Trayvon vs. Zimmerman - The trial

[Spider-Dan]

So what does this prove? 

The answer is pretty clear.....

The majority of time in which white person kills a black person it is in self-defense.

Not quite.

What it proves is that if a white person kills a black person and claims self-defense, the court is more likely to acquit them than:

- a white person killing a white person (over twice as likely)
- a black person killing a black person (over twice as likely)
- a black person killing a white person (over three times as likely)

Unless you're saying that conviction/acquittal statistics are interchangeable with the truth of crime?  White vs. black drug conviction rates (and sentencing) would seem to indicate otherwise.

[CF DolFan]

It's still skewed because there is much more black on white crime (reason to defend) than white on black crime. More whites carry or have weapons. Not that whites don't have issues too but a lot of black on black crime is gang or drug related so many times not much of a defense.

For instance. Last week here locally three black guys broke into white home where family was present. Owner shot one of the guys.

Unfortunately this happens far to regularly. I can't remember a time when white kids broke into a black persons home let alone got shot. That would certainly stand out.

For whatever reason in my experience, whether white, black or Latino criminals... Victims with legal guns are typically white and some times Latino. It seems to me based on my experience any blacks who are victims of theft etc are usually not carrying.

Interesting enough one of my black coworkers carries constantly but he seems to be an exception.

[Spider-Dan]

It's still skewed because there is much more black on white crime (reason to defend) than white on black crime.

How does this explain the enormous difference in acquittal rate (via justifiable homicide) between a white shooter and a black shooter, when the person killed (the ostensible criminal) is black in both cases?

If you're a white person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members, you have a much higher chance of being acquitted than if you're a black person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members.  Why?

[CF DolFan]

How does this explain the enormous difference in acquittal rate (via justifiable homicide) between a white shooter and a black shooter, when the person killed (the ostensible criminal) is black in both cases?

If you're a white person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members, you have a much higher chance of being acquitted than if you're a black person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members.  Why?

Because they have many more opportunities. For the same reason your likely to see skewed statistics towards whites when it comes to serial murderers or mass shootings. Percentage wise blacks are pretty minimal in these situations.

[Spider-Dan]

Why would more opportunities affect the acquittal rate?

I'm not saying anything about the total numbers of whites or blacks acquitted.  If a black person attacks you, you shoot and kill them, and you claim self-defense, you apparently have a much stronger case if you're white than if you're black.  Switch the attacker to a white person and (particularly for a white shooter!) your acquittal rate goes WAY down.  Why?

[masterfins]

Of course, in your mind, a unarmed kid being killed by a armed adult is not the issue that needs to be dealt with.  No, instead we should be pointing at and blaming black pop culture, what with their obsession with baggy clothes, gold, and womanizing:
You're right, the baggy clothes and the gold were the source of Trayvon Martin's troubles.

As usual you like to misrepresent, you left out the fact that many gangsta rappers admittedly come from a background of gang violence and drug dealing.  Their lyrics talk of being pimps, killing police, using drugs, selling drugs, etc.  You want to ignore that and dumb it down to baggy clothes, gold, and womanizing...I'm not buying it.  IMO this "black pop culture", as you call it, has only served to create new racism in this country, and create a new negative stereotype for African Americans.

[Spider-Dan]

I did later add rap music and hats worn sideways to the list of Real Reasons Why Trayvon Martin Was Killed, so I think we're covered.

Unless you think we also need to add spinning rims and dreadlocks to the tally.

[pondwater]

How does this explain the enormous difference in acquittal rate (via justifiable homicide) between a white shooter and a black shooter, when the person killed (the ostensible criminal) is black in both cases?

If you're a white person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members, you have a much higher chance of being acquitted than if you're a black person defending yourself from black drug-dealing gang members.  Why?

Seems like in Florida your numbers don't add up. Maybe you got confused and got them backwards. http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/. Oh wait, let me guess your reply, more whitey propaganda and made up numbers to hold a brotha down. Give me a break!

