This shooting happened because he got pisted off and nothing more. No way Stand Your Ground applies here in any way shape or form.
This shooting happened because he got pisted off and nothing more. No way Stand Your Ground applies here in any way shape or form.
So far, nobody knows what was said between the two of them. What, if any, threats were made by whom, towards whom.
So all we know at this point is, an asshole with a gun, met an asshole with a loud stereo...........GUN WON!!!
This isn't about racism, it's just another senceless killing. Funny how when a black person kills a white person you don't hear a peep about racism, hmmm, I wonder why.
Lotta opinions, but no one is addressing the statistics by the Department of Justice.
The case is not made that this one-off is in any way typical of the average killing of a black male in Florida, or even in the US.
Although it is outrageous, the outrage here is still about race, which is not the rampant crime against teen blacks that is the implied problem.
Disparage, ridicule, use schoolyard epithets, but address the stats. This case is not typical.
You could just as easily pick some hit-and-run crime and then try to portray it as systemically a problem, when it is not.
When a white guy goes up to black kids playing music and ends up shooting them of course it's going to stand out more than if we hear a shooting occurred during a drug deal gone bad or a drug addict who was robbering a 7-11. Because it's utterly senseless and there's no comprehensible reason why it happened other than for us to question if this guy was a racist or was looking to create a violent confrontation. Why in the world in an argument about music with some teenagers would you feel the need to pull out your gun and shoot them? When they were SITTING IN A CAR, no less? It's not like these kids were shoving him around and making him feel physically threatened.
I read that Dunn is claiming that he saw a gun barrel displayed or pointed at him through a window ????
Haven’t heard any more about that, though, nor have I heard of any other arrests in this case.
Again, there is no defense of this killing, even if the teens in some way verbally provoked the altercation that then escalated. But, your assumption that the senseless factor makes for outrage doesn't make good sense to me.
Whereas it IS senseless to kill for a petty argument, if we knew the motivations of the referenced black-on-black teen murders, they would likewise be senseless to most people too.
Racial murder is senseless. Drug deal murders are senseless. Ego and testosterone motivated murders are senseless. Fights over girlfriends ending in murder are senseless. Murders committed during theft are senseless.
My point remains that the great number of other senseless killings are appalling and a stain on our culture even more than the much more rare racist killing, if indeed this was about race or culture clash. And yeah, it is sad that someone would attempt a stand-your-ground defense, but lawyers often do outrageous strategies. Even if the killer was somehow able to get off with this unreasonable defense, it wouldn't make it typical, and it wouldn't outshadow all the tragedy of black-on-black murders.
Somehow, it is fashionable on JUB to pick a state like Florida, make generalizations about the entire populace based on a crime like this, and then portray it as some kind of hotbed of racial conflict. There must be a more compelling argument than one case. And, it seems ironic that taking offense at racism in a case like this then becomes the basis to stereotype Floridians. Think about it.
You are trying to apples and apples two situations that are clearly apples and oranges.
Oh and P.S.? Florida does have a horrible track record. If I casually think back on almost every random no motivation killing of a foreign tourist or black kid I've heard in the last decade or so, at least half of them were in Florida. No, no one has said everyone in Florida is an insane racist who shoots minorities on sight. But this kind of case comes slightly on the heels of the Trayvon case and you seriously want us to put an injunction order on talking about what might be going on with Florida and its laws specifically that might be setting the stage for these kinds of situations to happen? Too bad.
Last edited by xbuzzerx; November 28th, 2012 at 10:35 PM.
This thread is about addressing the racial divide in this country. Hard-up refuses to address these issues and simply says "well who cares... look at all these other issues". It's important to examine these issues. Florida allows crimes to happen under the disguise of self defense. And yes hard-up... definitely apples and oranges... two different situations.
Rare? He thinks these situations are rare? LMAO... what ignorance.
I could post all day and call you epithets, but I posted statistics. You have posted none.
Far from "who cares", my posts are arguing that promoting propaganda that portrays the state of inter-racial violence, while ignoring the much higher rate of black on black killing, is simply a dishonest portrayal of the big problem that faces a black male today in terms of greater exposure to violent death.
Many, many, many more black males are killed every year by their own race. Why is that not an even greater problem? Why?
