Neighborhood watch shooting in FL

[hepcat]

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I'm not trying to trivialize human life by the way...at least not any further than we already do when using statistics to represent the loss of human lives.

[Combustible Lemur]

Many stories that begin this way end much worse. Another colleague recently wrote about the final defendant to be sentenced in the beating death of 19-year-old James Robertson in East Ocean View five years ago. In that case, a swarm of gang members attacked Robertson and two friends. Robertson's friends got away and called for help; police arrived to find Robertson's stripped, swollen corpse.

Forster and Rostami's story has not, until today, appeared in this paper. The responding officer coded the incident as a simple assault, despite their assertions that at least 30 people had participated in the attack. A reporter making routine checks of police reports would see "simple assault" and, if the names were unfamiliar, would be unlikely to write about it. In this case, editors hesitated to assign a story about their own employees. Would it seem like the paper treated its employees differently from other crime victims?

More questions loomed.

Forster and Rostami wondered if the officer who answered their call treated all crime victims the same way. When Rostami, who admits she was hysterical, tried to describe what had happened, she says the officer told her to shut up and get in the car. Both said the officer did not record any names of witnesses who stopped to help. Rostami said the officer told them the attackers were "probably juveniles anyway. What are we going to do? Find their parents and tell them?"

The officer pointed to public housing in the area and said large groups of teenagers look for trouble on the weekends. "It's what they do," he told Forster.

Could that be true? Could violent mobs of teens be so commonplace in Norfolk that police and victims have no recourse?

Police spokesman Chris Amos said officers often respond to reports of crowds fighting; sirens are usually enough to disperse the group. On that night, he said, a report of gunfire in a nearby neighborhood prompted the officer to decide getting Forster and Rostami off the street quickly made more sense than remaining at the intersection. The officer gave them his card and told them to call later to file a report.

The next day, Forster searched Twitter for mention of the attack.

One post chilled him.

"I feel for the white man who got beat up at the light," wrote one person.

"I don't," wrote another, indicating laughter. "(do it for trayvon martin)"

Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teen, died after being shot by a community watch captain with white and Hispanic parents, George Zimmerman, in Florida.

Forster and Rostami, both white, suffered a beating at the hands of a crowd of black teenagers.

Was either case racially motivated? Were Forster and Rostami beaten in some kind of warped, vigilante retribution for a killing 750 miles away, a person none of them knew? Was it just bombast? Is a beating funny, ever?

Here's why their story is in the paper today. We cannot allow such callousness to continue unremarked, from the irrational, senseless teenagers who attacked two people just trying to go home, from the police officer whose conduct may have been typical but certainly seems cold, from the tweeting nitwits who think beating a man in Norfolk will change the death of Trayvon Martin.

How can we change it if we don't know about it? How can we make it better if we look away?

Are we really no better than this?

http://hamptonroads.com.nyud.net/2012/05/beating-church-and-brambleton

Sounds like some people that could have used a gun to defend themselves.

Of course some would rather that if they did they would just end up in jail instead of dead.

I used to run the streets of Norfolk and only remember having one altercation so I am guessing it is worse now than the eighties.

Maybe, unless someone(s) in the crowd had a gun, then you may have had more than two assaults.

[Remus West]

We also have an ethnic component that contributes to our higher than Europe crime rate.

So you're suggesting that there is not an ethnic component to violence in Europe? The Jews, Catholics, Rom, Serbs, Crotians, etc. etc. etc. would all like to vehemently disagree with you there if I may speak on their behalf. Ethnicity is pretty much the central issue in almost every major flareup of violence in Europe.

[Crux]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

[LordMortis]

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

It's interesting to say the least but I also think it's vague in isolation. In addition to what crime is and what crime is reported I'd also want to see population densities and neighborhoods and such. You're better off comparing urban areas, suburban area, and rural areas of equitable sized within a country than comparing a country itself.

So maybe:

Sydney with a population density 2058/square km

http://www.smh.com.au/national/murder-r ... 1pfjy.html

One per 100,000? Not bad, I assume.

So I look for a density of about 4500/square mile

Looking for a more presumably violent city, I'll look at Cincinnati but you could pick and choose.

http://www.demographia.com/db-us90city100kdens.htm

It looks like Cinci is at 26 per 100,000.

Holy crap. Not what I was expecting to find at all.

[Remus West]

The major issue you would have comparing Cincinatti to Sydney is the vast difference in socio-economic climate between the two cities.

[Grifman]

Discussing statistics is a losing endeavor, unfortunately. Where I would see a differentation of 2 or 3 per 100,000 as not being indicative of a violent culture when viewed against the rest of a list, you would probably counter that it is. Plus, we would need to define the parameters of "violent".

