freeman3 wrote:As far as I am concerned, let the chips fall where they may. The one thing that disturbs me about Zimmerman is his coldness. Even if he think he was entirely justified in shooting Trayvon one would expect a little emotional impact from taking another's life

It's kind of hard to measure that, isn't it? All we see is the man in court--a year after the incident. Based on testimony, he was not unaffected that night. He expressed remorse for the life lost. Right now, basically, his life is at stake (many years of it).

On the opposite side conservatives do not particularly like the case because they don't want it to be used to restrict their guns . . .

Oh brother. The most restrictive gun laws are in places like Chicago, where dozens of young black men are gunned down by other young black men every month.

. . . and if course they think our society is already color-blind (which it most certainty is not--being a white male still has its privileges which of course makes me want to laugh when I hear charges of reverse discrimination)

Yeah, we still have problems with race. Notice how people jumped to defend the racist comments Trayvon made about Zimmerman? Paula Deen admits using the n-word some 30 years ago (in the aftermath of being robbed) and her whole business empire is snatched from her. There's a problem with race all right, but it's nothing like what you think it is.

Meanwhile we have a black President--and a racist nation!

We have an incompetent (at best) attorney general . . . and a racist nation!

Given the facts of the case don't know that Zimmerman should be convicted, but I do know he should have been charged and that did not happen until there was liberal pressure.

Actually, maybe the case should have been professionally handled and not politically handled. Liberal pressure served only to give us a pathetic example of prosecutorial overreach and an embarrassing trial. Of course, it was really great when the Black Panthers put a bounty on Zimmerman. I'm sure there is a civil rights investigation into that . . . oh, there isn't?

If Martin were white and Zimmerman were black, you'd be screaming this was a racist prosecution--because there is very little evidence to support a charge of second-degree murder.

Even on these pages it is interesting how quickly he is described as a thug.

Yep, that was me!
I spelled out why I called him such ...care to explain why you think he was anything but a thug? I had well founded reasons for calling him this, your accusation that seems to claim I was wrong is based on ....nothing?

Here is a definition of thug, Tom. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/thug
A thug is defined as essentially being a violent criminal (the word originally comes from criminal gangs in India). Having traces of marijuana, gold teeth, or any of the other things you specified do not indicate that Trayvon was a violent criminal. So why do you think that you defined Trayvon as being a violent criminal, Tom?

Gee, I don't know,
Let's see what I had said...

Yes he was a thug, he had traces of marijuana in him, he called Zimmerman a racial slur, he was kicked out of school, he had pictures of himself with guns, he had gold teeth, he talked about trying to buy guns, he was in many fights ...that sir is a thug!

so you choose to look at the gold teeth and marijuana use only?
You say I said nothing of violent behavior?
Oh, but I did! He had used racial slurs often, posed in pics in "gangsta" poses, He was in many fights, pics of himself with guns, he had been looking for guns. Not stated but he had been refereeing other fights as well (and not in a boxing ring mind you), his own mother wanted to get him out of the house because he was causing too much trouble. Yes, this person was a thug! (guns and fights do in fact make him a violet person, the other stuff simply helps sell it all the more but you want to ignore guns, you want to ignore the fights, you want to ignore how he caused trouble and instead focus on the gold teeth?)

also interesting is your choice of definitions, You quickly jump to the historical definition and grab the one that suits you. You ignored the first definition in your own link, "a violent person" how about yet another definition? the first definition used in the American Heritage online dictionary:
"n. A cutthroat or ruffian; a hoodlum."
and are these not the more accepted definitions used in today's speech? (yes they are)

You're using the definition of thug as cutthroat or hoodlum in support of your position, Tom?! Give it up, Tom. Saying Trayvon was a thug was not an accurate description. Using a noun to describe what someone is can be problematic, anyway. People do things but saying they are one thing tends to reduce them to being only thing and that reduction leaves out the complexity of a person.

give it up?
he got in many fights, he refereed other fights, he used drugs, he used racial slurs and profanity, he was kicked out of school, he had pictures of himself with guns, he sought to obtain illegal guns, his own mother wanted him out of the house, oh and I see reports he swung at a bus driver...
I see, if things don't go as you would like, then the other people need to "give it up"? No sir, he fits the definition of thug and I stand by it. What part of this makes him sound like he is anything BUT a thug?

freeman3 wrote:You're using the definition of thug as cutthroat or hoodlum in support of your position, Tom?! Give it up, Tom. Saying Trayvon was a thug was not an accurate description. Using a noun to describe what someone is can be problematic, anyway. People do things but saying they are one thing tends to reduce them to being only thing and that reduction leaves out the complexity of a person.

