Jamie Foxx wore a Trayvon Martin shirt to the MTV Movie Awards. Surrounding Trayvon are kids who were killed in the Sandy Hook massacre. Appropriate shirt or not?
Thanks for posting this Enty! I've been dying to know what the CDAN fam thought about this... there were many people who were very angry and upset with him for wearing this.
We know the sandy hook victims where innocents. We may never know what really happened in Trayvon's killing. It is Jamie's right to express his beliefs and feelings on the matters. If his point is he is against gun violence then I agree. If he is equating sandy hook victims with trayvon then it is natural that some may take issue with it and they have that right.
I think it's appropriate yes, and think he may have worn it to counter the police sergeant who was fired for making the Trayvon Martin shooting targets.
Trayvon was innocent, just like those kids. The jackass was following him, which had to have scared the shit out of the kid. He thought he was defending himself (imo), and dies because of it. All of yhe people on the shirt were innocents who lost their lives to gun violence. I have no issue with what he wore.
He wants justice for a young man senselessly killed by gun violence, the same way the other kids were. I see no conflict at all.I also agree with him 100%.
The message in the shirt is clear. But I don't think the mtv movie awards are the place for this. You have everyone wearing their most flashy outfits and laughing and celebrating. Look at Kesha. I think if you want to send a serious message, doing it where people are making obvious ploys for attention could make it seem like that is what he is doing.
I think it was the perfect place to wear it as many teens watching it have lost classmates due to gun violence. I love the top. I tried to find one online to get one for myself but could not find one. Anyone else have better luck?
The kids at Sandy Hook are watching the mtv movie awards and being comforted by this shirt? I 'm glad he feels so strongly about wanting peace. But i hope he did more than wear a shirt to an award show. Especially one wear people see him then kesha dressed as a ghoul. It's easy to dismiss and disregard as another publicity stunt. Now if he was advertising the sale of these shirts (then you could find one) and donating the money these families.
hopefully someone makes a shirt with all the faces of those killed 9/11/01, and victims hurt during the bombing of the USS Cole, millions of people slaughtered in the genocide caused by Saddam Hussein, and have proceeds go to support victims, survivors' families, and those who rescued.
i also hope that millions who have been affected by cancer can have their pictures put on shirts as a group to draw awareness to cancer and assist caregivers who care for these individuals.
and instead of crapping on the fact that mental health is not seen as a vital part of the judicial system in many places, maybe people should petition to consider strengthening legal precedents for mental health concerns in criminal and civil cases. (This is not in response to Sandy Hook kids. this is in response to Trayvon Martin, and I don't have a personal feeling on thse situation besides the awful fact a child was murdered).
An 11 year old died of leukemia that I know. no press attention there. In situations such as TM it's made into a political issue which take away from so many other awful tragedies that occur with kids.
for those that don't have a sense of humor I wasn't endorsing actually making shurts of terminally ill patients. I have no use for politcizing things like this and making it any more than the awful tragedy it is. people like myself are who deal with the actual trauma and sadness that result these actions. i completely respect if others' opinions are different, but doesn't mean I am wrong.
um no. Trayvon Martin, no matter what people want to tell you, was NOT someone to be held in high esteem. Anyone who has seen the undoctored photos of the guy who shot him would know that. It is like when Sean Bell died here. A thug with a rap sheet 10 miles long, associating with known weapon and drug traffickers, and tries to run down undercover cops bc hes out until 5am on his wedding night. They named a street after him here in NYC. There are many things that are tragedies (like Bpston, or Sandy), people reaping what they sow bc they are not good humans is not one of them
WTF Is wrong with you people? Because he made mistakes in life he deserved to be murdered? He was followed because a crazy man with a gun felt like he didn't belong in a particular neighborhood. The crazy gunman was the aggressor and you two racists are cheering him on. I hope your kids never end up like Trayvon, if in fact you two losers have any.
Good god, Katie, how the hell did you come to the conclusion he was not a good human being? Was it because he smoked weed? He was being followed and was then approached by the guy. It was a fight or flight response. Give me a fucking break.
The only thing I find potentially offensive (and it doesn't offend me personally, but possibly others) is that he made Treyvon's picture so much bigger than all the others. I get that he did it so that people would see the point he was making, but these are all kids who never got to realize their dreams. Not one of them is more important than any of the others.
Hypocrite. This fool has made millions promoting guns and violence, and what, he thinks he can just "fix everything" with a tee shirt? This is the definition of inappropriate.
You don't know that. And no not bc he smokes weed?!!! Jeez. You realize he was consistently suspended from school, had assault of a bus driver, possession of jewelry that did not belong to him, possession of a buglary incident all on his rap sheet correct? He wasn't some innocent kid walking around in a gated community peering into windows. I call a spade a spade here.
And like I said, there are LOTS of tragedies, and an incident that was incorrectly politicized bc certain leaders like to cause unnecessary drama wherever they can is not one of them.
It is just in bad taste, and deliberately provocative. But I think Jamie Fox is an aggravating, scummy POS anyway so I am not surprised.
