Slashdot Mirror
Lowell Observatory Pushes To Name an Asteroid "Trayvon"
Flash Modin writes "The observatory where Pluto was discovered is pushing to name an asteroid after a black teenager killed in a controversial confrontation in Florida last year. William Lowell Putnam III says his family has identified with the cause of African American rights, and thus an asteroid named after Trayvon Martin is perfectly appropriate. Putnam is the sole trustee of the observatory, which was founded by Percival Lowell during his search for canals on Mars. Astronomers at the observatory discovered the asteroid in 2000, but it has not been formally named. Putnam has already asked the Minor Planet Center once to designate the asteroid 'Trayvon,' but they told him the designation was 'premature.' Now that there's been a verdict, the observatory is reapplying in hopes the naming body will see things different."
Sigh. Found it.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
The "stand your ground" law never entered into the Martin-Zimmerman situation on the street, or in the courtroom as a matter of law. You seem to be fixated by the idea of it despite the fact it is irrelevant. You may want to consider counseling if you can't stop thinking about it. The thoughts you are expressing don't really seem appropriate.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Yes, let's name all of the asteroids after attempted murders who got justice. Nothing political or controversial about that.
I'm looking forward to smoking some illegal drugs, putting on bulky clothing and going out an shoplifting some stuff, then attacking the first cracker that gives me a dirty look. All the evidence of my motivation can be suppressed, and I'll get a space rock named after me too.
Wow. I hope you realize your version goes a lot further than the court verdict.
The court found that there wasn't sufficient proof that Zimmerman initiated the fight, or that he didn't have reasonable grounds to fear for his life.
That's a long way from determining that Martin, initiated the confrontation, tried to kill Zimmerman, shoplifted (first I heard of this), or was going to smoke drugs that evening (irrelevant even if true).
I stole this Sig
Hes referring to the doctored recordings where Zimmerman is made to sounds like he uses a racial epithet. Didnt a news organization have to apologize for airing the doctored recording?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57591520-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-neighbor-testifies-trayvon-martin-was-straddling-zimmerman-moments-before-fatal-gunshot/
He saw. I'll take the victim's word when the back of his head is bloodied alongside a swollen face, and an uninvolved party corroborates the story immediately following the incident. Trayvon did not have a mark on him, so it's pretty clear who was on the bottom given the visible, physical damage to Zimmerman.
If you are willfully blind to the evidence, then that's your own fault, but it's time that you stop spreading ignorant information. You may want Trayvon to be innocent, but absolutely nothing points to it, including his own offline and online antics and the prosecution's lead witness admitting that Trayvon used racial slurs immediately before the fight.
But even if those didn't exist, you cannot reasonably compare a controlled fight on a special stage with doctors and judges standing around to stop the fight if it gets out of hand with a street brawl on concrete and no one there.
I don't think it's a reasonable fear but reasonable people panic all the time.
A stranger is on top of you, bashing your head on the ground with no sign of stopping. You don't think that it's a reasonable fear that you're going to lose your life?
"Amateur Cop" is a thing in the US. Zimmerman was part of a police-sponsored neighborhood watch program, in which people take it upon themselves to ... well, watch the neighborhood. The opening of this whole thing is that he saw a guy that "looked suspicious" (for whatever reason), got out of his car, and followed at a distance. That's pretty normal.
The "At a distance" thing is important, and something a lot of people missed. Trayvon turned down a street and went south; Zimmerman passed that street heading east, watching to see where Trayvon was going while reporting to the dispatcher. What Zimmerman was not doing was following Trayvon down the road in the shadows, inching closer, trying to get a bead on the little black kid; everyone wants to perpetuate this "stalking an innocent teenager" thing anyway, but that's not what happened.
What happened after that is less understood. Somehow Trayvon got to his house (south), then came back 100 meters (north) and a confrontation occurred. This became a physical altercation, which ended with Zimmerman shooting Trayvon to death. The murder argument comes down to an argument over whether or not Zimmerman was being beaten to death (or reasonably believed he was being beaten to death)--this is why you keep hearing that Trayvon was "armed with concrete" and smashing Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk.
Zimmerman had a permit to carry a gun because he's a shitty fighter. If he wasn't such a useless lump of shit, maybe he could have fought back and controlled the situation. He's lucky Trayvon didn't just take his gun and shoot him to death with it. Non-US people might find the concept of regular citizens carrying guns a little displacing--it's not a thing people do in England, for example--but in the US, people actually carry guns in case they're attacked. Beyond that, shooting Trayvon to death is just the natural result of being in a situation where he thought he was gonna die--that is, the natural action is to try to not die, and the only capable way he could think of to not die was to kill Trayvon.
Everything between the confrontation and the death is unclear. Fortunately for Zimmerman (and the rest of us), because nothing here screams "violent premeditated or negligent homicide", the only rational thing to do is accept "self-defense" and move on. Unfortunately, people are not rational and start screaming for blood, trying to blame Zimmerman while dismissing the very real and strong possibility that he was, in fact, going to die if he didn't shoot Trayvon right there. So we have this mess.
I don't understand the "Civil Rights" involved. They say Trayvon's rights were violated. What rights? He was observed in public; if he wasn't doing anything bad, the police wouldn't have even been able to search him. He could have 20 pounds of cocaine and stolen jewelry on him, and the cops could show up like "we heard reports of a suspicious person," and he's like "Everything's alright here," and they're like "Can we search your bag?" "No." That's it. Nothing actually happening here? The cops don't even get to frisk you. Other people are entitled to observe you, the police are entitled to pass through the neighborhood and ask you if you're alright and whatever, but if you're not obviously committing a crime (even if you really ARE, but it's not visible and they have no probable cause to assume you're a criminal) then they can't do shit. You could have burglary tools and a bomb in your backpack and they can't even check it to make sure you just have school books (unless somebody reported seeing you using burglary tools to try to break into somewhere).
I guess the only civil right here might be the right to, you know, not get shot to death; and you immediately waive that right when you're in the process of murdering someone.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Gun ownership is UP
Violent crime is DOWN.
Google it yourself.
Pretty simple. An armed society is a polite society.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.