guy in the face and started to beat his head on the sidewalk he would still be alive today.

I'm not saying the kid deserved it, but we don't know what happened. The whole country is going apechit with one side of the story.

You ever notice that all the pictures of this kid are years old? Funny how they show pictures of the kid when he was 13-14 and not recent pictures. They don't want to show recent pictures of he kid with his grill and tats. They want to portray the poor honor student, not the kid suspended from school for drugs who went by the twitter handle NO_LIMIT_N*** who tweeted about beating up people and got tweets from his friends asking to buy weed.

Now I'm not saying that means he attacked the guy or that he deserved to die. I'm saying that at least part of the story is not as presented and for all we know none of the story is as presented.


Those are all very valid points, but I will ask: What would you do if you were walking home, and someone got in your face?

My overall point is that it's hard to argue self defense when you initiate the contact/fight.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 34236
Joined: Sat Aug 1, 2009
Sand$: 719.69
Elmagister wrote:
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.



If an eye witness and the police are to be believed, if the 17 year old wouldn't have punched the guy in the face and started to beat his head on the sidewalk he would still be alive today.

I'm not saying the kid deserved it, but we don't know what happened. The whole country is going apechit with one side of the story.

You ever notice that all the pictures of this kid are years old? Funny how they show pictures of the kid when he was 13-14 and not recent pictures. They don't want to show recent pictures of he kid with his grill and tats. They want to portray the poor honor student, not the kid suspended from school for drugs who went by the twitter handle NO_LIMIT_N*** who tweeted about beating up people and got tweets from his friends asking to buy weed.

Now I'm not saying that means he attacked the guy or that he deserved to die. I'm saying that at least part of the story is not as presented and for all we know none of the story is as presented.


Those are all very valid points, but I will ask: What would you do if you were walking home, and someone got in your face?

My overall point is that it's hard to argue self defense when you initiate the contact/fight.


Everyone can talk in circles all they want, point to racial profiling, an armed overzealous wannabe failed cop, a teenager with marijuana residue in a plastic bag (ZOMG!), etc, etc, etc. You can spin it toward Trayvon, you can spin it toward Zimmerman, but I keep coming back to this
Elmagister wrote: My overall point is that it's hard to argue self defense when you initiate the contact/fight.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 8775
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007
Sand$: 16,714.50
Elmagister wrote:
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.



If an eye witness and the police are to be believed, if the 17 year old wouldn't have punched the guy in the face and started to beat his head on the sidewalk he would still be alive today.

I'm not saying the kid deserved it, but we don't know what happened. The whole country is going apechit with one side of the story.

You ever notice that all the pictures of this kid are years old? Funny how they show pictures of the kid when he was 13-14 and not recent pictures. They don't want to show recent pictures of he kid with his grill and tats. They want to portray the poor honor student, not the kid suspended from school for drugs who went by the twitter handle NO_LIMIT_N*** who tweeted about beating up people and got tweets from his friends asking to buy weed.

Now I'm not saying that means he attacked the guy or that he deserved to die. I'm saying that at least part of the story is not as presented and for all we know none of the story is as presented.


Those are all very valid points, but I will ask: What would you do if you were walking home, and someone got in your face?

My overall point is that it's hard to argue self defense when you initiate the contact/fight.


The official story is that he stopped following him as instructed by 911 and was heading back to his car when the kid approached him and hit him. Is that what really happened, I have no idea.

To the broader point though, it is harder to argue self defense when you initiated the contact but it can happen. The key is who escalated it. If someone starts an argument with you (justified or not) and you start to beat their teeth in it is still self defense if they shoot you in my opinion.
_______________________________________

It was purgatory.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 43141
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 12,282.12
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
If you're saying that appearances affect people's perceptions? Sure. I agree with that. If you're saying this has any bearing whatsoever in this case? Yeah, that pisses me off. The kid could have been dressed like a Zulu Warrior, and the guy had no reason to go start a fight with him, then shoot him dead. Had he followed the 911 dispatcher's instructions, and left the kid alone, the murderer can have whatever preconceived notions about him he wants, but the kid goes home alive.



If an eye witness and the police are to be believed, if the 17 year old wouldn't have punched the guy in the face and started to beat his head on the sidewalk he would still be alive today.

