Main Menu

Lessons Learned from Trayvon Martin

Started by williamjackson, March 30, 2012, 12:27:01 PM

NotNow

1.  “Those governments which are founded upon oppression, always find it necessary to engage interests enough in their tyranny to overcome all opposition from those who are tyrannized over, by giving separate and unequal privileges to the instruments and accomplices of their oppression, by letting them share the advantages of it, by putting arms in their hands, and by taking away all the means of self defense from those who have more right to use them.” â€" Cato’s Letters # 97 (October 6, 1722)

“That which someone does for the safety of his body, let it be regarded as having been done legally.” - Justinian ("Digest of Roman Law" 529 AD)

“The right men have by Nature to protect themselves, when none else can protect them, can by no Covenant [the agreement between individuals to form a government, and the laws enacted thereby] be relinquished.”- Thomas Hobbes ("Leviathan" 1651)

“Must men alone be debarred the common privilege of opposing force with force, which nature allows so freely to all other creatures for their preservation from injury? I answer: self defense is a part of the law of nature, nor can it be denied the community, even against the king himself...”. - John Locke ("Two Treatises of Government" 1689)

“It is a false idea of utility to sacrifice a thousand real advantages for the sake of one disadvantage which is either imaginary or of little consequence; this would take fire away from men because it burns and water because it drowns people; this is to have no remedy for evils except destruction. Laws forbidding people to bear arms are of this nature; they only disarm those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. On the other hand, how can someone who has the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity and the most important ones in the statute books be expected to respect the most trifling and purely arbitrary regulations that can be broken with ease and impunity and that,

were they enforced, would put an end to personal liberty -- so dear to each man, so dear to the enlightened legislator -- and subject the innocent to all the vexations that the guilty deserve? Such laws place the assaulted at a disadvantage and the assailant at an advantage, and they multiply rather than decrease the number of murders, since an unarmed person may be attacked with greater confidence than someone who is armed. These laws should not be deemed preventive, but rather inspired by a fear of crime. They originate with the tumultuous impact of a few isolated facts, not with a rational consideration of the drawbacks and advantages of a universal decree.” - Cesare Baccaria ("On Crimes and Punishment"  1764)

“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.” â€" Mohandas Ghandi ("Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth " 1948)

“As we have seen, the first public expression of disenchantment with nonviolence arose around the question of “self-defense.” In a sense this is a false issue, for the right to defend one’s home and one’s person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law.” â€"Martin Luther King Jr. (" Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?) (Chapter II, Black Power)

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms." - Aristotle

2.  In the sixth century BCE, a tyrant named Pisistratus took over Athens. Aristotle explained how the tyrant obtained absolute power by disarming the people of every city he controlled:

After his victory in the battle at Pallene he captured Athens, and when he had disarmed the people he at last had his tyranny securely established, and was able to take Naxos (a Greek island) and set up Lygdamis as ruler there. He effected the disarmament of the people in the following manner. He ordered a parade in full armour in the Theseum (a temple), and began to make a speech to the people. He spoke for a short time, until the people called out that they could not hear him, whereupon he bade them come up to the entrance of the Acropolis, in order that his voice might be better heard. Then, while he continued to speak to them at great length, men whom he had appointed for the purpose collected the arms and locked them up in the chambers of the Theseum hard by, and came and made a signal to him that it was done. Pisistratus accordingly, when he had finished the rest of what he had to say, told the people also what had happened to their arms; adding that they were not to be surprised or alarmed, but go home and attend to their private affairs, while he would himself for the future manage all the business of the state. (Aristotle, The Athenian Constitution, ch. 15, translated by Sir Frederic G. Kenyon)

"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest." -- Mohandas Gandhi, An Autobiography, pg 446

"The Night of the Broken Glass (Kristallnacht)--the infamous Nazi rampage against Germany's Jews--took place in November 1938. It was preceded by the confiscation of firearms from the Jewish victims. On Nov. 8, the New York Times reported from Berlin, "Berlin Police Head Announces 'Disarming' of Jews," explaining:

