When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Rupert Pupkin]

Reuters did an exhaustive investigation into Zimmerman. The investigation answers a lot of questions that many of you may have wondered about such as why Zimmerman got a gun, why Zimmerman was asked by neighbors to become the neighborhood watch captain, what types of incidents was Zimmerman involved with in the past in his role as neighborhood watch captain, how neighbors felt about Zimmerman, what types of crimes had been occurring in the neighborhood, what is the racial makeup of the homeowners in the neighborhood, etc.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83O18H20120425

[Antitrust32]

Thank god Zimmerman does not live in my town, Ocala. Half the town would have been shot dead by now.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Thank god Zimmerman does not live in my town, Ocala. Half the town would have been shot dead by now.

Agree with you on the first sentence. Not sure where you're coming from in the second.

I don't live in Ocala proper, but around 15 miles away on a small horse farm in "horse country." Not much crime here, except for the occasional domestic dispute. You must be referring to the Shores, or the Forest, or maybe the area around 40 downtown.

You do know, of course, that local neighborhood watch programs are very highly regulated around town. None are armed, none are ever supposed to follow anyone, and all are supposed to report anything suspicious to the police/sheriff.

[Riot]

You may remember this story about Jean Kalonji and his wife Angelica, the purchaser of a foreclosed home in Newton County GA. While changing the locks on their new home, they were threatened and held at gunpoint by two of their white neighbors.

When the local sheriff deputies arrived they arrested the Kalonjis without checking to find out if they were the homeowners, and took no action against the men who threatened and assaulted Jean and Angelica with their firearms and held them against their will for no apparent reason other than that 61 year-old Jean Kalonji was black.

Well, it seems the Newton County Sheriff's Department has had a change of heart about the actions of these two vigilantes (though the Kalonji's lawyer's meeting with the Sheriff and the local DA on Monday may have helped clarify the situation for them).

Yesterday, Robert Canoles and his son, Branden, were taken into custody and charged with "aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal trespass."

Frankly I am surprised, but also grateful that the Newton County authorities reversed themselves and made the proper decision to charge these two morons.

These idiots took it upon themselves to assault a 61 year old black man and his 57 year old white spouse and cause them to fear for their lives merely for lawfully occupying their own property.

Nonetheless, shamefully, both men reacted with defiance and an utter lack of remorse at what they had done to these two innocent people.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...2nd-Amendment-

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...2nd-Amendment-

I thought you didn't like partisan news sources. You are constantly bashing Fox for being partisan but you seem to love getting news from left-wing sites. I don't get it.

With regard to this story, if this is the worst thing that ever happens in this country, I think we're in pretty good shape. I think the thousands of people getting robbed, beaten, and murdered in this country is a slightly more serious problem than what happened in this case. It was an unfortunate misunderstanding but at least nobody got hurt.

I was dog-sitting for my brother about 5 months ago. He lives about 35 miles from me. I decided to go for a run around his neighborhood. I was doing my regular run/walk when I noticed a police car following me. Then another police car came. They finally pulled in front of me and got out of their car. They said that they had gotten a couple of calls about me. They claimed that people said I appeared to be walking sort of aimlessly and it looked like I might be lost. The police wanted to know who I was, what I was doing there, etc.

I was a combination of slightly amused and slightly annoyed. Why in the world would anyone think I looked suspicious and/or menacing? I'm 5'9 and weigh 145 pounds. I guess it was just one of those things when you're in a neighborhood that you don't live. You just don't quite look like you fit in. I've never been pulled over running in my neighborhood.

Anyway, I didn't give the cops any attitude. I was extremely friendly and cooperative. I answered all their questions. I told them my name. I gave them my address. I told them what I was doing there. They thanked me and I was on my way.

I know this isn't nearly as bad as what some people go through. They didn't pull a gun on me or anything like that. But I could have still gotten mad and told them they had no right to question me. I was minding my own business. I didn't break any laws. But I didn't get mad. I figured the bottom line was that they had good intentions. They were just trying to protect the neighborhood.

I'd rather have a neighborhood where residents and police are conscientious and are looking out for the residents than a neighborhood where nobody cares.