[Spider-Dan]

Looking at the source of that article (and excluding pending cases), when the accused and victim are both white, there were 25 convictions and 32 acquittals, for a 56.1% justified killing rate.  When the accused is white and the victim is black or Hispanic, there were 2 convictions and 10 acquittals, for an 83.3% justified killing rate.  (Specifically, white accused + black victim was 1 conviction to 6 acquittals for an 85.7% justified killing rate... and Zimmerman was classified with the Hispanic accused, not white.)

Black accused / white victim?  2 convictions, 4 acquittals, 66.6% justified.
Black accused / black victim? 6 convictions, 16 acquittals, 72.7% justified.
Black accused / Hispanic victim? 0 convictions, 1 acquittals, 100% justified.

Hispanic accused / white victim?  2 convictions, 2 acquittals, 50% justified.
Hispanic accused / black victim?  0 convictions, 3 acquittals, 100% justified.
Hispanic accused / Hispanic victim?  0 convictions, 2 acquittals, 100% justified.

I suppose you could read that as blacks getting "more benefit" from SYG if you're only looking at the race of accused (and specifically, when they are not accused of killing whites).  If you look at the race of the victim, blacks and Hispanics are getting railroaded.

Long story short: if you kill a white person, SYG is not as likely to work, and (despite what you might think from reading this thread) in Florida, the majority of white victims in SYG cases were killed by other white people.

[SCFinfan]

Here's an interesting polemic from one of my favorite British political writers.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100226889/zimmerman-what-about-the-words-not-guilty-does-obamas-department-of-justice-not-understand/

Not trying to stoke the fire or anything, but it's fun to read.

[Phishfan]

Pure numbers are meaningless. Give me the nature of the crimes (more than what race killed a person of what race) and I will entertain you numbers discussion.

[Spider-Dan]

Full details are at the cited link.  Have at it.

[pondwater]

Looking at the source of that article (and excluding pending cases), when the accused and victim are both white, there were 25 convictions and 32 acquittals, for a 56.1% justified killing rate.  When the accused is white and the victim is black or Hispanic, there were 2 convictions and 10 acquittals, for an 83.3% justified killing rate.  (Specifically, white accused + black victim was 1 conviction to 6 acquittals for an 85.7% justified killing rate... and Zimmerman was classified with the Hispanic accused, not white.)

Black accused / white victim?  2 convictions, 4 acquittals, 66.6% justified.
Black accused / black victim? 6 convictions, 16 acquittals, 72.7% justified.
Black accused / Hispanic victim? 0 convictions, 1 acquittals, 100% justified.

Hispanic accused / white victim?  2 convictions, 2 acquittals, 50% justified.
Hispanic accused / black victim?  0 convictions, 3 acquittals, 100% justified.
Hispanic accused / Hispanic victim?  0 convictions, 2 acquittals, 100% justified.

I suppose you could read that as blacks getting "more benefit" from SYG if you're only looking at the race of accused (and specifically, when they are not accused of killing whites).  If you look at the race of the victim, blacks and Hispanics are getting railroaded.

Long story short: if you kill a white person, SYG is not as likely to work, and (despite what you might think from reading this thread) in Florida, the majority of white victims in SYG cases were killed by other white people.

So what you're saying is that you would change the SYG laws so that more blacks would be convicted of murder? I bet then you would be saying how biased the system is for having so many more blacks being incarcerated for murder. Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

[Spider-Dan]

So what you're saying is that you would change the SYG laws so that more blacks would be convicted of murder?

Well, more blacks, and whites, and Hispanics, and men, and women.  In other words: I would get rid of SYG, and any person who decided that carrying a firearm means they can feel free to instigate and/or escalate confrontations would have to prepare a legal defense accordingly.

[pondwater]

Well, more blacks, and whites, and Hispanics, and men, and women.  In other words: I would get rid of SYG, and any person who decided that carrying a firearm means they can feel free to instigate and/or escalate confrontations would have to prepare a legal defense accordingly.

If blacks benefit from SYG law at a disproportionate rate. Then it would be prudent to assume that getting rid of the SYG laws would lead to more murder convictions of blacks by that same disproportionate rate. Wouldn't it?