First of all, no, I only took you to task for what you said and secondly, hello, Enty asked for opinions. How is that "shitting" on everyone. I simply said no, not appropriate. Is any opinion you don't agree with "shitting" on people?
because this show is catered to lots of young people, i think he was just trying to send a message out, and to remind folks that sure we are having a grand ol time, but there is real shit going on in this world that we needn't forget. I'm sure that on the red carpet he was asked about the shirt, and it gave him a chance to remind people.
If anyone was out of line it was puggle- he expressed his view on character of Trayvon (based on what he didn't say) and then slammed Katie because she expressed her opinion on his character (based on some facts listed in the press.)
The intelligence level of these people you've attracted to this site is amusing. You all sit around and gossip about "half truths" and "maybe truths" about people who don't know about your existence. You throw stones, you judge, you cheer when your interpretation of justice is fulfilled (ie, something unresolved made you emotional, and you cheer when the person your gut said was guilty received punishment). How do you not see this person is simply taking stories from the UK Daily mail, and just making up 95% of the stories? And then something like this comes along. Is it appropriate? Are you kidding? Who the heck are you to speak on the subject? How exactly do you view yourselves? Your lives? I suggest you all go try to find a life. I'm not even remotely surprised that a bunch of gossiping losers such as yourselves seem to all be democrats, driving your decision making process with emotion. Kids got shot?! Get rid of guns!!! Emotional idiots.
No, not appropriate. None of you who claim that Martin was completely innocent know for sure. Personally, I think he was up to no good. But I don't know for sure, either. However, Jamie Foxx is a lying, racist sack of shit and anyone who knows anything about his background knows that. I can't stand him.
word. Unitl I started reading blogs I never realized just how many were anti-fur, vegan, ect. I have no problem if someone is doing their own thing and it's not affecting everyone else. but putting milder moral standards into laws (excluding torturing and the like, you know, common sense) is bad juju. you can't have restrictive gun laws and trumptet for same gender marriage, because at both you're looking at equality in groups of people (albeit guns and sexuality are mutually exclusive. Point being, to champion individual rights you need to accept other will also fall under that umbrella. and with gun control, I live in a rural area in PA where the second amendment is serious business, especially as a lot of 'weapons' are jsed for hunting, to eat the food you killed. others more "civilized" types (and I say that loosely) may make fun and say "Redneck" but if anything would ever happen that technology would fail, you're going to be seeking those people out to help feed your family. this is just an example I use for one of many problems in social constructs.
Ted Bundy was Republican. John Wayne Gacy was Democrat. all political connections are tainted leaving us sensible people to flap in the breeze.
@mybrother...Upon rereading, I am genuinely curious as to how gun laws are an equal rights issue. I am also genuinely curious as to your reasoning in equating gay marriage and gun rights unless you are arguing that both are an example of free will and if we're going to allow free will on the one hand, we must allow it on the other hand. If that is your reasoning, respectfully, it is faulty reasoning at best.
Equal rights does not just apply to gender, sexuality, race. It is giving all the equal opportunity to express their individual rights (as long as they don't hurt someone else's free speech). To me, , those that are against same gender marriage are iimposing their believe of on oothers who are entirely responsible for making their own decision. In being armed, most people that are pro-gun are extremely careful in making sure all safety measures are observed and *responsible* individuals take safety courses, ect. Generalization against one or the other is not iintelligent discourse, it is simply justification to have a certain lifestyle either way (pro-gun people in my neck in the area are anti-gay marriage, but believe the right to own as many guns as they can). Ia
respectfully, as you mention none of your own thoughts, your stance seems to be to go along with the crowd, at best. I'm more than happy to expound in a friendly manner, and I am always open to others' points of view. I just hope yours has intelligent basis for it.
and no, I'm not being smart, though I know it reads that way. I'm just not an apologist, and if you state my opinion is 'faulty at best'' you should know what I mean and appropriate responses.
I love the shirt. Every person pictured is an innocent victim of gun violence. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that tshirt at the MTV movie awards. Just because an actor makes movies with guns doesn't mean he can't speak out against gun violence. That's like saying James Gandolfini can't speak out against organized crime or Jack Nicholson can't go to church because he played the devil in The Witches of Eastwick.
Anyone who thinks Jamie Foxx is wearing that t-shirt to "honor" the victims of gun violence and send some sort of unicorn peace message is very gullible. His movies all feature gun violence. He profits from gun violence. He probably owns guns and/or employs people who protect him with guns. He's doing it to call attention to himself, first, last, and foremost. He wants attention for his politically "dangerous" message of faux equivalence.
How would you know who those kids are if Jamie Foxx didn't tell you and explain about his political message? Also, why is the Travyon photo in the middle and large sized while the kids are all arrayed around him? What an asshole.
Trayvon Martin is not a victim like the Newtown kids. He got confrontational with Zimmerman and beat Zimmerman badly. The fact that he wasn't expecting the pushback that he got is sad. Somehow Trayvon Martin got it in his head that it's okay to go all gangsta on the neighborhood watch nerd and that there wouldn't be any blowback. Oops.
Actually, there is an equivalence between Jaime Foxx, rich movie star, and Trayvon Martin, poor delusional fool. They both think they're cool and dangerous. Obviously, this particular delusion only works out well if you're rich and don't have to actually prove your point.