By the way, the crimes they charged the people with in that case are a joke. They charged them with "aggravated assault, false imprisonment, and criminal trespass". Are they kidding? Those people didn't have any criminal intent. They may be stupid and they obviously don't know the law. But they had good intentions. They thought their neighbor's house was being burglarized. Why would you charge those people with the same crimes that you would charge real criminals with, who actually break into a house with criminal intent and hold people against their will? It's absurd. They should be charged with some type of simple misdemeanor related to improper brandishing of a gun. If the Kalonjis want to sue them for $25,000 for their trouble, that would be fine too. But to charge these people as if they had criminal intent is beyond absurd.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I thought you didn't like partisan news sources. You are constantly bashing Fox for being partisan but you seem to love getting news from left-wing sites. I don't get it.

With regard to this story, if this is the worst thing that ever happens in this country, I think we're in pretty good shape.

The story isn't "left wing". It's about moronic armed vigilantes who broke the law and endangered fellow citizens. Yeah. That's illegal, and no, self-appointed armed vigilantes are not good.

Zimmerman did the same thing, played armed vigilante, and a kid, doing nothing illegal, is dead. Bending over backwards imagining blame scenarios where it's all the victims fault says alot.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

The story isn't "left wing". It's about moronic armed vigilantes who broke the law and endangered fellow citizens. Yeah. That's illegal, and no, self-appointed armed vigilantes are not good.

Zimmerman did the same thing, played armed vigilante, and a kid, doing nothing illegal, is dead. Bending over backwards imagining blame scenarios where it's all the victims fault says alot.

My comment wasn't about it being a left-wing story. My comment was that I found it interesting that you seem to always post stories from left-wing sites. You constantly knock Fox News for being a partisan news source. Yet you seem to love partisan news sources. You love them as long as they have the same ideology as you.

You said, "Bending over backwards imagining blame scenarios where it's all the victims fault says alot." My response to you is that bending over backwards imagining some type of negative intentions in order to vilify altruistic people (who were only trying to help their neighbors) says alot.

By the way, if you read the article about Zimmerman you would have noticed that his black neighbors defended him. In addition, you would have noticed that Zimmerman and a black friend of his opened up a business together. Zimmerman is such a racist that his business partner was black. LOL.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

Agree with you on the first sentence. Not sure where you're coming from in the second.

I don't live in Ocala proper, but around 15 miles away on a small horse farm in "horse country." Not much crime here, except for the occasional domestic dispute. You must be referring to the Shores, or the Forest, or maybe the area around 40 downtown.

You do know, of course, that local neighborhood watch programs are very highly regulated around town. None are armed, none are ever supposed to follow anyone, and all are supposed to report anything suspicious to the police/sheriff.

yes.. shores, marion oaks, downtown, and the area I live in (475A & 312).. I've read about more violent crime in Ocala the past 5 years I've lived here than any other place I've lived. plus Ocala is robbery central. The horse farms are great and beautiful and safe! But the dense population area's are low income with a pretty good crime rate.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Reuters did an exhaustive investigation into Zimmerman. The investigation answers a lot of questions that many of you may have wondered about such as why Zimmerman got a gun, why Zimmerman was asked by neighbors to become the neighborhood watch captain, what types of incidents was Zimmerman involved with in the past in his role as neighborhood watch captain, how neighbors felt about Zimmerman, what types of crimes had been occurring in the neighborhood, what is the racial makeup of the homeowners in the neighborhood, etc.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83O18H20120425

none of that really matters. had he not followed, ignoring the 911 operator, this thread wouldn't even exist. the shooting wouldn't have occurred.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

none of that really matters. had he not followed, ignoring the 911 operator, this thread wouldn't even exist. the shooting wouldn't have occurred.

People in neighborhood watch programs follow people every day. That is a good thing, not a bad thing. It saves property and lives.

On your other point, if a police officer gives you an order, you have to follow it or there is a good chance you will get arrested. When a 911 operator advises you, "We don't need you to do that", that is advice. That is not an order. A person is not compelled by law to follow that advice.

In this case, in hindsight we know that Zimmerman should have followed the advice of the 911 operator. As you said, the incident would not have happened had Zimmerman taken the advice. Hindsight is 20/20. But I'm sure there are hundreds of similar situations that happen across the country every year, where there is a different ending. The neighborhood watch person follows the suspect until the police arrive, and the suspect ends up being arrested (because they turned out to be a criminal), or released because the police determine that there was no criminal intent on the part of the suspect.

It's easy to second-guess Zimmerman in hindsight, after you know that this was the one case in a thousand, where there was a bad ending. But what about the other thousand of cases a year (where a neighborhood watch person follows a person until the police arrive), and there is a happy ending?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

People in neighborhood watch programs follow people every day. That is a good thing, not a bad thing. It saves property and lives.

