Like the Swedish woman in dubai who perpetrated the crime of adultery or whatever
Under the law of Dubai she was found to be a perpetrator, yes. I have no idea what that has to do with this discussion. I do not in any way support Dubai's laws pertaining to women, court testimony, non-muslims, etc....
I guess since this case was a massvie injustice, anyone who doesn't see it that way must support all massive injustices? I'm not really sure how to respond to this comment.
You have a right to be there, as an invited guest. There's nothing illegal about the appointed captain of the neighbourhood watch asking you about why you are there.
No, there is nothing illegal about being offensive, disrespectful and harassing to people. But if someone behaves in that way, there has to be some personal accountability on the outcome.
If you look up neighbourhood watch guidelines for just about any district, the one thing they all have in common is they say not to carry a weapon and not to interject themselves into the situation. They are only supposed to be the eyes and ears of law enforcement. When Zimmerman went beyond the protocol of the the neighbourhood watch, he was no longer acting within the scope of "neighbourhood watch", and was now acting as a vigilante. When people do so, they have to bear some responsibility when the situation escalates.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
No, there is nothing illegal about being offensive, disrespectful and harassing to people. But if someone behaves in that way, there has to be some personal accountability on the outcome.
If you look up neighbourhood watch guidelines for just about any district, the one thing they all have in common is they say not to carry a weapon and not to interject themselves into the situation. They are only supposed to be the eyes and ears of law enforcement. When Zimmerman went beyond the protocol of the the neighbourhood watch, he was no longer acting within the scope of "neighbourhood watch", and was now acting as a vigilante. When people do so, they have to bear some responsibility when the situation escalates.
This is the part where you make an argument, or otherwise provide something to show that your position has merit. This seems to be somewhat of a struggle for you.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
In the manual, you can find the following statement, and when he strayed from it, he was no longer fulfilling Neighbourhood Watch duties, but he was acting on his own:
Quote:
Citizen Patrols
Many NW groups choose to use Citizen Patrols on foot or in vehicles to keep their community safe. Patrol may be effective for your group, but you should discuss it with your law enforcement liaison. Two or more individuals, often from the same family, patrol during designated tours of duty and may detect suspicious activity not noticed by stationary observers. Lost children, stranded motorists, stray dogs, damaged street signs or traffic signals, wandering cattle, and automobile accidents are often discovered by citizen patrols.
Patrol members should be trained by law enforcement. It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles. They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity. Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous. Patrol members can be equipped for their duties. For example, flashlights or searchlights are necessary for night patrols. Many mobile patrols use cell phones or two-way radios to contact a citizen-manned base station, which in turn contacts law enforcement officials when necessary. Remember your partnerships and ask for donations from local businesses.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 07-19-2013 at 03:42 PM.
No, there is nothing illegal about being offensive, disrespectful and harassing to people. But if someone behaves in that way, there has to be some personal accountability on the outcome.
If you look up neighbourhood watch guidelines for just about any district, the one thing they all have in common is they say not to carry a weapon and not to interject themselves into the situation. They are only supposed to be the eyes and ears of law enforcement. When Zimmerman went beyond the protocol of the the neighbourhood watch, he was no longer acting within the scope of "neighbourhood watch", and was now acting as a vigilante. When people do so, they have to bear some responsibility when the situation escalates.
Right....
There are no "guidelines" for a neighbourhood watch. Anyone can form one. There is nothing to stop you from doing it. The NSA may have their own guidelines, but those are in no way binding on anyone.
Zimmerman was on private property. His strata council had elected him the captain of his watch. He did not start carrying a weapon until after authorities advised him to do so.
You also have no evidene whatsoever to show that Zimmerman "interjected" himself anywhere. The evidence shows he followed someone who looked suspicious. Ended his chase at one point after being advised to do so. He may have started pursuing again and may have "interjected" himself. There is, however, no evidence towards that conclusion.
The concept of acting outside of the "scope of neighbourhood watch" is one that you are making up. As previously mentioned, there is no set rules for what a neighoubourhood watchman can do on private property, beyond criminal laws. We have zero proof that Zimmerman did anything illegal here. He was doing exactly what authorities had advised him to do. He was doing exactly what he'd been appointed to do by his strata. The only question is was he being racist by thinking Martin was suspicious purely based on skin colour? Even if the answer is yes, that's not illegal. That does not, in itself, justify a physical altercation. If a physical altercation ensues, Zimmerman retains the right to self-defence.