I was comparing us to other First World nations, not the entire world. The US murder rate is 4.5 murders per 100,000. Western/Central Europe is 1.5. That means our murder rate is 3 times that of our peers. Seems like with respect to murder, we are much more violent than our peers.

I certainly don't feel good that our murder rate is less than Venezuela, South Africa or Brazil, do you?

Just murders? Or do we include assault?

I think all we can look at is the murder rate as from my quick reading, violent crime is defined differently by various nations.

Overall, we have a much larger crime rate in comparison to the rest of the world (at least according to this chart),

So we have a higher murder rate, a higher overall crime rate, it would seem reasonable that violent crime is also higher, but that would just be an educated guess.

but as many comment on that list's site, that may very well be due to a much more effective police force and the willingness to report crimes, as well as what's defined as "criminal".

Perhaps but that would need to be shown to be true, not merely saying, "Oh, this might be a reason for the difference". Right now all we have are the statistics, if someone wants to argue that there is a problem with the data, they need to do more than merely assert that there "may" be a problem.

And I doubt that any of this is a problem in looking at the murder rate.

I maintain we're no more inherently violent than most of our peers on the world stage.

Who do you consider our peers? Based upon the murder rate, it is clear that we are significantly more violent than our peers (Western Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, etc.)

[LordMortis]

The major issue you would have comparing Cincinatti to Sydney is the vast difference in socio-economic climate between the two cities.

I was just trying narrow things down in comparing all of Australia to all of the US. So I went straight for the most densely populated city in Australia and tried to compare it with a well known similarly dense city in the US. Taking and finding a similarly dense city with a similar socio economic level becomes more time consuming and it's more than I can do in a casual minute at work.

http://www.demographia.com/db-us90city100kdens.htm

San Jose has a close total population to Sydney than does Cinci, so maybe they're a better fit.

Silicon valley says

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/3 ... 14513.html

50/700,000 or about 7 per 100,000. Still bigger than I expected and still interesting and worthy of pondering things as Crux asked me to.

And Honolulu seems to be of similar attitude and is even sufficiently divorced from the rest of the "violent" culture of the US.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/artic ... 10326.html

23 per 350,000 (and notes as about the safest major city in the US) or about 6.5 per 100,000

Again not what I'm expecting.

[Rip]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

[hepcat]

Just so we're all clear here, I am in no way a member or supporter of the NRA. and as I've stated repeatedly, I think the SYG law is just a bad law that should be abolished.

[GreenGoo]

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Too many cars. Duh.

[ichbinunique]

Reading this thread it's occurred to me that the central problem is that Martin didn't react with lethal force when accosted by Zimmerman. It appears that as it stands in Florida just any meeting with a stranger is a misstep away from ending in a homicide, and this situation was just such a misstep.

It seems that given how Florida organizes things, this was bound to end in a homicide, so the tragedy becomes that Martin didn't appear to have an even chance. I'm not sure if minors are allowed to own and carry firearms, but at the very least he should've had a good knife. It would've made killing Zimmerman when their confrontation occurred much easier. Banging ZImmerman's head into the concrete may have been suitable for a schoolyard brawl, but it wasn't going to kill him. I wonder if Martin really knew he was fighting for his life.

I'm still horrified that anyone would think this is the logical order of things for a country in peacetime, but at least gunshops in Florida should be doing good business.

On a sidenote, in the case of the beating in Norfolk, if it really was a group of 30+ people I'm dubious as to how much good guns would've done. Gunmen can be taken down by unarmed people, and assuming they're using small caliber handguns the odds of instantly killing any of their assailants are somewhat low. The hope is that the crowd would have instantly dispersed, but if it's a group of people angry to beat someone to death, I'm unsure of what one armed person would do to diffuse that anger. I suppose the ideal is that all three of them produce firearms, fire a warning shot and then start laying into the crowd if they don't flee. I suppose there's a chance the situation resolves with no deaths, and a chance that it results with far more than one.

The problem in all of these cases is encouraging our populace to use lethal force on each other. It doesn't seem very Christian or practical. I really hope Florida dumps these laws and gets something more serviceable before this line of thinking spreads.

[Exodor]

The Miami Herald apparently dug up Zimmermans My Space page

“I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book,” Zimmerman wrote. “Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!”

[msduncan]

We also have an ethnic component that contributes to our higher than Europe crime rate.

So you're suggesting that there is not an ethnic component to violence in Europe? The Jews, Catholics, Rom, Serbs, Crotians, etc. etc. etc. would all like to vehemently disagree with you there if I may speak on their behalf. Ethnicity is pretty much the central issue in almost every major flareup of violence in Europe.