Um, shooting a gun and killing a young man, then doing nothing as said young man cries for his mother is not pushback. Trayvon Martin's only crime was not calling the police after George Zimmerman confronted him the first time. The incident was recorded on his cell phone. George acted first then continued to follow him, even after he directly asked him what the problem was (after which he did not identify himself as neighborhood watch). The coward then followed him for several blocks and then shot him after he lost the fight he started. People are acting as though Trayvon Martin wasn't a kid, wasn't someone's kid. We've all done dumb things, some people have pasts that they grown from and it makes them a better adult because of it- well, he doesn't get that chance. Don't prosecute him when you sure wouldn't want the world to judge you on what you did in your youth. As for the fight, if it were your son, you would have wanted him to do the same thing if some stranger in an automobile was following him. You certainly wouldn't have wanted him to lose his life over someone else's ungrounded suspicions. The only delusion here is those ignoring the tapes.
"Where do you get Jaime Fox "thinks he's cool and dangerous" Amartel?"
Where do you get the idea that he doesn't think that?
"Are you scared of black people?"
No, but you are. Not one mention of race in my comment but it's front and center and the first thing on your racist little mind. I pride myself on treating all celebrity douchebags with equal contempt.
You kidding me? I think is INAPPROPRIATE. The Trayvon Martin case isn't over yet so neither him or Zimmerman are guilty. I also have a hard time comparing Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old kid who had been suspended from school 3 times, to a bunch of innocent, defenseless little kids who probably hadn't even muttered a single curse word and were gunned down by a mad man. Get real. If I were a Sandy Hook parent I'd be insulted.
The older a person gets, the more mistakes they make. If one of the kids shot at the school was older, had a history of suspension, would his death be less important? What if you found out that one of the teachers had a secret life that you didn't approve of? Its really sad that a not so good teenager in your eyes can't be seen as a victim, especially since he is DEAD.DEAD.DEAD. and you think that's okay because he is not a completely innocent person. I guess we should all feel the same about you.
Would the naysayers have a different sentiment if it was Jordan Davis? A kid who was just playing his music loud and got murdered because of it? Would you feel that his face didn't deserve to be on the shirt? It doesn't matter a persons past or who you perceive them to be -- if they were innocent in that moment, doing harm to no one, why is it such an issue if the circumstances to which they've perished become such a bone of contention? At the end of the day, these people were murdered. And justice needs to be served in their honor.
Treyvon was minding his own business walking home from the convenience store (in the evening when school was closed) after buying some candy and soda like a typical teen.
George was the one driving round looking for trouble. He took one look at the color of Treyvon's skin and called the police who basically told him to mind his own business after questioning him.
George ignored them, took matters into his own hands, and perused Treyvon first by car, then on foot, and confronted him FOR NO GOOD REASON.
Treyvon was frightened (confirmed by the call he made to a friend), a scuffle ensued, Treyvon was getting the better of George, so George pulled out a gun and killed him.
That is the raw, unvarnished, spin free truth and there will be national hell to pay if George isn't held accountable for it.
Never have seen the appeal of Jamie Fox(with an extra X)
Only movie I've seen with him was the one with Tom Cruise. Cruise out acted him by a mile. (hate to say it, I kinda like some Cruise movies. I own Outsiders daggone it)
I think the picture of Martin is more recognizable than the pictures of the little ones from Sandy Hook, which is why it is front and center. The same picture seemed to be used for every news report for what seemed like forever. It grabs your attention quicker, and getting attention was the point of the shirt.
The lack of compassion in here has me disgusted. It amazes me that certain folk have an idea of how they think a person is just because of the way that they look. It shows in what you write and the adjectives that you use what you are really thinking and how you view certain people. You are gross.
The only thing George Zimmerman supporters could do to help this country is disappear. What part of adults shooting unarmed teenagers is wrong don't you child killing supporting lunatics understand. the only reason you sick psychopaths support Zimmerman is he represents more you color and mindset, a giant wuss who thought he was Wyatt Earp. I consider youmindset dangerous, guess I have the right to kill you know...paranoid freakshows
@iknowpeople, no I'm not threatening violence, and find it interesting that's what you read into it.
Justifiable outrage, and an ugly stigma associated with laws like Stand Your Ground, the gun control debate, and the NRA's increasingly compromised reputation.
All due respect if one doesn't like the the comments, skip over the "Your TURN". I hardly ever post anymore due to the clique-ishness on this board, but I wanted to say something so I did. Please go to regular posts where you can chat witwithin your comfort zone. There are a lot of good people here, though only few have deigned themselves to interact with me, so turn to those supportive of you and your ideas so this can be an enjoyable experience for those who want it to be. I don't care if you think different or you present it, that's great, but don't get on others. And if you think everyone's an idiot, ignore the post. Simple. Good grief.
My observation that your reasoning is faulty is based on a couple of things.
Society's regulation/prohibition of gay marriage and gun control is grounded in law and the Supreme Court's rulings on those laws based on changing social, moral and scientific norms (while recognizing that even the Constitution is not absolute and that exceptions exist in all aspects of the law) .
But rather than expound on my thoughts about the 2nd and 14th amendments it's easier to just argue the simplified equal rights aspect of what you said.