Howl at the moon, jibe as a kid, but you simply haven't attempted to explain why the greater number of black deaths at the hands of other blacks gets NO discussion or outrage on JUB, but the white-on-black killing becomes center stage as if it were typical.
Address the statistics.
Last edited by Hard-up1; November 28th, 2012 at 11:05 PM.
Oh but several of us have provided statistics and facts.
It's awesome that one is willing to turn a blind eye to a serious problem in this fucking society. This thread is about Florida's terrible justice system and this crime here. Don't try to change the subject because it doesn't suit some selfish desire.Far from "who cares", my posts are arguing that promoting propaganda that portrays the state of inter-racial violence, while ignoring the much higher rate of black on black killing, is simply a dishonest portrayal of the big problem that faces a black male today in terms of greater exposure to violent death.
I find it funny.
A few months back, when that asshole shot all those people, (who were all races) in the batman theatre, no anti white, or racial remarks were made of the event. Just to add, he's labeled as a mental case and psychopath.
However, in what many are calling Trayvon Martin part 2, it's racist white man this and thug hoodlum black boy that.
That's all I have to point out for now. This story is still sort of new and nobody knows the full story.
Killing is killing. I don't care if the victim was purple and the shooter was yellow. If it was race related or not, killing is wrong.
Glass Half Empty, Glass Half Fullhttp://colorfulqueers.tumblr.com/
I've completely agreed that these cases are exactly that, most likely, but that choosing to focus on that as the problem needing great attention and outrage is disingenuous when the same killing is taking the lives of many, many more young black men, and at the hands of their own race and for reasons just as senseless.
It is an inconvenient truth, and denied effectively by extinction by the same posters on this forum who repeatedly raise the white-on-black racism issue. If white vigilante killings are the big problem in the US, then what exactly are the black killings, acceptable?
And the poster cited about the Colorado shooting is another fine piece of racist propaganda. There is no history of any ethnicity committing any kind of random killing spree without the individual's sanity being called into question. If an Arab or a Black had shot up the same theater in the same way, he would have most certainly been suspected to be psychologically deranged. Making such a poster is racist in and off itself. Cite a single randomized mass killing like this and show where a black man was represented simply as a thug rather than a psycho.
Last edited by Hard-up1; November 28th, 2012 at 11:52 PM.
What do you conclude from that?
It's not disingenuous at all. Those other deaths you are referring to are not happening because a really, really bad law is giving people a cowboy mindset to go out into the street with their gun and fix problems which wind up with an unarmed teenager dead for absolutely no reason.I've completely agreed that these cases are exactly that, most likely, but that choosing to focus on that as the problem needing great attention and outrage is disingenuous when the same killing is taking the lives of many, many more young black men, and at the hands of their own race and for reasons just as senseless.
Who said they are acceptable? We said it's apples and oranges, you are the only one discussing it here because this thread IS ABOUT THE VIGILANTE KILLINGS. However if a law was specifically creating the legal gray-area which ENCOURAGED perpetrators of black-on-black violent crime to go out and do it, yes, I would be taking exception to that law too.It is an inconvenient truth, and denied effectively by extinction by the same posters on this forum who repeatedly raise the white-on-black racism issue. If white vigilante killings are the big problem in the US, then what exactly are the black killings, acceptable?
I appologise to anyone I offended, it was an attempt at sarcasm that obviously failed. But that dosen't change the fact that people are sreaming racism before anyone knows the full details of what happened. A white person shot a black person, so far that's all we know. That racial dynamic dosen't automaticaly eqaute to racism.
Had Dunn been a black guy he may have shot that kid. Had the kid been white Dunn may have still shot him. Was there racism? Possibly/probably, but there are other variables to considder. Dunn was comming from a wedding (probably drinking) stopped at a convience store (buying beer?) notices/hears a SUV blarring load music, Dunn pumps up his beer muscles to go and put these kids in line. Dunn asks/tells the kids to turn the music down, a verbal exchange occurs, Dunn fires 8-9 times killing the kid in the back seat then runs, turning himself in the next day (after consulting an attourney no doubt)
You can speculate till the cows come home but there is no overt act or statement pointing to a racial bias or motivation that we know of yet.