The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been "disarmed" with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.1

On the evening of Nov. 9, Adolf Hitler, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, and other Nazi chiefs planned the attack. Orders went out to Nazi security forces: "All Jewish stores are to be destroyed immediately . . . . Jewish synagogues are to be set on fire . . . . The Führer wishes that the police does not intervene. . . . All Jews are to be disarmed. In the event of resistance they are to be shot immediately."2
All hell broke loose on Nov. 10: "Nazis Smash, Loot and Burn Jewish Shops and Temples." "One of the first legal measures issued was an order by Heinrich Himmler, commander of all German police, forbidding Jews to possess any weapons whatever and imposing a penalty of twenty years confinement in a concentration camp upon every Jew found in possession of a weapon hereafter."3 Thousands of Jews were taken away.


Invading Nazi troops in Holland in 1940 immediately nailed up posters announcing a ban on all firearms. From Die Deutsche Wochenshau, May 15, 1940. 
Searches of Jewish homes were calculated to seize firearms and assets and to arrest adult males. The American Consulate in Stuttgart was flooded with Jews begging for visas: "Men in whose homes old, rusty revolvers had been found during the last few days cried aloud that they did not dare ever again return to their places of residence or business. In fact, it was a mass of seething, panic-stricken humanity."4
Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed six million Jews. It was self evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin." - Stephen P. Halbrook (Registration: The Nazi Paradigm)

For a fourth example, pick one:

USSR
China
Cambodia
Hungary
Yugoslavia

As stated earlier, history is filled with examples.







Deo adjuvante non timendum

Tamara-B

Quote from: stephenc on May 17, 2012, 08:41:55 PM
Quote from: stephendare on May 17, 2012, 08:32:12 PM
Quote from: jaxnative on May 17, 2012, 08:02:46 PM
It's going to be interesting to see if this trial occurs to find justice in this tragedy or just to stop a riot.

huh?

some jerk calls himself 'neighborhood watch', stalks a kid after being told to stop by cops, and then shoots the kid to death and you think a trial would be for some reason other than justice?

Well ok?

If this was a white kid in ortega who had been shot to death by a fake security guard, no one -----no one----- would be making this embarrassing fuss.

too bad there isn't an ignore button for some people. It would make this site more tolerable at times... :P

Hello no, embrace the negativity sometimes. For your own amusement, because it'd be boring if everyone in the world had the exact same opinion about every damn thing.
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent  -Eleanor Roosevelt

Tamara-B

Quote from: Kaiser Soze on March 30, 2012, 04:18:57 PM
I wish the African-American community would get as angry about black on black violence as they do about situations like this as unfortunate as they are.

That has to be the most ignorant thing I've heard all day.
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent  -Eleanor Roosevelt

Tamara-B

Quote from: Kaiser Soze on March 30, 2012, 04:39:12 PM
Quote from: stephendare on March 30, 2012, 04:32:07 PM
Quote from: Kaiser Soze on March 30, 2012, 04:18:57 PM
I wish the African-American community would get as angry about black on black violence as they do about situations like this as unfortunate as they are.

What makes you say that?  Are black people the only people angry?
No, but how often do you see Corrinne Brown, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. show up for media coverage of a gang shooting involving black on black violence.

The media, mostly, only chooses to focus on stories involving white victims and white criminals. It's true. If a black child shoots up his school, you'll hardly ever hear about it. They're just dismissed as "monsters." A white child does it and it makes national news. People talk about his abusive childhood and him/her getting bullied in school. Books are written, movies are made, and Nancy Grace also begins chopping her gums. Everyone is trying to figure out "Why? Oh, why?"

Natalee Holloway and Laci Peterson received intense national attention when they went missing.