Equal rights under the law is fairly specifically applied to inherent traits of a person which may cause them to experience discrimination in civil and government spheres. As homosexuality is now understood (scientifically) to be an inherent trait, it is no wonder that the societal tide is beginning to turn in favor of treating homosexuals (legally) just as we treat heterosexuals (and the legal tide is likely to be relatively close on its heels).
The "choice" to be pro or anti gun is just that...a choice. As far as I know, we are not born pro/anti gun, we "become" one or the other based on life experience. We can "choose" at any time to switch to the other side without denying something unchangeable within us.
That is the short answer as to why I find your reasoning faulty (and if you read between the lines, it's not too hard to decern how I have come about my own beliefs). Having said that, you are certainly entitled to your beliefs and I appreciate your respectful response.
Lola, I honestly do understand your viewpoint, and I'd also like to give a point of view that may have not been voiced too much. Where I am from, gun owners hit 8IS* part ofthe cculture here. It is ingrained in many people that owning a firearm is to be expected in an area where bears and wild animals are not just a rare occuarnce, it's what occurs in a normal basis.
consider this: would you want an area prone to fires to be out of/anything, like fire hydrants, to eunavailable to those who may need them? I do not equate sexuality as a choice (unless someone is in a 3some) but the fault seems to be all eownerare plotting demise. As many are often lectured, it's unherite in more rural cultures to use guns out of necessitI appreciate intelligent disc race. Thanks.
and sorry bout typos. My phone is all messed up. Can hardly see the screen, ishattered terribly. Loltt.
Well @imahrtbrkbeat pretty sure neither you or I are on the jury of the trial and all we can do right now is speculate whether Zimmerman was being attacked and shot the gun in self-defense or if he shot it in cold-blood. Martin was only in the neighborhood after being suspended from school again and had even reportedly swung at a bus driver a few days earlier so you can't rule him out as an aggressor either until the trial is over and all the facts are presented. The one fact we do know is there was an altercation and arguing whereas those poor children never stood a chance and had no idea what was going on. Media wants to blow this story up. Why didn't Jamie Foxx have James Kouzaris and James Cooper's faces on his shirt if its all just about innocent people killed by guns?
? Hey, tell you what.. it's clear you're more concerned about an irresponsible and questionably stable child killer than the child he needlessly killed, but before you become too enamored of him, consider this: he's just a spineless, pitiable coward without that gun. Without it, he's got no balls or he wouldn't target children to prove he's a macho man. I guarantee it.
You are confusing sexual preference (heterosexuality, homosexuality, etc.) with the act of sex.
I am using the term "inherent" not "inherit". Inherent meaning an inseparable or unchangeable aspect of someone...homosexuality (all sexuality) is now thought to have a genetic basis. As such, it is an unchangeable characteristic of a person, or, inherent.
I also think you are confusing two different meanings of "inherit": 1. something learned from someone or something someone has given to you, like a legacy. 2. Genetic traits passed down to you by your parents.
Guns your dad gave you would be meaning #1.
Blue eyes would be meaning #2.
I believe that homosexuality is thought to be a gene mutation. Assuming that to be the case, homosexuality would be inherent but is unlikely to be inherited.
I think the shirt is fine. I'd buy one if the profits were going somewhere charitable.
ReplyDeleteYes
ReplyDeleteYes. They all died as a result of gun violence.
ReplyDeleteYes. Thank you Jaimie.
ReplyDeletenice to see a celebrity who cares about others. no problem with it.
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this Enty! I've been dying to know what the CDAN fam thought about this... there were many people who were very angry and upset with him for wearing this.
ReplyDeleteYes. I, frankly,am disturbed that this is even controversial.
ReplyDeleteKnow justice. Know peace. <3
ReplyDeleteThere are always ppl that just want to stir shit up... Just WAITING to be "offended". I see no issue with him wearing this shirt :)
ReplyDeleteI'm good with this....
ReplyDeleteWe know the sandy hook victims where innocents. We may never know what really happened in Trayvon's killing. It is Jamie's right to express his beliefs and feelings on the matters. If his point is he is against gun violence then I agree. If he is equating sandy hook victims with trayvon then it is natural that some may take issue with it and they have that right.
ReplyDeleteI think it's appropriate yes, and think he may have worn it to counter the police sergeant who was fired for making the Trayvon Martin shooting targets.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/14/florida-policeman-fired-using-trayvon-martin-shoot/
I doubt he knows anything about either catastrophy, only did it to be PC.
ReplyDeleteYes, and I'm with @Dasha.
ReplyDeleteTotally appropriate.
ReplyDeleteMore than appropriate. Humans need to evolve past killing each other. Every reminder helps.
ReplyDeleteOf course it's appropriate.
ReplyDeleteNo problem with it.
ReplyDeleteNo issue here.
ReplyDeleteEvery kid on that t-shirt is dead because of two mentally unstable men with access to guns.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, if you put a picture of every kid in teh U.S. that dies from a gunshot every year, they wouldn't fit on a single t-shirt.
Trayvon was innocent, just like those kids. The jackass was following him, which had to have scared the shit out of the kid. He thought he was defending himself (imo), and dies because of it. All of yhe people on the shirt were innocents who lost their lives to gun violence. I have no issue with what he wore.
