174 replies to this topic

[Smart E. Nuff]

Neighbohood Vigilantism?



This sign was posted at the entrance to my neighborhood. The president of the homeowners association's board of directors (of which I am a member) sent this e-mail to the leader of the local Neighborhood Watch program. (Names edited)

  

Quote

Found at the front of (our) neighborhood. The Neighborhood watch has gone too far. I want that FB group disbanded NOW. ***, I hold you personally responsible for any violence generated from this activity!

He blamed this Facebook post by the leader for the "escalation" of vigilantism (the sign)

  

Quote

The objective could be to make our communities a place where those breaking in know that they are at risk of immediate intervention should they attempt a crime.”

In subsequent e-mails between board members, another member of the board posted this-

Quote

   I find it horrifying that criminals have been challenged to bring weapons into our community. What about those of us who are home with our children, unarmed, when one of them decides our home looks like a good prospect? It's unfortunate that the sign poster used Neighborhood Watch his/her platform, which also insinuates the endorsement of the (our) community. I think we should address the responsible party directly, if we can find out who he/she is.

    I haven't been to a N.W. meeting since the eruption of last summer's mania, but I have attended enough meetings to know that **** would be the first to deter vigilantism and threats of violence. The local N.W. supports the national mission of USAonWatch.org which is (from their website): "Neighborhood Watch is a crime prevention program that stresses education and common sense. It teaches citizens how to help themselves by identifying and reporting suspicious activity in their neighborhoods to local law enforcement."
    I think (president) speaking at the next N.W. meeting is a great idea. I believe it needs to be conveyed to that this sort of outlandish behavior cannot be repeated. It's one thing to exercise your right to free speech, but you must speak for yourself as an individual. You do not get to speak for your entire community.

One more comment by the president-

  

Quote

  Another way to look at this…what happens when the crooks make sure they have a gun too? I don’t have any guns in my house and the last thing I want to see is a theif shooting up my place because he’s sure I’m packing. I don’t care about my stuff – take it and go. My family is irreplaceable. Any family member is irreplaceable.

I must admit, I was shocked at the response to a sign that reflected what I took as a bit of frustration by whoever posted it. Does anyone think the sign encouraged criminals to be armed? Do you consider the sign an act of vigilantism? The term vigilante has been thrown around a lot lately in the msm. It's as though any thought or action aimed at self protection or crime deterrent is now considered vigilantism. The word itself has been turned into having a negative connotation, a derogatory term. What have we become?

Edited by Smart E. Nuff, 25 March 2012 - 11:19 AM.

[JoshF]

Wow glad i don't live in your neighborhood. My house is one of the few around here that do not have "we don't dial 911" sign or some other sort of advertisement that any attempt at harm will be met with armed resistance.
I for one am glad to see a sign like that and I hope whomever made it is not merely spouting off.

I grew up with (and am related to a guy through marriage) who has been a career criminal. (Mostly robberies and break ins to fund his drug habit). From what he has told me,the last place he wants to rob is one where he has a great chance of being killed.

Edited by JoshF, 25 March 2012 - 10:59 AM.

[BigJohnny]

The question is what brought this on? Was there a wave of break-ins in that neighborhood? The guy said "I haven't been to a N.W. meeting since the eruption of last summer's mania", so I'm assuming that mania is some kind of crime wave or something.

Otherwise they're probably right to get angry. Some guy wrote some random stuff on a piece of cardboard pretending to represent the entire community. Obviously that entire community doesn't feel like they've been accurately represented.

[Smart E. Nuff]

There has been a number of break ins in the adjacent community, a few actually in mine. Most notably the local church had a rash of thefts. The mania is that person's take on the reaction of the residents to a neighborhood watch presentation of some sort at an annual community picnic.  I have no idea what the mania supposedly consisted of, in fact that was the first I had heard of it.

I would not presume a somewhat crudely crafted cardboard sign posting would portray the official policy of a community organization, be I see your point. I am astonished at the reaction. But when it comes to firearms, differing opinions are often passionate.

[Chris]

The proper response is to let the criminals know everyone is unarmed, so the criminals won't resort to violence. Probably easier if the residents just put all their valuables on the front porch at night.

[88tc]

Maybe there shouldn't be a neighborhood watch. Then the homes that are prepared to defend themselves will be ready, and the one's that are anti-gun owners can have their stuff stolen, themselves murdered, wives and daughters raped. Just today, I met my neighbor. We talked about the weather and yard work. He told me that his house was broken into last year when he was out of town. We told each other that if we are out of town, that we will look after each other's house. In Texas, I can go over to my neighbor's house and defend his property with firearms, if he asked me to look after his home while he is gone. I'm just saying maybe we don't need people patrolling the streets, when they maybe worse than cops patrolling the streets(but maybe not). Not that they have the same authority as cops, but maybe we can handle things without neighborhood watch.

[Gen. Jack T. Ripper]

You should post something complaining about the apostrophe.

[The Desert Lynx]

A community where the people defend themselves, and each other, is in my opinion far more civilized, advanced, and peaceful than one that relies on the government to defend them.

[crackshot]

two words. Trayvon Martin.

[Trolic]

So your all for disbanding the police department the next time they accidentally shoot someone? Nice to see you changing your views.


Shitt happens we do not need to run off halfcocked everytime and attempt to create new laws or limits someone's freedom. Punish the guy who did it and move on.

[Gen. Jack T. Ripper]

For all anyone actually knows, Martin might've been an honest mistake - and there's good reason to think he might even have been perfectly justified. (The unfortunate truth is that Martin was a thug-in-training, which, like pretty much all the other circumstantial evidence, lends credence to Zimmermann's story.) At the very worst, it was a mistake the oh-so-well-trained police make many times a year - and when they make it, they, unlike 'vigilantes', never have to pay for it.