I don't know why you feel you should share your racial indentity with me, but ....congrats on your whiteness......I'm not.
And there are ALWAYS people who try to make these cases not seem racist at all no matter how much they actually are or appear to be. And someone not screaming racial slurs does not = not racist.You can speculate till the cows come home but there is no overt act or statement pointing to a racial bias or motivation that we know of yet.
I never said there was "NO" racism, I have no idea what's in the shooters heart, nor do you. Just because there's a conflict between 2 people of different races dosen't automaticaly mean it's a racialy driven event. It seems that there are a few folks around who are hyper-vigilant to anything that could be construed as racialy motivated.
If it is proven that Dunn's motivation was racism, not loud music, then he would deserve to have the hate crime charging/sentencing enhansment leveled against him. But the constant drumbeat of racism is bullshit. The race of the shooter and victim in this case is errelevant unless you can show that that difference was "THE" motivating factor.
At the end of the day, it really dosen't matter how it "appears". When you look at life through the distorted prism of racism/victim hood, you just become convinced that "those" people are out to get you.
As far as "people who try to make theses cases seem not racist at all", thier vision is no better/worse than yours. One group has thier collective heads in the sand and the others (you) are running around like chicken little. Stop, catch a breath, an examine the known facts in the case and proceed from there.
How am I running around like a little chicken? But if I am I guess it's better than you back pedaling by calling your initial response "sarcasm". I never claimed that this was most definitely a racist crime or that I knew all the facts, but as quickly as people are willing to call this a racist crime there are the same people who will quickly claim it is not, facts or not.As far as "people who try to make theses cases seem not racist at all", thier vision is no better/worse than yours. One group has thier collective heads in the sand and the others (you) are running around like chicken little. Stop, catch a breath, an examine the known facts in the case and proceed from there.
Given the other recent case in Florida and given its horrible law giving people the belief that this kind of behavior is "self-defense" and you have white guys initiating confrontations with black teenagers which end in "self-defense shootings", it's perfectly reasonable to believe race is involved.
I didn't call you a "little Chicken", I referenced a characer from a kids book, Chicken Little, who has a acorn fall on his head and jumps to the conclusion that the sky is falling and runs around proclaiming such. (I assumed Chicken Little was a more widely known character, sorry).
Also, the reference to "you" was not meant as you an individual, but rather you as a part of the collective that continues to promote the narrative as a cut and dried case of racialy inspired violence.
I love this part "I never claimed that this was most definitely a racist crime or that I new all the facts..." Would that be backpeddaling or an attempt at revisionist history.
You asserted a conclusion based on incomplete reporting and what appears to be a personaly held bias. I have no idea if this was racialy motivated and I am not claiming it was or wasn't. I, like you, am without all the facts, the difference is, I asume the best while you assume the worst.
^ So you presume this guy was just insane and would shoot any unarmed teenager near his house, and that's the "best"?
If anything I feel like my interpretation of what happened is a lot kinder than yours. I think this is a prejudiced guy who, like a LOT of white people, is kind of intimidated by black people in general, particularly males, and has the social conditioning that most of us of every race in the United States do that black people are "more dangerous." And when he went up and confronted these kids and they (my assumption) mouthed back (it's legal to play music before 11pm) he felt threatened and reacted. Do I think it COULDN'T have happened with white teenagers? No. Do I think it's equally likely he would have felt equally threatened by white teenagers sitting inside a vehicle to the point where he would shoot them? No.
And he is claiming self-defense... so his perception of 'threat' is relevant.
The alternate is to assume he's just a psychopathic nutbar and would have shot anyone who played music, in which case it begs the question of why he hasn't shot random people before. I hardly think of that as the "more positive" interpretation.
And lots of this stuff as well—
Well let's see if I can decipher this. The fact that the guy shot a kid over a loud stereo is rediculous and should be dealt with. But the fact that people are saying it's racialy motivated based on nothing more than skin color is crap. To this point I've heard nothing suggesting the shooters motivation. Was it racial, was it that the guy dislikes loud music, was something said between the two that set this nut off, I don't know, but I doubt you do either, that's why I say we need the full story.