ReplyDeleteHe wants justice for a young man senselessly killed by gun violence, the same way the other kids were. I see no conflict at all.I also agree with him 100%.
ReplyDeleteThe message in the shirt is clear. But I don't think the mtv movie awards are the place for this. You have everyone wearing their most flashy outfits and laughing and celebrating. Look at Kesha. I think if you want to send a serious message, doing it where people are making obvious ploys for attention could make it seem like that is what he is doing.
ReplyDeleteBrian, no they wouldn't but the famous ones are also symbolic for the untold others.
ReplyDeleteThis is the first thing that made me smile since yesterday.
I think it was the perfect place to wear it as many teens watching it have lost classmates due to gun violence. I love the top. I tried to find one online to get one for myself but could not find one. Anyone else have better luck?
ReplyDeleteThe kids at Sandy Hook are watching the mtv movie awards and being comforted by this shirt? I 'm glad he feels so strongly about wanting peace. But i hope he did more than wear a shirt to an award show. Especially one wear people see him then kesha dressed as a ghoul. It's easy to dismiss and disregard as another publicity stunt. Now if he was advertising the sale of these shirts (then you could find one) and donating the money these families.
DeleteNo problem with at all
ReplyDeleteJustice should be the same for everyone. **looking at YOU Lohag**
ReplyDeletehopefully someone makes a shirt with all the faces of those killed 9/11/01, and victims hurt during the bombing of the USS Cole, millions of people slaughtered in the genocide caused by Saddam Hussein, and have proceeds go to support victims, survivors' families, and those who rescued.
ReplyDeletei also hope that millions who have been affected by cancer can have their pictures put on shirts as a group to draw awareness to cancer and assist caregivers who care for these individuals.
and instead of crapping on the fact that mental health is not seen as a vital part of the judicial system in many places, maybe people should petition to consider strengthening legal precedents for mental health concerns in criminal and civil cases. (This is not in response to Sandy Hook kids. this is in response to Trayvon Martin, and I don't have a personal feeling on thse situation besides the awful fact a child was murdered).
An 11 year old died of leukemia that I know. no press attention there. In situations such as TM it's made into a political issue which take away from so many other awful tragedies that occur with kids.
for those that don't have a sense of humor I wasn't endorsing actually making shurts of terminally ill patients. I have no use for politcizing things like this and making it any more than the awful tragedy it is. people like myself are who deal with the actual trauma and sadness that result these actions. i completely respect if others' opinions are different, but doesn't mean I am wrong.
have a great day!
absolutely yes. At least he took his few minutes on stage to get a message out.
ReplyDeleteIt's a free country, good grief, let him wear what he wants to wear.
ReplyDeleteGood for him.
ReplyDeleteVery appropriate.
ReplyDeleteum no. Trayvon Martin, no matter what people want to tell you, was NOT someone to be held in high esteem. Anyone who has seen the undoctored photos of the guy who shot him would know that. It is like when Sean Bell died here. A thug with a rap sheet 10 miles long, associating with known weapon and drug traffickers, and tries to run down undercover cops bc hes out until 5am on his wedding night. They named a street after him here in NYC. There are many things that are tragedies (like Bpston, or Sandy), people reaping what they sow bc they are not good humans is not one of them
ReplyDeleteAmen.
DeleteWTF Is wrong with you people? Because he made mistakes in life he deserved to be murdered? He was followed because a crazy man with a gun felt like he didn't belong in a particular neighborhood. The crazy gunman was the aggressor and you two racists are cheering him on. I hope your kids never end up like Trayvon, if in fact you two losers have any.
DeleteKind of like the gun violence he has been happy to ride to box office success & millions in his pocket? Hypocrite, so no, not appropriate.
ReplyDeleteDoesnt set well with me.
ReplyDeleteGood god, Katie, how the hell did you come to the conclusion he was not a good human being? Was it because he smoked weed? He was being followed and was then approached by the guy. It was a fight or flight response. Give me a fucking break.
ReplyDeleteNo, not appropriate, imo.
ReplyDelete@Puggle - she's been shitting on everyone today.
ReplyDeleteNope. Not appropriate.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I find potentially offensive (and it doesn't offend me personally, but possibly others) is that he made Treyvon's picture so much bigger than all the others. I get that he did it so that people would see the point he was making, but these are all kids who never got to realize their dreams. Not one of them is more important than any of the others.
ReplyDeleteHypocrite. This fool has made millions promoting guns and violence, and what, he thinks he can just "fix everything" with a tee shirt? This is the definition of inappropriate.
ReplyDeleteYou don't know that. And no not bc he smokes weed?!!! Jeez. You realize he was consistently suspended from school, had assault of a bus driver, possession of jewelry that did not belong to him, possession of a buglary incident all on his rap sheet correct? He wasn't some innocent kid walking around in a gated community peering into windows. I call a spade a spade here.
ReplyDeleteAnd like I said, there are LOTS of tragedies, and an incident that was incorrectly politicized bc certain leaders like to cause unnecessary drama wherever they can is not one of them.
It is just in bad taste, and deliberately provocative. But I think Jamie Fox is an aggravating, scummy POS anyway so I am not surprised.
