News Stories

[Seitsuki]

Neighborhood Watches are fine. We have one in most of our suburbs, and I think it's infinitely better than your neighbors walking past not giving a damn as your house is blatantly pillaged (although I guess with legal guns thrown into the mix things get murkier). 'Taking the law into your own hands' has been around ever since the law itself was set up because it was set up by humans, and therefore has failings in all aspects from legislation to enforcement. Not condoning it in all cases by any stretch, just putting that out there.

The one thing I do have problems with however is how 'stand your ground' has been interpreted. As far as I know it mostly only applies when one is on one's own private property doesn't it? Does Florida have some wack variation which extends it further?

[monir]

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

........... Either way, Florida was screwed from the moment this story broke out.

Pretty much the reason why the state had to let him get away with it... Heck, some of you may remember this guy was formerly charged several days later after the story broke and created a massive uproar nationwide. The local law enforcement, at first, cleared him of any criminal wrong doing, and rightly so since Florida just adopted this new law. After the uproar, the chief for that local LE was the scapegoat and was disgraced and fired for not taking any action.

[serenade_beta]

I'm just glad this case is over. To be honest, I was slightly hoping Zimmerman would be acquitted, solely because his case was so overly exaggerated into a civil rights thing.
But anyways, I don't have much problem with the results. The prosecution failed to prove without a doubt that Zimmerman committed manslaughter or murder to the jury, whom both sides had an opportunity to select.

[monir]

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

Does Florida have some wack variation which extends it further?

The law can be interpreted in a very broad manner that doesn't limit to once own dwelling. Here is the link. #3 was Zimmerman's likely defense to justify his deadly use of force. The dwelling part is covered in #4.

[Mr. DJ]

Originally Posted by serenade_beta

But anyways, I don't have much problem with the results. The prosecution failed to prove without a doubt that Zimmerman committed manslaughter or murder to the jury, whom both sides had an opportunity to select.

They should have focused purely on a manslaughter charge and not try and get a conviction for murder 2. It certainly didn't help that the jury didn't even know the grounds for manslaughter.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by serenade_beta

I'm just glad this case is over. To be honest, I was slightly hoping Zimmerman would be acquitted, solely because his case was so overly exaggerated into a civil rights thing.
But anyways, I don't have much problem with the results. The prosecution failed to prove without a doubt that Zimmerman committed manslaughter or murder to the jury, whom both sides had an opportunity to select.

I'm inclined to agree. The Prosecution's case just wasn't all that strong.

The whole situation is really a messy tragedy. My impression is that Zimmerman and Martin both made some bad decisions that night - It sadly cost Martin his life, while Zimmerman's life will never be the same. I think it's important to note that even with this acquittal, it's highly unlikely that Zimmerman will ever enjoy a normal life again. So he is paying some cost for his bad decisions that cost a young man his life.

[MrTerrorist]

Somehow this feels bittersweet about the whole thing. While Zimmerman may have been acquitted, i doubt anyone would want him to join any Neighborhood Watch again due to his extreme actions with Martin. No one is taking a chance if he does something like this again.

[Anh_Minh]

It's a free country. I don't think he needs anyone's permission if he wants to prowl around, looking for people to stand his ground against.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Mr. DJ

They should have focused purely on a manslaughter charge and not try and get a conviction for murder 2. It certainly didn't help that the jury didn't even know the grounds for manslaughter.

I'm inclined to agree. The public outlash against nothing being done about this lead to an official indictment, probably lead to an indictment that overstepped itself. The Prosecution should have aimed for manslaughter from the start. Because as suspicious as I am in Zimmerman pursuing people in the way he did, there probably wasn't much indication of malicious intent.


I still personally feel that Zimmerman was culpable for Martin's death. Zimmerman was the guy who got out of his vehicle while armed, intent on pursuing someone he thought of as being a "fucking criminal". Once you do something like that, you need to bear personal culpability.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

I still personally feel that Zimmerman was culpable for Martin's death. Zimmerman was the guy who got out of his vehicle while armed, intent on pursuing someone he thought of as being a "fucking criminal". Once you do something like that, you need to bear personal culpability.

Going by the scenarios and timelines presented in court, the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin went on for a significant stretch of time before a shot was fired. Zimmerman was probably reckless in trailing Martin the way he did, but I do get the impression that Zimmerman held back on firing his gun until he felt he truly had no other option. Which suggests that Martin was probably dominating the fight, and hence could have probably made a successful run for it if he had wanted to.

