Charles Barkley: Zimmer was right to be acquitted

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]Bogus....there is no scientific " facts" showing minor diffrencies amongst species means anything...

" Skull sizes?"...that's like saying Polynesians have diffrent "stomach sizes?"...

- yeah they have bigger stomachs.....it means nothing.....just like if someone is shorter or taller.....it means nothing.

- Skull size , stomach size , Brain size ( has no bearing on IQ), Leg size.....all mean absolutley nothing!

- According to science....there are no " races"...just minor cosmetic difference among 1 species...( that can change very easily)

Just like the GZ trial...there are FACTS....and there are hear say.


Iam going with my expierience backed up by the Facts/Science......[/QUOTE]
if you really want to bring science in to it, modern taxonomy classifies animals with very small differences as different species on a regular basis. it's pretty common.

a slightly different color pattern, a small difference in skeleton or organ size, whatever. i believe the reason this is usually done is to differentiate groups of animals that have split apart by region. it is probably expected that they will continue to drift genetically.. hence a reason in calling them a different species. in fact it would be impossible for them to develop back in to a single species if there wasn't some event which caused the groups to mix back together again. even so, the number of species would usually splinter further i would think.

but, yea... you are certainly right that it doesn't mean they can't interbreed. many such animals are functionally the same species.

of course a lion and a tiger can also mate, sometimes or usually. so the genetic differences can be pretty severe, as well.

i think even science has the common sense not to do the usual reclassification thing with humans, however.

i'm an amateur zoologist, but there are some people here... maybe deucewallaces, shakehandlover or various lurkers that could explain better.

[QUOTE=tontoz]Racial profiling is based solely on race. It doesn't take into account anything other than race. Age, height, weight, facial hair, clothing, etc don't matter.

GZ was looking specifically for a black TEEN, not a 30, 40, or 50 year old black man. Not a fat black man or a black man with braids...[/QUOTE]

its not always solely based on race.. its based primarily on race..

cant tell if trayvon has braids when he has a hoodie on

anyway who is to say whether or not zimmerman follows taryvon if he is 30, 40, or 50 :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=ace23]AlphaWolf said there's no such thing as race, though. Either way, he's wrong.[/QUOTE]


[B]Race is a Modern Idea[/B] - Ancient Civilizations did not divide people based on appearance....but by Class, Religion and even language

[B]Race has no genetic basis[/B] - Not one charistic, gene or physical marker distinguishes one so called ( made up) Race from another

[B]Humans are 1 species[/B] - Modern Humans have not been around long enough to evolve subspecies or races...Despite minor surface diffrences...we are teh most similar of all species.

[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[B]Most "Variation" is within...not between "races"[/B] - of the small human genetic variation....85% of it exists within the local population....2 random Koreans are as likley to be genetically diffrent as a Korean and an Italian...

[B]Race is a made up social construct to catagorize humans based of Minor phyical diffrences[/B] - Racism is real.....[B]Race[/B] is a made up / barbaric way to find seperation.....

it does not exist......


might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"




:pimp: ( thumps chest)




next

[QUOTE=dude77]gz was under no obligation to stay in his car .. none ..

why does everyone keep saying that shit ? he was in his own fkn neighborhood[/quote]


Nobody said he is "obligated" I said he was "warned" not to follow the kid and he did it anyway...

he could have "tracked" him from the truck and let the police handle it from there.. It would have been the smart thing thing to do.. That is why he was advised NOT to follow him..



[quote]gz wasn't looking for a fight .. and you all now that .. tm however .. well he liked to 'make em bleed'[/QUOTE]


evidently George like to "make em bleed" too.. only difference is he needs a gun to do it..

If you look at the law and the jury instruction...the verdict was correct. There was reasonable doubt and it isn't really arguable to reasonable people.

It's sad seeing normally sane people turn into lunatics when race is involved. Really, someone explain to me how there was no reasonable doubt.

[QUOTE=gigantes]if you really want to bring science in to it, modern taxonomy classifies animals with very small differences as different species on a regular basis. it's pretty common.

a slightly different color pattern, [B]a small difference in skeleton or organ size, whatever.[/B] i believe the reason this is usually done is to differentiate groups of animals that have split apart by region. it is probably expected that they will continue to drift genetically.. hence a reason in calling them a different species. in fact it would be impossible for them to develop back in to a single species if there wasn't some event which caused the groups to mix back together again. even so, the number of species would usually splinter further i would think.

but, yea... you are certainly right that it doesn't mean they can't interbreed. many such animals are functionally the same species.

of course a lion and a tiger can also mate, sometimes or usually. so the genetic differences can be pretty severe, as well.

i think even science has the common sense not to do the usual reclassification thing with humans, however.

i'm an amateur zoologist, but there are some people here... maybe deucewallaces, shakehandlover or various lurkers that could explain better.[/QUOTE]


I have to look more into taxidermy....:confusedshrug:

[QUOTE]might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"[/QUOTE]

Humans don't catagorize skeloton size as a diffrent species though...