@Cathy,
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, no, I only took you to task for what you said and secondly, hello, Enty asked for opinions. How is that "shitting" on everyone. I simply said no, not appropriate. Is any opinion you don't agree with "shitting" on people?
because this show is catered to lots of young people, i think he was just trying to send a message out, and to remind folks that sure we are having a grand ol time, but there is real shit going on in this world that we needn't forget. I'm sure that on the red carpet he was asked about the shirt, and it gave him a chance to remind people.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone was out of line it was puggle- he expressed his view on character of Trayvon (based on what he didn't say) and then slammed Katie because she expressed her opinion on his character (based on some facts listed in the press.)
ReplyDeleteThe intelligence level of these people you've attracted to this site is amusing. You all sit around and gossip about "half truths" and "maybe truths" about people who don't know about your existence. You throw stones, you judge, you cheer when your interpretation of justice is fulfilled (ie, something unresolved made you emotional, and you cheer when the person your gut said was guilty received punishment). How do you not see this person is simply taking stories from the UK Daily mail, and just making up 95% of the stories? And then something like this comes along. Is it appropriate? Are you kidding? Who the heck are you to speak on the subject? How exactly do you view yourselves? Your lives? I suggest you all go try to find a life. I'm not even remotely surprised that a bunch of gossiping losers such as yourselves seem to all be democrats, driving your decision making process with emotion. Kids got shot?! Get rid of guns!!! Emotional idiots.
ReplyDeleteNo, not appropriate. None of you who claim that Martin was completely innocent know for sure. Personally, I think he was up to no good. But I don't know for sure, either. However, Jamie Foxx is a lying, racist sack of shit and anyone who knows anything about his background knows that. I can't stand him.
ReplyDeleteTrayvon was on his way back home you racist fuck-wad
Deleteword. Unitl I started reading blogs I never realized just how many were anti-fur, vegan, ect. I have no problem if someone is doing their own thing and it's not affecting everyone else. but putting milder moral standards into laws (excluding torturing and the like, you know, common sense) is bad juju. you can't have restrictive gun laws and trumptet for same gender marriage, because at both you're looking at equality in groups of people (albeit guns and sexuality are mutually exclusive. Point being, to champion individual rights you need to accept other will also fall under that umbrella. and with gun control, I live in a rural area in PA where the second amendment is serious business, especially as a lot of 'weapons' are jsed for hunting, to eat the food you killed. others more "civilized" types (and I say that loosely) may make fun and say "Redneck" but if anything would ever happen that technology would fail, you're going to be seeking those people out to help feed your family. this is just an example I use for one of many problems in social constructs.
ReplyDeleteTed Bundy was Republican. John Wayne Gacy was Democrat. all political connections are tainted leaving us sensible people to flap in the breeze.
@mybrother...Upon rereading, I am genuinely curious as to how gun laws are an equal rights issue. I am also genuinely curious as to your reasoning in equating gay marriage and gun rights unless you are arguing that both are an example of free will and if we're going to allow free will on the one hand, we must allow it on the other hand. If that is your reasoning, respectfully, it is faulty reasoning at best.
DeleteEqual rights does not just apply to gender, sexuality, race. It is giving all the equal opportunity to express their individual rights (as long as they don't hurt someone else's free speech). To me, , those that are against same gender marriage are iimposing their believe of on oothers who are entirely responsible for making their own decision. In being armed, most people that are pro-gun are extremely careful in making sure all safety measures are observed and *responsible* individuals take safety courses, ect. Generalization against one or the other is not iintelligent discourse, it is simply justification to have a certain lifestyle either way (pro-gun people in my neck in the area are anti-gay marriage, but believe the right to own as many guns as they can). Ia
Deleterespectfully, as you mention none of your own thoughts, your stance seems to be to go along with the crowd, at best. I'm more than happy to expound in a friendly manner, and I am always open to others' points of view. I just hope yours has intelligent basis for it.
and no, I'm not being smart, though I know it reads that way. I'm just not an apologist, and if you state my opinion is 'faulty at best'' you should know what I mean and appropriate responses.
I love the shirt. Every person pictured is an innocent victim of gun violence. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that tshirt at the MTV movie awards. Just because an actor makes movies with guns doesn't mean he can't speak out against gun violence. That's like saying James Gandolfini can't speak out against organized crime or Jack Nicholson can't go to church because he played the devil in The Witches of Eastwick.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who thinks Jamie Foxx is wearing that t-shirt to "honor" the victims of gun violence and send some sort of unicorn peace message is very gullible. His movies all feature gun violence. He profits from gun violence. He probably owns guns and/or employs people who protect him with guns.
ReplyDeleteHe's doing it to call attention to himself, first, last, and foremost. He wants attention for his politically "dangerous" message of faux equivalence.
How would you know who those kids are if Jamie Foxx didn't tell you and explain about his political message? Also, why is the Travyon photo in the middle and large sized while the kids are all arrayed around him?
What an asshole.
Trayvon Martin is not a victim like the Newtown kids. He got confrontational with Zimmerman and beat Zimmerman badly. The fact that he wasn't expecting the pushback that he got is sad. Somehow Trayvon Martin got it in his head that it's okay to go all gangsta on the neighborhood watch nerd and that there wouldn't be any blowback. Oops.