Quote

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

Do read those links.

One thing is plain: anyone who believes this was 'raciss', quite simply, needs to be stripped of his voting privileges. Until stupid people are systematically disenfranchised by their superiors, the country will continue to circle the drain.

[mrblump]

Chris, on 25 March 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

The proper response is to let the criminals know everyone is unarmed, so the criminals won't resort to violence. Probably easier if the residents just put all their valuables on the front porch at night.

Nail on head. I plan to buy and be robbed of a new computer within the next few months if my budget can afford it.

Gen. Jack T. Ripper, on 26 March 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

For all anyone actually knows, Martin might've been an honest mistake - and there's good reason to think he might even have been perfectly justified. (The unfortunate truth is that Martin was a thug-in-training, which, like pretty much all the other circumstantial evidence, lends credence to Zimmermann's story.) At the very worst, it was a mistake the oh-so-well-trained police make many times a year - and when they make it, they, unlike 'vigilantes', never have to pay for it.


Do read those links.

One thing is plain: anyone who believes this was 'raciss', quite simply, needs to be stripped of his voting privileges. Until stupid people are systematically disenfranchised by their superiors, the country will continue to circle the drain.

Keep in mind George Zimmerman is the person that seems to be the one with a history of violence. When I clicked on your first link there and the title of the story was "Was Trayvon Martin a Drug Dealer?" I laughed and new exactly the script I was about to read. Involvement in drugs or having tattoos and being suspended from school for some random stupidity(none of these things George could see or knew about prior top the incident) does not mean the boy had a bulls-eye on his head saying "I am going to rob someone tonight please follow me and confront me while i am walking down the road". Regardless whether it was self defense or not it is sad that the kid died so young.

Edited by mrblump, 26 March 2012 - 08:06 PM.

[Gen. Jack T. Ripper]

Sorry. I simply don't believe reports of domestic violence without a thorough police report, indisputable photographic evidence, and an assault conviction to top it off. Chicks accuse men of 'domestic violence' all the goddam time, and it's usually out of sheer spite, just to dump a load of bureaucratic shit on men who've somehow crossed them. In this case, if there'd been anything at all to it, Zimmermann wouldn't have had his gun legally.

And yes. Involvement in drugs tends to go with being a thug. Having tattoos in that fashion marks you as a savage. He was suspended from school for assaulting a bus driver. My default assumption, then, is that the kid had it coming.

[lrstaffWY]

I have this feeling that the confrontation between Martin and Zimmerman was somewhere in between the two stories.  My take is that Zimmerman was a paranoid person in general, who confronted Martin asking what he was doing.  Martin, being a smart mouthed seventeen year old (as many his age have a tendency to be) probably didn't make himself easy to ignore and either egged on Zimmerman or told him to get lost and mind his own business.  Zimmerman probably took this as a chance to put the kid in his place (or the kid felt threatened by him and came at him physically) and things escalated. The kid was proving himself to be physically stronger and hurting his fragile ego, so he shot him.

Neither of the individuals involved were total angels, but Martin was a kid and certainly did not deserve his fate.  

Regarding the neighborhood watch sign, I can see how certain members of the neighborhood could feel somewhat violated since the sign did represent the entire neighborhood and the neighborhood watch as a whole.  Had the sign maker not put the *weapons are loaded* piece in there, I doubt anyone would have been upset.

[Gen. Jack T. Ripper]

The phone recordings make it pretty plain that that's not what happened. They're perfectly clear that Zimmermann disengaged (read: did not pursue Martin!), lost sight of the kid for about two minutes, during which he went back to his truck, and then the 'altercation' began. The kid didn't hurt anyone's 'fragile ego'; he jumped on top of Zimmermann, knocked him to the ground, and wailed on him. And if that's true, Martin made the last of a long string of shitty life decisions.

There's a reason the cops didn't arrest Zimmermann on the spot, and it's because the scene looked like a self-defense scene. Nothing has come out to contradict that, and everything that has come out has supported Zimmermann's story. Which is probably why the prosecutor is saying it'd be an uphill battle to get him on anything.

As for 'paranoia', the guy had good reason to be watchful. He apparently helped solve several crimes, and actually caught one criminal, in a community that, to put it mildly, had a pretty damn big crime problem. And Martin, to put it mildly, looked like a hoodlum - i.e. the sort of person responsible for the aforementioned crime problem. If Zimmermann perceived Martin so, Martin didn't exactly dispel Zimmermann's perfectly reasonable suspicions by leaping on top of him and knocking him to the ground.

I'm sorry the kid's dead, but nothing painting Zimmermann as a loon, a racist, or aggressor stands up to scrutiny. And if he wasn't any of those things, then Martin got himself killed, and Zimmermann deserves our sympathies for having to defend himself. And, of course, the life savings of every media asshole who tried to keep the raciss!!!! nonsense going by calling him a 'white hispanic'.

[Smart E. Nuff]

Gen. Jack T. Ripper, on 25 March 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

You should post something complaining about the apostrophe.

*snickers*

[Chris]

lrstaffWY, on 26 March 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:

Neither of the individuals involved were total angels, but Martin was a kid and certainly did not deserve his fate.  

Deserves got nothing to do with it. Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc. all lived long past what they "deserved". Deserve is one of those pointless words, like "fair".

Being alive is an abnormal condition, being dead is the norm. The act of living can be defined as the effort to resist death as long as possible. The moment you stop making decisions towards that end you're fucked.

[JoshF]

crackshot, on 26 March 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

two words. Trayvon Martin.

Boo hoo. The only reason this made the news is because the media wants to blame it on racism.

[Bezukhov]

This is taking things too far:

Trayvon Martin's mother files to trademark son's name

[oblivionboyj]

Fucking vultures.