Trayvon Martin: A Child, or a Thug Wannabe?

The New American ^ | 15 July 2013 | Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.

[VitacoreVision]

It is Trayvon Martin, no one else, who has put the lie to the notion that he was some innocent child.

Trayvon Martin: A Child, or a Thug Wannabe?

The New American
15 July 2013

George Zimmerman has been acquitted in the shooting death of "the child," the "young boy," Trayvon Martin.

As should go without saying, it is of course a tragedy that our world is such that it regularly claims human life. It is particularly tragic when young people, like Martin, lose their lives in circumstances that could have so easily been avoided.

But Martin was no "child." He was not yet a legal adult, but at 17 years of age he could, with a parent’s permission, kill and die for the United States military. And 17-year-olds, particularly when they are six feet tall, intoxicated on drugs, and physically fit, as was Martin, can and do kill and die in the streets of America.

Yet it isn't just Zimmerman's persecutors who are fond of sanitizing Martin's character.

Writing for Front Page magazine, Arnold Ahlert castigates his fellow conservatives for acting badly.

In "Framing Trayvon," Ahlert contends that "many conservatives" have engaged in a "demonization campaign" against Martin -- or "Trayvon," as Ahlert calls him -- that runs "parallel" to that promoted against Zimmerman by such "racial arsonists" as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Conservatives "have hastily embraced caricatures of Trayvon Martin, painting him as a vicious street thug who deserved his fate."

Ahlert insists that Martin sounded like "little more than a rambunctious teenager" whose family and friends describe as "a fine young man," "warm and funny," and "a standout athlete with an enormous appetite."

Where do we begin?

First, Ahlert is correct that, from day one, the “racial arsonists” did indeed rush to demonize Zimmerman. Yet he fails to so much as hint at the fact that the demonization of Zimmerman demanded the idealization of Martin. By now, everyone who’s paid any attention to this case is all too familiar with the media’s tireless juxtaposition of Zimmerman’s mug shots alongside the outdated pictures of a prepubescent Martin.

Had Ahlert mentioned this, it would immediately become clear that it isn’t “conservatives,” but Martin who supplied us with a negative caricature of Martin. More accurately, as details emerged since February of 2012, time has exploded the idyllic caricature of Martin that the “anti-racists” have labored to embed in the popular imagination. The Martin who had that fateful encounter with Zimmerman was a far cry from the sixth-grader whose photograph was plastered all over the media for months after the shooting. As Ahlert himself admits, at the time of his death, Martin “used foul language, made obscene gestures on camera, probably smoked marijuana, and engaged in other troublesome teenage behavior” — like getting caught with possession of what was likely stolen jewelry, getting repeatedly suspended from school, and attempting to assault a bus driver.

This brings us to a second point.

Neither conservatives nor anyone else has made Martin out to be a vicious thug, as Ahlert says. What the record shows is that he was a thug of a sort, a thug wannabe, if you will. At the very least, he was thuggish, even if he may not have been a full-blown thug.

And we know this, not just from his record, but solely from the fact that he unleashed a torrent of violence upon Zimmerman.

No one credibly disputes that Martin threw the first punch. From what has been determined, it was he who threw every other punch after that as well. To be clear, there was no exchange of blows between Martin and Zimmerman. Rather, Zimmerman was on his back as Martin repeatedly pounded on him.

And it is not as if Zimmerman was in his face posing an imminent danger to Martin. Had this been the case, then perhaps the latter would have been justified in launching a preemptive punch (even if he would not have been justified in punching his face into the ground after he had succeeded in knocking him down).

Had Martin really feared for his life when he noticed that Zimmerman had been following him, and had he conducted himself in a non-thuggish way, then he would have done what Zimmerman did when he first observed Martin: call the authorities. Martin could’ve ended his phone call with Rachel Jeantel — to whom he referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy a** cracker” — and called the police.

Instead, he chose to lie in wait for Zimmerman before jumping him.

This is the official account of the events of that fateful evening when Martin’s life ended — an account that the jury in Florida accepted and that no one has been able to contradict.

Contra Ahlert, to acknowledge these facts is not to say that Martin “deserved” to be killed. Much less has anyone, least of all the “conservatives” whom Ahlert lectures, even remotely insinuated that Martin deserved to be killed because of his lifestyle.

However, to concede the facts is to concede both that Martin did indeed act thuggishly and that Zimmerman was just as justified in shooting him as an elderly woman would be justified in shooting an assailant who had her pinned on the ground while striking her.

Though painful, we mustn’t lose sight of the realities of this issue — even if the Zimmerman haters, including some alleged “conservatives,” insist upon calling them “caricatures.”

[goodnesswins]

It isn’t clear yet?????

[BenLurkin]

It appears that Martin decided that being followed by a gay man was legitimate provocation for a brutal assault.

[Christie at the beach]

More like a young man versus a child. So, why do they disrespect him; it is very telling/and a disconnect to reality to do so. He certainly was not guided by his parents nor school instructors, or his friends well enough because he had a pattern of issues at school. He was being moved back and forth from parent to parent which didn’t help stability for him.

I am sorry he lost his life but you don’t go around attacking people because people react differently. I understand that he had been removed from school and had a incident with his bus driver. While in Sanford, he was already angry upset.

[VitacoreVision]

True.

Trayvon Martin attacked a man he thought was gay. This sounds like a Hate Crime to me. He also stereotyped gays as rapists.

[nickcarraway]

I know people want to portray him as a megaHitler, but to be, his facebook page suggests and everything suggest he was a wannabe and a wimp.

[arthurus]

The leftist claim. and Ahlert’s, is that it was Zimmerman’s duty to take whatever Martin chose to dish out to him, even unto death, because Martin was black and Zimmerman is not. The drive here is to establish as principle of law that no white man is legally justified in defending himself against a black man, regardless of circumstances.