That is true, but I was speaking more of how the institution of slavery followed immediately by decades of discrimination (in the South AND the North) impacted an entire race of people in this country. Economics plays a huge part in crime and violence. The institution of slavery is a large magnitude event that covered a large segment of the population.

[Combustible Lemur]

We also have an ethnic component that contributes to our higher than Europe crime rate.

So you're suggesting that there is not an ethnic component to violence in Europe? The Jews, Catholics, Rom, Serbs, Crotians, etc. etc. etc. would all like to vehemently disagree with you there if I may speak on their behalf. Ethnicity is pretty much the central issue in almost every major flareup of violence in Europe.

That is true, but I was speaking more of how the institution of slavery followed immediately by decades of discrimination (in the South AND the North) impacted an entire race of people in this country. Economics plays a huge part in crime and violence. The institution of slavery is a large magnitude event that covered a large segment of the population.

I may be wrong but reread that statement and you will realize how egocentric it is. (Nation centric? )
When's The last time nato or the UN had to step in for US racial issues?

Sent from mah Incredible'

[noxiousdog]

We also have an ethnic component that contributes to our higher than Europe crime rate.

So you're suggesting that there is not an ethnic component to violence in Europe? The Jews, Catholics, Rom, Serbs, Crotians, etc. etc. etc. would all like to vehemently disagree with you there if I may speak on their behalf. Ethnicity is pretty much the central issue in almost every major flareup of violence in Europe.

That is true, but I was speaking more of how the institution of slavery followed immediately by decades of discrimination (in the South AND the North) impacted an entire race of people in this country. Economics plays a huge part in crime and violence. The institution of slavery is a large magnitude event that covered a large segment of the population.

I may be wrong but reread that statement and you will realize how egocentric it is. (Nation centric? )
When's The last time nato or the UN had to step in for US racial issues?

Sent from mah Incredible'

They couldn't if they wanted to. Regardless, crime in those countries is much higher than the US and that's even not counting government sponsored crime.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk

[Combustible Lemur]

We also have an ethnic component that contributes to our higher than Europe crime rate.

So you're suggesting that there is not an ethnic component to violence in Europe? The Jews, Catholics, Rom, Serbs, Crotians, etc. etc. etc. would all like to vehemently disagree with you there if I may speak on their behalf. Ethnicity is pretty much the central issue in almost every major flareup of violence in Europe.

That is true, but I was speaking more of how the institution of slavery followed immediately by decades of discrimination (in the South AND the North) impacted an entire race of people in this country. Economics plays a huge part in crime and violence. The institution of slavery is a large magnitude event that covered a large segment of the population.

I may be wrong but reread that statement and you will realize how egocentric it is. (Nation centric? )
When's The last time nato or the UN had to step in for US racial issues?

Sent from mah Incredible'

They couldn't if they wanted to. Regardless, crime in those countries is much higher than the US and that's even not counting government sponsored crime.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk

What's your point?

[Crux]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Why are you bringing laws into it? I didn't.

[Rip]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Why are you bringing laws into it? I didn't.

OH, got you.

We need to outlaw vehicles as they are the root to our world leading accident rate.

[Crux]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Why are you bringing laws into it? I didn't.

OH, got you.

We need to outlaw vehicles as they are the root to our world leading accident rate.

I can't tell if you're even reading what I'm writing or not. I specifically said I am not trying to relate the murder rates to gun laws.

[Rip]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Why are you bringing laws into it? I didn't.

OH, got you.

We need to outlaw vehicles as they are the root to our world leading accident rate.

I can't tell if you're even reading what I'm writing or not. I specifically said I am not trying to relate the murder rates to gun laws.

But YOU ARE trying to relate it to gun ownership. With the natural progression of that line of thinking is to next enact more laws restricting firearms rights.

I am simply saying the same could be said for car ownership and accident rates/deaths.

[hepcat]

I honestly didn't think he was trying to bring gun control into the discussion in any way.

[Crux]

To msd,

I view those statistics as being more of a commentary on a relatively violent society for a first-world nation than related to gun ownership. I own a gun. I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever shoot anyone with it

I guess my threshold of differentiation for declaring America a violent country in comparison to other countries is a bit higher than 2 to 3 per 100,000. I understand that 5 is technically almost 3 times higher than 2, but that makes the difference sound a bit more profound than it really is when you consider the sampling size, imho.