I'm not saying the kid deserved it, but we don't know what happened. The whole country is going apechit with one side of the story.

You ever notice that all the pictures of this kid are years old? Funny how they show pictures of the kid when he was 13-14 and not recent pictures. They don't want to show recent pictures of he kid with his grill and tats. They want to portray the poor honor student, not the kid suspended from school for drugs who went by the twitter handle NO_LIMIT_N*** who tweeted about beating up people and got tweets from his friends asking to buy weed.

Now I'm not saying that means he attacked the guy or that he deserved to die. I'm saying that at least part of the story is not as presented and for all we know none of the story is as presented.


Those are all very valid points, but I will ask: What would you do if you were walking home, and someone got in your face?

My overall point is that it's hard to argue self defense when you initiate the contact/fight.


The official story is that he stopped following him as instructed by 911 and was heading back to his car when the kid approached him and hit him. Is that what really happened, I have no idea.

To the broader point though, it is harder to argue self defense when you initiated the contact but it can happen. The key is who escalated it. If someone starts an argument with you (justified or not) and you start to beat their teeth in it is still self defense if they shoot you in my opinion.


Actually they instructed him to stop following, but when Trayvonn began running, he ran after him. A witness also said she heard the boy screaming for help, and the policeman (who wasn't there) corrected her and told her she'd heard Zimmerman screaming.

Also, if the law states that I can defend myself with deadly force (Stand Your Ground), and someone approaches and attacks me, and I legally begin to defend myself...does it then become legal for them to shoot me dead because I was defending myself? I don't think so.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 8775
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007
Sand$: 16,714.50
Elmagister wrote:
Actually they instructed him to stop following, but when Trayvonn began running, he ran after him. A witness also said she heard the boy screaming for help, and the policeman (who wasn't there) corrected her and told her she'd heard Zimmerman screaming.

Also, if the law states that I can defend myself with deadly force (Stand Your Ground), and someone approaches and attacks me, and I legally begin to defend myself...does it then become legal for them to shoot me dead because I was defending myself? I don't think so.



Like I said, I don't know what really happened. I wouldn't be surprised by either scenario.


I would say that if someone approaches and attacks you and you defend yourself I wouldn't think they could legitimately claim self defense.

If someone approaches you and says they don't recognize you and asks what are you doing here and you proceed to beat the chit out of them and they shoot you dead, I would say that despite the fact they approached you and initiated the contact it is self defense.

Its not always black and white, in my opinion, the one that escalates the violence beyond what is reasonable loses the right to claim self defense.
_______________________________________

It was purgatory.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 43141
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 12,282.12
tjusmc wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
Actually they instructed him to stop following, but when Trayvonn began running, he ran after him. A witness also said she heard the boy screaming for help, and the policeman (who wasn't there) corrected her and told her she'd heard Zimmerman screaming.

Also, if the law states that I can defend myself with deadly force (Stand Your Ground), and someone approaches and attacks me, and I legally begin to defend myself...does it then become legal for them to shoot me dead because I was defending myself? I don't think so.



Like I said, I don't know what really happened. I wouldn't be surprised by either scenario.


I would say that if someone approaches and attacks you and you defend yourself I wouldn't think they could legitimately claim self defense.

If someone approaches you and says they don't recognize you and asks what are you doing here and you proceed to beat the chit out of them and they shoot you dead, I would say that despite the fact they approached you and initiated the contact it is self defense.

Its not always black and white, in my opinion, the one that escalates the violence beyond what is reasonable loses the right to claim self defense.


So I can go into Little Rock, pick out the thugiest guy I can find, approach question him, and when he pounds me in the face, legalized murder.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 8775
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007
Sand$: 16,714.50
Elmagister wrote:
So I can go into Little Rock, pick out the thugiest guy I can find, approach question him, and when he pounds me in the face, legalized murder.



If that's the way you want to look at it, yes.

Starting a verbal confrontation doesn't mean that the person loses the right to defend themselves if the other person changes it to a physical confrontation if the violence level justifies it. Meaning I can't shoot you because you punched me in the jaw. I can shoot you if you start banging my head on the sidewalk or continue to beat me to the point a reasonable person would fear for their life or fear serious bodily harm.

Isn't this common sense?
_______________________________________

It was purgatory.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 2 guests