As to the view of "no phyical threat", we don't know that either. There are now reports that say Dunn claims to have seen a shotgun in the car, weather it's true or not, or weather that would constitue a "physical threat" or not will eventualy be brought to light.
The guy is claiming it was self-defense so.... you have a better explanation as to why this guy felt "threatened" by an unarmed teen sitting inside a car?
I have no thoughts on hearsay. Hearsay and Assumptions isn't evidence.
I don't presume the guy was/is nuts (clinicaly insane), nor do I assume he would shoot any teenager, something set him off. And it's that "something" that has to be known before anyone can assign a motivation to his actions.
As to your beleif that he felt threatened, where do you get that from? If he felt threatened why would he approach the car?
Your take on this situation seems to be primarily based on "feelings", What you "feel" what you believe Dunn "felt", how white people "feel". When you start labeling people you need more than "feelings", FACTS are the meat of the matter, without them you're just pissin' in the wind.
Last edited by xbuzzerx; November 29th, 2012 at 01:19 PM.
gon read it
how many century tak great human ape find tere shit?"classfied"<ha
So, moving right on along ...
Imo, it just seems like a case of a Clint Eastwood wannabe trying to take back his neighborhood b/c too many thugs and gang bangers have moved in next door with their loud jungle rap music. And that’s just not right. This isn’t what this country is supposed to be about. No one is forced to deal with anyone and their annoying habits. If Dunn didn’t like their loud music, he was more than abled enough to leave and go to another store. I don’t care what words were exchanged, nothing gave that man the right to take someone’s life over loud music being played. Hell, nothing gave him the right to go over to their vehicle in the first place and DEMAND that they turn down their music. Just the fucking nerve of it all. That for some white people it really does seem like they do believe they have liable cause to rule all over any non-white person they wish and designate them to their rightful, lowly places.
My point remains that the focus of many of your threads and posts is to perpetuate racial animus by exaggerating the implied incidence of it.
You're just trying to start something with me personally and I am so not in the mood to stoop that low with you so this will be my last post directed to you.
No, the problem I have is not with you the individual, but the tenor of these continuing race threads in Hot Topics.
The implication is that whites are oppressing blacks in an ongoing systemic and widespread manner, and that states like Florida are some sort of holdouts of Jim Crow, barely progressed into civil rights or trying hard to go backward.
Whereas there IS racism in all countries, including the U.S., it is a more complex story than just majorities oppressing minorities. Racial animosity goes both directions across cultural lines, and is problematic in all instances.
My point was and is that blacks are causing vastly more fatalities to blacks than whites in criminal acts and if the suffering of black Americans is an area of elevated concern, then addressing the larger source of killing is a valid point of focus, even more so than the few instances of racial killings like the subjects of these threads.
And again, what is the goal? Is it racial harmony through civil rights and legal reform, or is it fostered animosity and role reversal?
That killings will always erupt in society is a given. That the basis of conflict will always include a range of reasons -- economic, social, racial, religious, romantic, etc. -- is also a given. In that light, a low incidence of racial killing is reprehensible, but hardly surprising, as it is just another dimension of dysfunctional individuals in a world peopled with misanthropes as well as functional people.
Last edited by Hard-up1; November 30th, 2012 at 06:05 AM.
When people try to talk about racism and the serious issues in America, respond with a deflection about a different topic. Apples and oranges. And yes I agree with MoePhoenix, the point you tried to make is absolute horseshit.
Stand your Ground is a bad law. Why is this difficult to admit? And why do you keep going on and on about people going "nuts about Florida" when at least according to your info you don't even live there?
If anything rather than all of us engaging in some "concerted effort to exaggerate the race animus" I have seen actually you doing the complete opposite-- trying to be a crusader insisting that cases that actually DO look racially motivated are just our overactive imaginations and you can't assume bad laws or cowboy-minded white people who go up to minorities with a gun and do ILLEGAL THINGS (like demanding that they turn off their music, or stalking them on their way home holding iced tea and skittles) and wind up shooting them to death were remotely influenced by racial animosity?
When the stories start coming in with people claiming it was "self defense" after they shot white unarmed teenagers doing nothing wrong to death you'll have a leg to stand on here.
Beachguy invented the 'fact' that people playing their music loud for two minutes was cause for shooting them in post #39