The Following User Says Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
__________________
Thank you for everything CP. Good memories and thankful for everything that has been done to help me out. I will no longer take part on these boards. Take care, Go Flames Go.
The Following User Says Thank You to PIMking For This Useful Post:
I am generally a fan of him, but Obama needs to shut up. What good is going to come from comments like "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago"??. Completely irresponsible for a President to fuel the fire in light of the division that has already been generated.
Zimmerman was not on a Neighborhood Watch patrol at the time this happened. He was driving to Target when he saw Martin and believed the kid was acting suspiciously.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I am generally a fan of him, but Obama needs to shut up. What good is going to come from comments like "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago"??. Completely irresponsible for a President to fuel the fire in light of the division that has already been generated.
My fiance is an UBER Obama fan, she is working on her BA in Social Work (going to pharmacy school) and was just FURIOUS with what Obama said today. She stated that this is something that that guy needs to shut up about and the only thing he is doing is pouring fuel on the racial fire.
__________________
Thank you for everything CP. Good memories and thankful for everything that has been done to help me out. I will no longer take part on these boards. Take care, Go Flames Go.
There are no "guidelines" for a neighbourhood watch. Anyone can form one. There is nothing to stop you from doing it. The NSA may have their own guidelines, but those are in no way binding on anyone.
Zimmerman was on private property. His strata council had elected him the captain of his watch. He did not start carrying a weapon until after authorities advised him to do so.
You also have no evidene whatsoever to show that Zimmerman "interjected" himself anywhere. The evidence shows he followed someone who looked suspicious. Ended his chase at one point after being advised to do so. He may have started pursuing again and may have "interjected" himself. There is, however, no evidence towards that conclusion.
The concept of acting outside of the "scope of neighbourhood watch" is one that you are making up. As previously mentioned, there is no set rules for what a neighoubourhood watchman can do on private property, beyond criminal laws. We have zero proof that Zimmerman did anything illegal here. He was doing exactly what authorities had advised him to do. He was doing exactly what he'd been appointed to do by his strata. The only question is was he being racist by thinking Martin was suspicious purely based on skin colour? Even if the answer is yes, that's not illegal. That does not, in itself, justify a physical altercation. If a physical altercation ensues, Zimmerman retains the right to self-defence.
Evidently there are. You can go onto the websites of different police departments and it lays out what neighbourhood watches are supposed to do (and not do).
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Evidently there are. You can go onto the websites of different police departments and it lays out what neighbourhood watches are supposed to do (and not do).
The police and other law enforcement agencies can suggest guidelines to follow. They cannot stop you from doing anything that is not illegal.
I am generally a fan of him, but Obama needs to shut up. What good is going to come from comments like "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago"??. Completely irresponsible for a President to fuel the fire in light of the division that has already been generated.
He's been a pretty lousy president so this should not be surprising.
My fiance is an UBER Obama fan, she is working on her BA in Social Work (going to pharmacy school) and was just FURIOUS with what Obama said today. She stated that this is something that that guy needs to shut up about and the only thing he is doing is pouring fuel on the racial fire.
I disagree on this.
Regardless of whether Zimmerman did anything illegal, the profiling aspect is going to cause a lot of rage, and people want to feel vindicated. They won't get that through the court system, and rightfully so. Acknowledgement by the President, however, can go a long way.
Obama isn't telling people to kill whitey, he's telling people to direct their energy at fixing some of the underlying societal problems that led to this situation.
By acknowledging these issues, Obama can difuse things and hopefully avoid riots and other civil unrest. A lot of the time anger is about not being acknowledged.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
The police and other law enforcement agencies can suggest guidelines to follow. They cannot stop you from doing anything that is not illegal.
Go the page 5 of the PDF from the manual I posted from the National Sherriff's Association. See the symbol on the right (looks like a sideways tear drop)? That symbol is a trademark of USAonWatch - Neighbourhood Watch Program (note the capitals) which is a community based program that works with the local police all over the U.S. They are supposed to follow the rules in the manual if they are using the trademarks (like not carrying weapons). It's in all in the links I posted.
If you go look at "The Retreat at Twin Lakes" on Google street view (intersection of Twin Trees and South Oregon Avenue), they have a sign with that symbol right at the gate of the community. You can see it perfectly. This wasn't just a group of people calling their group a neighbourhood watch, they were "Neighbourhood Watch". They have rules to follow.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 07-19-2013 at 07:09 PM.