I think you need to recalibrate. The sampling size is enormous - measured in the millions. You are looking at a difference that is more than just statistically significant - it is enormous. You are more than 3 times more likely to be murdered in the US than you are in Australia. That's not a blip. That isn't a statistical anomaly.

and how many times more likely are you to die in an auto accident?

Twice I think, so we must have lax auto laws?

Why are you bringing laws into it? I didn't.

OH, got you.

We need to outlaw vehicles as they are the root to our world leading accident rate.

I can't tell if you're even reading what I'm writing or not. I specifically said I am not trying to relate the murder rates to gun laws.

But YOU ARE trying to relate it to gun ownership. With the natural progression of that line of thinking is to next enact more laws restricting firearms rights.

I am simply saying the same could be said for car ownership and accident rates/deaths.

I give up.

[Victoria Raverna]

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/05/11/justi ... index.html

Killed an unarmed teenager and police claimed that they can't charge you because you're protected by Stand Your Ground.

Shooting warning shot to stop husband that threaten to kill you = 20 years sentence?

Florida is fuck up.

[Isgrimnur]

Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as "10-20-life."

The law mandates increased penalties for some felonies, including aggravated assault, in which a gun is carried or used.

Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.
...
She said she escaped and ran to the garage, intending to drive away. But, she said, she forgot her keys, so she picked up her gun and went back into the house. She said her husband threatened to kill her, so she fired one shot.

Having successfully fled the direct threat and coming back into the threat zone with a gun because you forgot your keys is not Standing Your Ground.

She was offered a lesser sentence, decided to gamble, and lost, kicking in mandatory sentencing guidelines.

[Smoove_B]

Slow it down there.

Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as "10-20-life."

Also:

Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.

(emphasis added)

I'm not schooled in the particulars, but I'm guessing this violates all kinds of basic gun safety recommendations.

[Isgrimnur]

Slow it down there.

Speed it up.

[Smoove_B]

AND you included a picture. Show off.

[Exodor]

Slow it down there.

What......does.....a .......yellow......light........mean?

[Victoria Raverna]

Having successfully fled the direct threat and coming back into the threat zone with a gun because you forgot your keys is not Standing Your Ground.

I guess that mean Zimmerman can't use Standing Your Ground, too? Wasn't he outside threat zone when he noticed Trayvon and by following or confronting Trayvon, he moved into the threat zone with a gun?

[Victoria Raverna]

Slow it down there.

Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as "10-20-life."

Also:

Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.

(emphasis added)

I'm not schooled in the particulars, but I'm guessing this violates all kinds of basic gun safety recommendations.

So fired directly at the body of teenager doesn't violate basic gun safety?

So her mistake is that she shoot a warning shot? If she shoot her husband dead, she'll avoid jail time?

[Isgrimnur]

Having successfully fled the direct threat and coming back into the threat zone with a gun because you forgot your keys is not Standing Your Ground.

I guess that mean Zimmerman can't use Standing Your Ground, too? Wasn't he outside threat zone when he noticed Trayvon and by following or confronting Trayvon, he moved into the threat zone with a gun?

I'm going to let the justice system decide that one. But you really shouldn't need me to spell out the differences in these cases.

[Turtle]

Wow, that is a complete lack of justice. And yeah, her being black probably had a subtle influence.

Hopefully she can appeal that sentence. At least civil rights groups have her back.

Especially now when there's such a high profile case happening alongside this covering this law.

[Smoove_B]

So fired directly at the body of teenager doesn't violate basic gun safety?

No, I'm pretty sure that's a gun being used as intended.

So her mistake is that she shoot a warning shot? If she shoot her husband dead, she'll avoid jail time?

She might not have avoided jail time, but how threatened did you really feel if your instinct was to fire a warning shot instead of one towards the center of mass of the alleged assailant? Pulling a gun on someone isn't a half-measure. I've watched enough episodes of Justified to know this.

[Kasey Chang]

Basic gun safety: only point the gun at something you INTEND to DESTROY.

That stuff about pointing a gun at someone to stare him down? Only in the movies.

In an urban environment you never know where your warning shot may go.

[dbt1949]

I know where my warning shot is going, no matter what the environment.

[Turtle]

It'll be a warning for the next guy?

[Blackhawk]

Zimmerman has yet to successfully use Stand Your Ground. We're comparing a completed jury trial to a pre-trial defense claim.

[PLW]

I know where my warning shot is going, no matter what the environment.

What if you are on the second story of a three story building?

[msduncan]

Basic gun safety: only point the gun at something you INTEND to DESTROY.

That stuff about pointing a gun at someone to stare him down? Only in the movies.

In an urban environment you never know where your warning shot may go.

+3 (1 for each)