How about "wannabe thug?"

I'm not defending Zimmerman. He probably is on par with a mall cop.

However, why do you want to pretend, or even appear to pretend, that Trayvon was some angel? If his character becomes an issue in court, the jury will take less than 2 hours to acquit. As it stands, I don't see how they convict.

Dan Abrams.

Thug is an ugly term. Lots of kids have the sort of troubles Trayvon had and we don't them call thug. Adolescents can be troubled but when they become an adult they turn it around. Was Trayvon in a gang? Was he robbing people or committing other crimes? No. I think thug is associated with criminality; are you saying it's not? Are you saying only that he was violent by using thug? I don't think that because a 17 year old gets into fights he is therefore violent. If you are going to defend your use of thug you need to identify what you mean by it (violence,criminality), then provide some examples from Trayvon's life that support your definition. Don't go through your laundry list of Trayvon's alleged transgressions, then say it means he is a thug (unless you have your private language and thug means what you want it to mean)

freeman3 wrote:I don't think that because a 17 year old gets into fights he is therefore violent.

Intriguing.

is not getting into fights not violent?
unless they are hitting each other with feathers or dressing up in those padded sumo costumes, I think getting in fights (including school bus drivers!) to be considered "violent". Maybe you raise the bar to attempted murder to be considered violent? (then again, he was seeking to buy an illegal gun so maybe even then he would have fallen into even that group as well?)

freeman3 wrote:Thug is an ugly term. Lots of kids have the sort of troubles Trayvon had and we don't them call thug. Adolescents can be troubled but when they become an adult they turn it around. Was Trayvon in a gang? Was he robbing people or committing other crimes? No. I think thug is associated with criminality; are you saying it's not? Are you saying only that he was violent by using thug? I don't think that because a 17 year old gets into fights he is therefore violent. If you are going to defend your use of thug you need to identify what you mean by it (violence,criminality), then provide some examples from Trayvon's life that support your definition. Don't go through your laundry list of Trayvon's alleged transgressions, then say it means he is a thug (unless you have your private language and thug means what you want it to mean)

Hitting a bus driver is not violent?
Marijuana use is not a criminal act?

Due to the Indian background of the term "Thug", I can see your desire to use something else.

What term would you like?
assassin, bandit, bully, criminal, delinquent, gang member, gangster, goon, gorilla, gunman, hired killer, hood, hooligan, killer, mobster, murderer, professional killer, punk, rioter, rowdy, ruffian, troublemaker

http://thesaurus.com/browse/thug

I thought that the main problem for many was that the initial case was dropped, apparently due to 'Stand Your Ground'. That doesn't mean that we assumed Zimmerman was guilty (or that Traynor was a saint), but that it appeared that claims of SYG could be used to block investigations into homicide. While murder may be a stretch, there is certainly a case to answer on manslaughter and this getting to tria does at least show the flaw in the original decision to drop investigations so quickly.

Quite why it makes it so important to label a young, dead, guy as a thug beats me.

danivon wrote:I thought that the main problem for many was that the initial case was dropped, apparently due to 'Stand Your Ground'. That doesn't mean that we assumed Zimmerman was guilty (or that Traynor was a saint), but that it appeared that claims of SYG could be used to block investigations into homicide.

Actually, Zimmerman waived an SYG hearing, meaning that is not the basis of his defense. His defense is based on self-defense. In Florida, the prosecution has to prove it was not self-defense. Few think they have done that.

While murder may be a stretch, there is certainly a case to answer on manslaughter and this getting to tria does at least show the flaw in the original decision to drop investigations so quickly.

No, there is no case for manslaughter--not according to Abrams and any number of non-conservative analyses I've read. The prosecution is hoping emotion carries the day, not the rule of law. That should not be.

I got into a lot of fights in elementary school, certainly had tried marijuana around Trayvon's age, and a couple of my back teeth have gold caps...guess I am a thug

freeman3 wrote:I got into a lot of fights in elementary school, certainly had tried marijuana around Trayvon's age, and a couple of my back teeth have gold caps...guess I am a thug

I said thug was not right. What term did YOU want? I listed the synonyms for your assistance...