[QUOTE=IGOTGAME]If you look at the law and the jury instruction...the verdict was correct. There was reasonable doubt and it isn't really arguable to reasonable people.

It's sad seeing normally sane people turn into lunatics when race is involved. Really, someone explain to me how there was no reasonable doubt.[/QUOTE]


I think you are right... I have been on a few juries and the jury instruction can be very narrow...

I personally think manslaughter would be the proper judgement, but after seeing the jury instruction and seeing the state's case, I cant be mad at the jury..

I think the law needs to be specified or modified

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I have been on a few juries[/QUOTE]

Doubtful. Your radical black supremacy viewpoints would be instantly picked up on and rule you out of any jury pool.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]I have to look more into taxidermy....:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
taxonomy, meaning classification. taxidermy is just the preservation of specimens.

here's an example, if it helps-- the common box turtle.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrapene_carolina[/url]


my point is, if scientists wanted to treat modern humans as with all other animals, they could easily classify mongoloid, cauc, negroid, aboriginal australian as legit subspecies. maybe not separate species, but separate subspecies. there are more than anything shared differences to do so.

they don't hesitate for a moment to do so with extinct humans, but probably have enough sense to let it go as "race" with h. sapiens sapiens.

again, that's my working understanding, subject to clarification.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24][B]Race is a Modern Idea[/B] - Ancient Civilizations did not divide people based on appearance....but by Class, Religion and even language

[B]Race has no genetic basis[/B] - Not one charistic, gene or physical marker distinguishes one so called ( made up) Race from another

[B]Humans are 1 species[/B] - Modern Humans have not been around long enough to evolve subspecies or races...Despite minor surface diffrences...we are teh most similar of all species.

[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[B]Most "Variation" is within...not between "races"[/B] - of the small human genetic variation....85% of it exists within the local population....2 random Koreans are as likley to be genetically diffrent as a Korean and an Italian...

[B]Race is a made up social construct to catagorize humans based of Minor phyical diffrences[/B] - Racism is real.....[B]Race[/B] is a made up / barbaric way to find seperation.....

it does not exist......


might as well say ...." well he is tall.......Tall people are a differnt Race"




:pimp: ( thumps chest)




next[/QUOTE]


:cheers:

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]its not always solely based on race.. its based primarily on race..

cant tell if trayvon has braids when he has a hoodie on

anyway who is to say whether or not zimmerman follows taryvon if he is 30, 40, or 50 :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]


We don't know what he would have done. We do know that if he followed an old black man he would be racial profiling. He would only be following because of race, not because he fit the description of the person invading homes.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]
[B]Skin color is only skin deep [/B]- Traits are inherited seperatley....the gene for skin color has no bearing on hair color , eye color , blood type or physical ability....etc..etc

[/QUOTE]


Are you trying to say the hair is the same for blacks and whites? How many black people are natural blondes? :oldlol:

Why are so many NBA players black if there are no differences between races' physical abilities?

[QUOTE=tontoz]We don't know what he would have done. We do know that if he followed an old black man he would be racial profiling. He would only be following because of race, not because he fit the description of the person invading homes.[/QUOTE]


like I said earlier.. Race as the KEY factor makes it racial profiling... If you say "black youths" vs "black elderly men" :confusedshrug:

black is the key factor

[quote]Any police-initiated action that relies on the race, ethnicity, or national origin rather than the behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been, engaged in criminal activity." -Deborah Ramirez, Jack McDevitt, Amy Farrell for US [/quote]

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling[/url]

If age is the key factor? it would still be a form of profiling, just not by race..

the fact that these criminals were supposedly Black is the key factor by everyone's account.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]like I said earlier.. Race as the KEY factor makes it racial profiling... If you say "black youths" vs "black elderly men" :confusedshrug:

black is the key factor[/QUOTE]

Well, we can't know that race was the key factor in Zimmerman's mind. Looking from the outside in it might appear that way, but Zimmerman didn't bring up race on the call until he was specifically asked by the dispatcher. And in the tone of his voice he sounds uncertain when he first answers.

7:09:59 PM [B]Dispatch[/B]: "OK, and this guy

can somebody comment on how the jury instruction 'systematically excluded racism' from the proceedings that i've heard so much about? mostly a unilateral decision by the judge yea? thats the big point the naacp is making anyway, along with a few other gruops and outspoken critics. jus curious about what specific charges could have been made by the prosecution that could have led to a conviction, would they just fall under some standard state hate crime law or what, etc