On your other point, if a police officer gives you an order, you have to follow it or there is a good chance you will get arrested. When a 911 operator advises you, "We don't need you to do that", that is advice. That is not an order. A person is not compelled by law to follow that advice.

In this case, in hindsight we know that Zimmerman should have followed the advice of the 911 operator. As you said, the incident would not have happened had Zimmerman taken the advice. Hindsight is 20/20. But I'm sure there are hundreds of similar situations that happen across the country every year, where there is a different ending. The neighborhood watch person follows the suspect until the police arrive, and the suspect ends up being arrested (because they turned out to be a criminal), or released because the police determine that there was no criminal intent on the part of the suspect.

It's easy to second-guess Zimmerman in hindsight, after you know that this was the one case in a thousand, where there was a bad ending. But what about the other thousand of cases a year (where a neighborhood watch person follows a person until the police arrive), and there is a happy ending?

bullshit. it's called neighborhood WATCH. not follow, not get out of your car, not apprehend, not play cop, just watch. he was specifically told not to follow. not only did he do so, he then left his car and followed on foot. all of it against what they told him to do, all of it not what neighborhood watch is supposed to do. you see something, you all the people trained to handle it. you don't try to handle it yourself.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

bullshit. it's called neighborhood WATCH. not follow, not get out of your car, not apprehend, not play cop, just watch. he was specifically told not to follow. not only did he do so, he then left his car and followed on foot. all of it against what they told him to do, all of it not what neighborhood watch is supposed to do. you see something, you all the people trained to handle it. you don't try to handle it yourself.

Three months ago, before this incident happened, I bet that if I would have done a story about aggressive neighborhood watch programs that were cutting crime way down in their neighborhoods, I bet you would have been all for it.

If I would have told you about some neighborhoods where there was a lot of crime, that there was an aggressive neighborhood watch program where the members were armed and they followed the suspects until the police got there, and the program was really effective, I bet you would have been all for it.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Three months ago, before this incident happened, I bet that if I would have done a story about aggressive neighborhood watch programs that were cutting crime way down in their neighborhoods, I bet you would have been all for it.

If I would have told you about some neighborhoods where there was a lot of crime, that there was an aggressive neighborhood watch program where the members were armed and they followed the suspects until the police got there, and the program was really effective, I bet you would have been all for it.

and i bet you'd be wrong. i'm all for people defending their home, their life-i am not for vigilantes at all. you have every right to DEFEND yourself-not go after someone like some g--d--- charles bronson character from a movie.

Originally Posted by Danzig

and i bet you'd be wrong. i'm all for people defending their home, their life-i am not for vigilantes at all. you have every right to DEFEND yourself-not go after someone like some g--d--- charles bronson character from a movie.

Huh? That is exactly what he was doing. He was defending his "village". And how do we know for sure if he was acting like Charles Bronson? That seems to me like a stretch to add oomph to your point.

He has every right to defend his property and the property of his neighbors if they allow it. That's what liberty is all about.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

People in neighborhood watch programs follow people every day. That is a good thing, not a bad thing. It saves property and lives.

On your other point, if a police officer gives you an order, you have to follow it or there is a good chance you will get arrested. When a 911 operator advises you, "We don't need you to do that", that is advice. That is not an order. A person is not compelled by law to follow that advice.

In this case, in hindsight we know that Zimmerman should have followed the advice of the 911 operator. As you said, the incident would not have happened had Zimmerman taken the advice. Hindsight is 20/20. But I'm sure there are hundreds of similar situations that happen across the country every year, where there is a different ending. The neighborhood watch person follows the suspect until the police arrive, and the suspect ends up being arrested (because they turned out to be a criminal), or released because the police determine that there was no criminal intent on the part of the suspect.

It's easy to second-guess Zimmerman in hindsight, after you know that this was the one case in a thousand, where there was a bad ending. But what about the other thousand of cases a year (where a neighborhood watch person follows a person until the police arrive), and there is a happy ending?

the past means nothing. the neighborhood watch means nothing. The dead kid is what this is all about. And taking the law into your own hands with a firearm.

It would be a WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY if Martin was shot while breaking into someone's home. That wasnt the case. He was innocently walking home to his dads house, thats all. If he threw some punches because he was sticking up for himself for being followed by some cop wanna be looney toon, that still does NOT give Zimmerman the right to kill the teenager.