Both individuals made bad decisions, so I don't think that Zimmerman alone should bear full culpability for Martin's death.

[MeoTwister5]

The letter of the law is still the law, whether the law is itself is moral or not, so even if the morality of the law is up for the debate its enforcement isn't.

Meaning that for all intents and purposes even if the moral case can be argued that he indeed acted grossly beyond what was realistically necessary at the time, he is legally protected because the law allowed his actions to be justified, at least legally speaking.

So in the end the jury probably actually did the right thing, legally speaking. Doesn't change the fact that the law is stupid, but a stupid law is the law nonetheless and has to be followed until the time that it can be changed. And really, it needs to be changed.

[SeijiSensei]

Nations Buying as Hackers Sell Flaws in Computer Code

No more giving away bugs for the good of mankind. Today's hackers want cold cash for discovered vulnerabilities (especially zero-days), and governments around the world are lining up to pay them.

Ten years ago, hackers would hand knowledge of such flaws to Microsoft and Google free, in exchange for a T-shirt or perhaps for an honorable mention on a company’s Web site. Even today, so-called patriotic hackers in China regularly hand over the information to the government.

Now, the market for information about computer vulnerabilities has turned into a gold rush. Disclosures by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. consultant who leaked classified documents, made it clear that the United States is among the buyers of programming flaws. But it is hardly alone.

Israel, Britain, Russia, India and Brazil are some of the biggest spenders. North Korea is in the market, as are some Middle Eastern intelligence services. Countries in the Asian Pacific, including Malaysia and Singapore, are buying, too, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

To connect sellers and buyers, dozens of well-connected brokers now market information on the flaws in exchange for a 15 percent cut. Some hackers get a deal collecting royalty fees for every month their flaw is not discovered, according to several people involved in the market.

[ganbaru]

Norway's island shooting survivors run for parliament
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...96905E20130710

As glacier melts, secrets of lost military plane revealed
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...9690EC20130710

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Going by the scenarios and timelines presented in court, the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin went on for a significant stretch of time before a shot was fired. Zimmerman was probably reckless in trailing Martin the way he did, but I do get the impression that Zimmerman held back on firing his gun until he felt he truly had no other option. Which suggests that Martin was probably dominating the fight, and hence could have probably made a successful run for it if he had wanted to.

Both individuals made bad decisions, so I don't think that Zimmerman alone should bear full culpability for Martin's death.

Considering that one of the reasons that Zimmerman avoided arrest was because of the Stand Your Ground Law, the idea that Martin's principle mistake wasn't retreating from a fight is hypocritically hilarious.


That's why I have a hard time taking the Zimmerman trial seriously as a self defense issue. A true self defense advocate would argue that if you found yourself being pursued by an unidentified person in the middle of the night, you'd have reasonable reason to think your safety was at risk. And that you'd have latitude in trying to defend yourself. People defending Zimmerman are actually arguing against peoples right to self defense when you think about it practically.

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

The letter of the law is still the law, whether the law is itself is moral or not, so even if the morality of the law is up for the debate its enforcement isn't.

Just another reason to disconnect Florida from the USA with a hacksaw.

[aohige]

Soooo... seeing Zimmerman fiasco above, has anyone posted the news on neighborhood search gone RIGHT?

Two young boys on bike, responding to Amber Alert, rescues a child from a kidnapper.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...car-BIKES.html

Two Pennsylvania teens are being hailed as heroes after they chased down a man in a car who had snatched a five-year-old girl from her grandmother's front yard - on their bikes.

Jocelyn Rojas, five, was missing for two hours yesterday when Temar Boggs and a friend saw the child in a car near Lancaster Township and gave chase.

After Boggs, 15, and his friend had been tailing the vehicle for 15 minutes, the driver let the little girl out of the car and sped off.

Now that the little girl is safely back with her family, police are focusing on finding the suspect.

Jocelyn Rojas was playing in the front yard of her grandmother's home on the 100 block of Jennings Drive in Lancaster Township when she disappeared at about 4:35pm Thursday.

The family notified police and officers sprang into action, blocking off streets and scouring the area with canine units. Police showed Jocelyn's picture around the neighborhood and Boggs and his friend joined more than 100 first responders searching for the girl.

Boggs spottted the girl in the abductor's car and he and his friend began to follow the car.
The high school student said the little girl ran towards him when she got out of the car.