Casey Anthony and Amy Fisher aka "Long Island Lolita" became infamous for their crimes.

When have you ever seen a young, black girl receive such high coverage when she goes missing?

A seven-year-old boy was killed and had he not been Jennifer Hudson's nephew, would we know so much about it?

All crime, no matter what race committed it, is bad! All victims deserve the same coverage when their loved  ones are going nuts trying to find them.

Challenge my view if you want to.
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent  -Eleanor Roosevelt

NotNow

Tamara,

I wouldn't challenge your statements about the media, but I think it goes beyond race.  Attractive and/or famous persons are highlighted.  It's about ratings and money.  That's why Hudson's nephew became a national headline.  There also seems to be ideological driven stories at times.  But there does seem to be a focus on pretty young white girls, doesn't there?
Deo adjuvante non timendum

Tamara-B

Quote from: NotNow on July 05, 2012, 04:03:51 AM
Tamara,

I wouldn't challenge your statements about the media, but I think it goes beyond race.  Attractive and/or famous persons are highlighted.  It's about ratings and money.  That's why Hudson's nephew became a national headline.  There also seems to be ideological driven stories at times.  But there does seem to be a focus on pretty young white girls, doesn't there?

"Attractive and/or famous persons are highlighted" um I think I made that point already when I brought up Hudson's nephew. You're half right. If a non-famous attractive young, black girl went missing you think the media will explode like they did for natalee Holloway? No!

"But there does seem to be a focus on young white girls, doesn't there?"

Uh...yes I think I made that point to in regards to Laci Peterson and Holloway.
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent  -Eleanor Roosevelt

NotNow

OK, sorry for agreeing with you.  It appeared that your point was the race of the victim, mine was to add looks.
Deo adjuvante non timendum

Tamara-B

Quote from: NotNow on July 05, 2012, 10:52:01 AM
OK, sorry for agreeing with you.  It appeared that your point was the race of the victim, mine was to add looks.

Don't apologize, I understand. You're right btw. Im just having trouble figuring out why this is still the case. Does the media even acknowledge it? They have to be aware of what they are doing...

Are do they just pretend it's not true?
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent  -Eleanor Roosevelt

civil42806

boy this story has dropped off the radar

Cheshire Cat

Actually civil, there was an updated report on the local news a couple days back that featured pictures of Mr. Zimmerman's bloody and swollen nose taken by a police officer at the scene.  Then another report about Trayvon's mom coming to speak to a group here in Jacksonville I believe. 



Diane
Diane Melendez
We're all mad here!

TheCat

George Zimmerman Sues NBC, Says He's A Victim Of 'Yellow Journalism':

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/12/07/166727771/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-says-hes-a-victim-of-yellow-journalism

Former Florida neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman says NBC Universal's editorial decisions made him look like a racist when the network covered the shooting and killing of teenager Trayvon Martin.

He's filed a lawsuit in Florida, alleging NBC saw the shooting "not as a tragedy, but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so set about to create the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain." His main example is the 911 call he placed on Feb. 26 to authorities just before the shooting occurred. Zimmerman says NBC altered his conversation with the dispatcher.

The complaint alleges the first altered call that NBC aired on March 29 included these statements, in which Zimmerman described Martin:

"Zimmerman: There is a real suspicious guy. Ah, this guy looks like he is up to no good or he is on drugs or something. He looks black."
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Ok we don't need you to do that."

On March 20, the complaint alleges NBC changed Zimmerman's remarks to this:

"Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good or on drugs or something. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male.
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Okay, we don't need you to do that."

The suit claims the audio had several deletions, and about a minute of conversation was ultimately taken out. Zimmerman alleges some dialogue was also moved around to create the false impression that he had a racist motive.

The lawsuit says the conversation Zimmerman had with the dispatcher actually went like this:

"Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK and this guy - is he white, black or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/12/07/166727771/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-says-hes-a-victim-of-yellow-journalism