[nickcarraway]

In "Framing Trayvon," Ahlert contends that "many conservatives" have engaged in a "demonization campaign" against Martin -- or "Trayvon," as Ahlert calls him -- that runs "parallel" to that promoted against Zimmerman by such "racial arsonists" as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Conservatives "have hastily embraced caricatures of Trayvon Martin, painting him as a vicious street thug who deserved his fate."

The cold hard truth is, do people really want to be just like Sharpton or Jackson on the other side?

[anonsquared]

I have been waiting for the multi-millionaire record label owners and music producers who have profiting from pushing the “gangsta” lifestyle on youths like Martin to stand up and take responsibility for his death and the deaths of so many in the black community.

Waiting...

Still waiting...

[South40]

It isn’t clear yet?????

Good question. Trayvon's Twitter handle was "No Limit Nigga", and he tweeted about manufacturing his own drugs. Factor in the fighting, stealing, guns, and other clues and that's a thug wannabe if one ever was one.

[chris37]

The correct answer is violent criminal.

[2ndDivisionVet]

The problem has been the focus on irrelevant arguments – some of which are actually unsupported by the evidence.

1. ‘GZ racially profiled TM’ There is no evidence of this.

2. ‘GZ disobeyed an order by the police’ * The civilian dispatcher, Sean Noffke, testified that he did not give GZ an order and, in fact, he, like his fellow dispatchers, are trained not make comments that sound like commands. * Noffke also testified under cross that, as a result of his asking GZ which way TM was going, GZ could have reasonably interpreted this as being asked to follow Martin. * It is also not a crime in Florida to disregard a comment made by a civilian dispatcher.

3. ‘GZ got out of his car’ Not a crime on public property and not negligent either.
4. ‘GZ followed TM’ Again, anyone can follow anyone on a public street unless the followee has obtained a restraining order against the follower and even there, the RS only places time, place, and manner restrictions on the person enjoined.

5. ‘GZ wasn’t really injured’ * Under Florida’s self-defense laws, one doesn’t have to be injured AT ALL to use deadly force * No one is required to refrain from defending himself while another is engaged in or attempting to commit a felony.

6. ‘TM is dead through no fault of his own’ * If you believe that TM assaulted GZ, then he IS dead as a result of his own actions.

7. ‘GZ could have left’ * Under Florida law, there is not a duty to withdraw rather than use deadly force * TM was straddling GZ so how the latter was supposed to leave the scene is unanswered.

8. ‘GZ was armed and TM wasn’t’ * One’s fists can be considered weapons and can result in severe bodily harm or death.

* GZ was legally carrying a weapon * There is no requirement under the law that the same weapon be used by the assailant * A homeowner can kill an intruder whether or not he has been threatened * Those that attack cannot feign surprise if they are met with superior firepower.

9. ‘Stand Your Ground!’ * SYG is NOT at issue in this trial. * The defense is a classic self-defense case.

10. ‘Black men NEVER get to use SYG!’ * Wrong http://tinyurl.com/nboht35

11. ‘GZ is a man and TM was a boy!’ * As if ‘boys’ don’t commit murder, rape, and assault everyday in this country.

[arthurus]

Trayvon Martin attacked a man he thought was gay. This sounds like a Hate Crime to me. He also stereotyped gays as rapists.

I think it was Showandtell who made that identification.

[Jeff Head]

Zimmerman had a broken nose and bruises to his face, and lacerations and bruises on the back of his head.

Zimmerman also had grass stains on his back and the back of his legs.

Martin, OTOH, had grass stains on his knees, and had only two injuries. Scraped knuckles, and the single bullet wound that killed him.

It is clear what happened. And so it is time that we removed this lie:

And replaced it with the truth:

But with the race baiting, hate America, get "whitey," crowd, the truth of what happened does not matter. Advancing their goal of "fundamentally changing" America is all that matters.

One thing...for once, Obama actually got it right. Now that we know so much more about Trayvon, it is true...if Obama had a boy, hhe would have been just like Trayvon.

ZIMMERMAN NOT GUILTY!

[Java4Jay]

Good looking kid, appears he turned bad last couple years.

Sad

[arthurus]

3. ‘GZ got out of his car’ Not a crime on public property and not negligent either.

That may not have even been "public" property in a gated community.

[Cyman]

He dead

[infowarrior]

"a standout athlete with an enormous appetite."

One of the first thoughts that occurred to me, when this first erupted onto the national scene, was this; Trayvon Martin played varsity football, right? When the meme of 'fine young man senselessly gunned down started, I withheld from forming any opinion one way, or the other, and just waited to see if a certain 'dog' 'barked' or not. That 'dog' was any college chiming in that they had been scouting this young man for inclusion into their football program, and were saddened by the loss of his potential to their program.

The 'dog' did *not* 'bark', as no college came forward to assert this, although I waited several weeks to see if one would. Not a single college stated that they were scouting Trayvon Martin at all, let alone seriously.

This told me volumes, as if he were the athletic paragon that was being claimed, there could only be one possible explanation as to why colleges would have little to no interest in him. That explanation would be that he had discipline problems of a rather serious nature.So it turned out to be...

the infowarrior

[gleeaikin]

There is mention of past marijuna use. Usually people on MJ are nonviolent. Was a drug test performed on Martin’s body and what were the results??

[TChad]

Conservatives "have hastily embraced caricatures of Trayvon Martin, painting him as a vicious street thug who deserved his fate."

Forget this "caricature" nonsense and focus on what Trayvon Martin DID.

Do you see any evidence that he might have been a vicious street thug?