Actually, there is an equivalence between Jaime Foxx, rich movie star, and Trayvon Martin, poor delusional fool. They both think they're cool and dangerous. Obviously, this particular delusion only works out well if you're rich and don't have to actually prove your point.
Um, shooting a gun and killing a young man, then doing nothing as said young man cries for his mother is not pushback. Trayvon Martin's only crime was not calling the police after George Zimmerman confronted him the first time. The incident was recorded on his cell phone. George acted first then continued to follow him, even after he directly asked him what the problem was (after which he did not identify himself as neighborhood watch). The coward then followed him for several blocks and then shot him after he lost the fight he started. People are acting as though Trayvon Martin wasn't a kid, wasn't someone's kid. We've all done dumb things, some people have pasts that they grown from and it makes them a better adult because of it- well, he doesn't get that chance. Don't prosecute him when you sure wouldn't want the world to judge you on what you did in your youth. As for the fight, if it were your son, you would have wanted him to do the same thing if some stranger in an automobile was following him. You certainly wouldn't have wanted him to lose his life over someone else's ungrounded suspicions. The only delusion here is those ignoring the tapes.
ReplyDeleteWhere do you get Jaime Fox "thinks he's cool and dangerous" Amartel? Are you scared of black people?
ReplyDeleteOh God. Here cones the race card. Jamie Fox has fulfilled his desire to be talked about.
ReplyDelete"Where do you get Jaime Fox "thinks he's cool and dangerous" Amartel?"
ReplyDeleteWhere do you get the idea that he doesn't think that?
"Are you scared of black people?"
No, but you are. Not one mention of race in my comment but it's front and center and the first thing on your racist little mind. I pride myself on treating all celebrity douchebags with equal contempt.
You kidding me? I think is INAPPROPRIATE. The Trayvon Martin case isn't over yet so neither him or Zimmerman are guilty. I also have a hard time comparing Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old kid who had been suspended from school 3 times, to a bunch of innocent, defenseless little kids who probably hadn't even muttered a single curse word and were gunned down by a mad man. Get real. If I were a Sandy Hook parent I'd be insulted.
ReplyDeleteThe older a person gets, the more mistakes they make. If one of the kids shot at the school was older, had a history of suspension, would his death be less important? What if you found out that one of the teachers had a secret life that you didn't approve of? Its really sad that a not so good teenager in your eyes can't be seen as a victim, especially since he is DEAD.DEAD.DEAD. and you think that's okay because he is not a completely innocent person. I guess we should all feel the same about you.
DeleteWould the naysayers have a different sentiment if it was Jordan Davis? A kid who was just playing his music loud and got murdered because of it? Would you feel that his face didn't deserve to be on the shirt? It doesn't matter a persons past or who you perceive them to be -- if they were innocent in that moment, doing harm to no one, why is it such an issue if the circumstances to which they've perished become such a bone of contention? At the end of the day, these people were murdered. And justice needs to be served in their honor.
ReplyDelete@dumbhollywood +++++111111
ReplyDeleteNewtown kids were in school when they got shot. Not looking for trouble.
ReplyDeleteTrayvon Martin: not in school, AWOL, roaming around looking for trouble.
I'll say it again...
ReplyDeleteLOL at insulting the intelligence of people for commenting on gossip blogs, and doing so in a comment...on a gossip blog.
Pot, thy name is kettle.
As long as I don't have to watch that effing Law Abiding Citizen again, I don't care what he wears.
ReplyDelete@Amartel, way to rewrite history.
ReplyDeleteTreyvon was minding his own business walking home from the convenience store (in the evening when school was closed) after buying some candy and soda like a typical teen.
George was the one driving round looking for trouble. He took one look at the color of Treyvon's skin and called the police who basically told him to mind his own business after questioning him.
George ignored them, took matters into his own hands, and perused Treyvon first by car, then on foot, and confronted him FOR NO GOOD REASON.
Treyvon was frightened (confirmed by the call he made to a friend), a scuffle ensued, Treyvon was getting the better of George, so George pulled out a gun and killed him.
That is the raw, unvarnished, spin free truth and there will be national hell to pay if George isn't held accountable for it.
@phoenix...And just what would that "national hell to pay" be? Are you threatening violence?
DeleteAmused by all the people who seem to have been on scene the night of the shooting. Will you all be called as witnesses?
With regard to the shirt, I could give a rat's ass.
Never have seen the appeal of Jamie Fox(with an extra X)
ReplyDeleteOnly movie I've seen with him was the one with Tom Cruise. Cruise out acted him by a mile.
(hate to say it, I kinda like some Cruise movies. I own Outsiders daggone it)
I think the picture of Martin is more recognizable than the pictures of the little ones from Sandy Hook, which is why it is front and center. The same picture seemed to be used for every news report for what seemed like forever. It grabs your attention quicker, and getting attention was the point of the shirt.