'If he wasn't going to stop, I was probably going to like, jump on the car,' Boggs told ABC6.

Boggs said the suspect would turn around to see if they were still following him after they began to give chase.

'As soon as the guy started noticing that we were chasing him, he stopped at the end of the hill and let her out, and she ran to me and said that she needed her mom,' he said.

Boggs took the little girl to the police and they contacted her frantic mother and family.

Police say the teens may have scared the abductor into giving the girl up and their bravery is being praised by the girl's family and police.

Quite ironic turn of events, having a young black teen involved in these two neighborhood events gone complete opposite end of the vector.

Great job, young Temar Boggs and your anonymous friend.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Considering that one of the reasons that Zimmerman avoided arrest was because of the Stand Your Ground Law, the idea that Martin's principle mistake wasn't retreating from a fight is hypocritically hilarious.

Having a legal right to do something doesn't mean it's the wisest course of action.

Both individuals here made bad decisions, so to say that either is solely responsible for Martin's death strikes me as quite the stretch.

That's why I have a hard time taking the Zimmerman trial seriously as a self defense issue.

Given the injuries Zimmerman sustained, it shouldn't be hard to take it seriously.

A true self defense advocate would argue that if you found yourself being pursued by an unidentified person in the middle of the night, you'd have reasonable reason to think your safety was at risk. And that you'd have latitude in trying to defend yourself.

Sure. But engaging in self-defense doesn't come without risk.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by aohige

Soooo... seeing Zimmerman fiasco above, has anyone posted the news on neighborhood search gone RIGHT?

Two young boys on bike, responding to Amber Alert, rescues a child from a kidnapper.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...car-BIKES.html



Quite ironic turn of events, having a young black teen involved in these two neighborhood events gone complete opposite end of the vector.

Great job, young Temar Boggs and your anonymous friend.

I suppose these amber alerts can do some good. Especially when random members of the public take them seriously and keep an eye open and are willing to intervene like that.

I hadn't heard that the kids were on bicycles though. That's pretty ballsy when you consider the mass difference involved. Or the fact a kidnapper might be potentially armed. Thank god the guy panicked by tossing the kid out of the vehicle safely though. Pretty ballsy though.


I hope the boys managed to get the plate number for the car so they can catch the bastard.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Having a legal right to do something doesn't mean it's the wisest course of action.

Both individuals here made bad decisions, so to say that either is solely responsible for Martin's death strikes me as quite the stretch.

It's the magnitude of the bad decisions IMHO. I don't consider Martin not retreating *enough* as bad as Zimmerman opting to pursue so aggressively. Martin's reacting to a stupid situation that Zimmerman instigated. Puts culpability on zimmerman in my mind.



Though the real test is this. If Martin had been a legal concealed weapons carrier, and the cops had arrived to have found Zimmerman shot dead with Martin claiming self defense, would Martin's claim seem more believable than the IRL self defense claim made by Zimmerman?

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

It's the magnitude of the bad decisions IMHO. I don't consider Martin not retreating *enough* as bad as Zimmerman opting to pursue so aggressively. Martin's reacting to a stupid situation that Zimmerman instigated. Much puts culpability on zimmerman in my mind.



Though the real test is this. If Martin had been a legal concealed weapons carrier, and the cops had arrived to have found Zimmerman shot dead with Martin claiming self defense, would Martin's claim seem more believable than the IRL self defense claim made by Zimmerman?

You make a good argument. It's a tough call given the letter of the law for this case. I certainly don't envy the jury in this case. I can see why it took them a long time to arrive at a verdict.

Certainly, something should be done to minimize the likelihood of something like this happening again. Like MeoTwister said, the law probably needs to be changed.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

You make a good argument. It's a tough call given the letter of the law for this case. I certainly don't envy the jury in this case. I can see why it took them a long time to arrive at a verdict.

For being the instigator, I think the gravity of fault lies more with the adult Z than the dead boy.
Not to mention, the boy already paid the ultimate price for his decisions.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

You make a good argument. It's a tough call given the letter of the law for this case. I certainly don't envy the jury in this case. I can see why it took them a long time to arrive at a verdict.

Certainly, something should be done to minimize the likelihood of something like this happening again. Like MeoTwister said, the law probably needs to be changed.

I'm inclined to agree. I don't think the Jury was particularly stupid. I think it's more that they just couldn't find an honest way to convict Zimmerman with the way Florida law is structured.