ReplyDeleteThe lack of compassion in here has me disgusted. It amazes me that certain folk have an idea of how they think a person is just because of the way that they look. It shows in what you write and the adjectives that you use what you are really thinking and how you view certain people. You are gross.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing George Zimmerman supporters could do to help this country is disappear. What part of adults shooting unarmed teenagers is wrong don't you child killing supporting lunatics understand. the only reason you sick psychopaths support Zimmerman is he represents more you color and mindset, a giant wuss who thought he was Wyatt Earp. I consider youmindset dangerous, guess I have the right to kill you know...paranoid freakshows
ReplyDeleteIm thinking no t shirts of dead people. Problem solved.
ReplyDeleteWell this went horribly awry.
ReplyDeleteLol! I'm so glad your comment rounds this sh*tshow out, bc wow.
Delete@iknowpeople, no I'm not threatening violence, and find it interesting that's what you read into it.
ReplyDeleteJustifiable outrage, and an ugly stigma associated with laws like Stand Your Ground, the gun control debate, and the NRA's increasingly compromised reputation.
Nice backtracking after being called out. Didn't say, though, how you have all this on scene commentary and if you will be testifying.
DeleteAll due respect if one doesn't like the the comments, skip over the "Your TURN". I hardly ever post anymore due to the clique-ishness on this board, but I wanted to say something so I did. Please go to regular posts where you can chat witwithin your comfort zone. There are a lot of good people here, though only few have deigned themselves to interact with me, so turn to those supportive of you and your ideas so this can be an enjoyable experience for those who want it to be. I don't care if you think different or you present it, that's great, but don't get on others. And if you think everyone's an idiot, ignore the post. Simple. Good grief.
ReplyDeleteNope. Not appropriate at all.
ReplyDelete@mybrother...
ReplyDeleteMy observation that your reasoning is faulty is based on a couple of things.
Society's regulation/prohibition of gay marriage and gun control is grounded in law and the Supreme Court's rulings on those laws based on changing social, moral and scientific norms (while recognizing that even the Constitution is not absolute and that exceptions exist in all aspects of the law) .
But rather than expound on my thoughts about the 2nd and 14th amendments it's easier to just argue the simplified equal rights aspect of what you said.
Equal rights under the law is fairly specifically applied to inherent traits of a person which may cause them to experience discrimination in civil and government spheres. As homosexuality is now understood (scientifically) to be an inherent trait, it is no wonder that the societal tide is beginning to turn in favor of treating homosexuals (legally) just as we treat heterosexuals (and the legal tide is likely to be relatively close on its heels).
The "choice" to be pro or anti gun is just that...a choice. As far as I know, we are not born pro/anti gun, we "become" one or the other based on life experience. We can "choose" at any time to switch to the other side without denying something unchangeable within us.
That is the short answer as to why I find your reasoning faulty (and if you read between the lines, it's not too hard to decern how I have come about my own beliefs). Having said that, you are certainly entitled to your beliefs and I appreciate your respectful response.
Lola, I honestly do understand your viewpoint, and I'd also like to give a point of view that may have not been voiced too much. Where I am from, gun owners hit 8IS* part ofthe cculture here. It is ingrained in many people that owning a firearm is to be expected in an area where bears and wild animals are not just a rare occuarnce, it's what occurs in a normal basis.
ReplyDeleteconsider this: would you want an area prone to fires to be out of/anything, like fire hydrants, to eunavailable to those who may need them? I do not equate sexuality as a choice (unless someone is in a 3some) but the fault seems to be all eownerare plotting demise. As many are often lectured, it's unherite in more rural cultures to use guns out of necessitI appreciate intelligent disc race. Thanks.
and sorry bout typos. My phone is all messed up. Can hardly see the screen, ishattered terribly. Loltt.
i
Well @imahrtbrkbeat pretty sure neither you or I are on the jury of the trial and all we can do right now is speculate whether Zimmerman was being attacked and shot the gun in self-defense or if he shot it in cold-blood. Martin was only in the neighborhood after being suspended from school again and had even reportedly swung at a bus driver a few days earlier so you can't rule him out as an aggressor either until the trial is over and all the facts are presented. The one fact we do know is there was an altercation and arguing whereas those poor children never stood a chance and had no idea what was going on. Media wants to blow this story up. Why didn't Jamie Foxx have James Kouzaris and James Cooper's faces on his shirt if its all just about innocent people killed by guns?
ReplyDelete? Hey, tell you what.. it's clear you're more concerned about an irresponsible and questionably stable child killer than the child he needlessly killed, but before you become too enamored of him, consider this: he's just a spineless, pitiable coward without that gun. Without it, he's got no balls or he wouldn't target children to prove he's a macho man. I guarantee it.
ReplyDelete@mybrother...
ReplyDeleteYou are confusing sexual preference (heterosexuality, homosexuality, etc.) with the act of sex.
I am using the term "inherent" not "inherit". Inherent meaning an inseparable or unchangeable aspect of someone...homosexuality (all sexuality) is now thought to have a genetic basis. As such, it is an unchangeable characteristic of a person, or, inherent.
I also think you are confusing two different meanings of "inherit": 1. something learned from someone or something someone has given to you, like a legacy. 2. Genetic traits passed down to you by your parents.
Guns your dad gave you would be meaning #1.
Blue eyes would be meaning #2.
I believe that homosexuality is thought to be a gene mutation. Assuming that to be the case, homosexuality would be inherent but is unlikely to be inherited.