The Ugly Truth About Trayvon Martin

There is one reason and one reason alone that Trayvon Martin is dead today and that reason is he attacked a man with a licensed firearm who used it. It’s not pretty – it’s not pleasant – but it’s true.

George Zimmerman did not jump (read attack) Martin. Just the opposite. Martin attacked him. All else notwithstanding, Martin jumped Zimmerman for no defendable reason, and he paid the ultimate price for his ill-conceived decision.

George Zimmerman did not kill Martin because of the color of his skin, and it is a damnable lie to claim otherwise. George Zimmerman shot and killed Martin because Martin was attacking and beating him. The ugly truth is just that simple. To raise the specter of skin color and to clothe the event in vestiges of racialization and a zeitgeist of rampant racism is nothing more than an attempt to obfuscate that single, salient truth.

George Zimmerman was a member of his neighborhood watch. The function of a neighborhood watch is to watch and report suspicious and/or unlawful activities taking place in a particular neighborhood. It was dark, it was raining, and Martin appeared to be acting suspiciously. A neighborhood watch volunteer following for purposes of observation and giving the police accurate information is not an assault on color. I submit it is inculcated denial to not recognize this.

The jury might have been prevented from hearing certain facts about Martin, but those of us in the public weren’t. Space doesn’t permit me to detail all in print as I will in on-air interviews, but suffice it to say the figurative exhumation of Martin in the image of Emmett Till is an affront to even the most ignorant of racialists and morally opprobrious in the truest definition, but it’s obviously not out of character for those eager to do same.

Emmett Till was the 14-year-old young man who was brutally murdered and mutilated specifically because of his skin color after he allegedly engaged flirtatiously with a 21-year-old white woman who owned a store in Money, Mississippi.

For Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder to now announce the Department of Justice (DOJ) is opening an investigation to see if Martin’s civil rights were violated by George Zimmerman is cruel irony. Holder refused to have the DOJ investigate much less prosecute one of the most undeniably grievous incidents of civil rights violations since the end of Jim Crow. I’m speaking of the New Black Panthers voter intimidation in Philadelphia, PA in 2008.

I returned home to Florida Saturday after spending some three weeks on the road. About two hours after the jury in the George Zimmerman trial handed down the “not guilty” verdict, as I was exiting my local pharmacy, I overheard a man say, with a degree of sarcasm, to the man with him “They feel if we don’t care about killing ourselves why should they?”

he man, who happened to be an American of color, was wrong. We (read Americans) do care that blacks are killing themselves in record numbers. It’s those they extol as so-called leaders who do not care. Holder isn’t having the DOJ look into the civil rights of the more than 200 people killed in Chicago so far this year. Jesse Jackson lives in Chicago, but he isn’t leading any marches or protests against the black-on-black murders there. And perhaps it’s out of respect for territory, but Al Sharpton isn’t leading any there either. Sarcasm intended.

A report released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics shows 8,000-9,000 blacks are murdered in the United States each year, and 93 percent of those murders are committed by other blacks.

How many of those families have Obama, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton, or the same media trollops who are fanning the flames of “It’s because Martin was black,” spoken out regarding those ugly statistics?

Those who emphasize that Martin was unarmed should be asked “what if he had been?” If Martin was violent enough to attack and beat George Zimmerman when Martin didn’t have a weapon – what would he have done were he to have had one?

No parents should outlive their children. To do so creates a vacuum of inconsolable loss. And certainly the Martin family is suffering from the loss of their son. But specific to that point, it is a transpicuous and vulgar display of race-mongering by mobocrats who use race as currency to validate their own existence.

Like it or not, agree or not, Martin made a decision to behave like a common street thug and gangsta when he attacked George Zimmerman. That decision speaks volumes about his character, (or lack thereof). There is an attempt to portray Martin as worthy of deification, but I submit that he chose to attack another person for what amounts to no reason at all and that speaks volumes pursuant to his real character.

How many reading this have children who would physically attack someone for the reasons Martin did? I know, without hesitation, that my son wouldn’t. The ugly truth is that Martin was given to the violent mentality of thinking he could bully a white person, and it cost him his life.

Just a quick note, when reading an interview by the young lady talking to TM then night he died, she said 2 very interesting things in the same interview. The first was that she encouraged TM to run, but he would not, because his brother was at home and this person “Might be a rapist”, in fact there was nobody at home, he was alone for the evening with his Father out on a date with the woman who owned the Condo, which they both were visiting. Second, was the comment about the white A@@ cracka, which she defined as a cop wannabe, or a security guard. WHAT??? This means that TM KNEW that GZ was acting in the capacity of a Neighborhood Watch, security guard, or cop wannabe, not as a person who was seeking to harm him. TM could have gone straight to the condo, and none of this would have happened. Rather, he decided to GET GZ. As the dispatcher told GZ that he did not need to follow TM, he turned around to return to his truck. As he started back, abandoning the search, rather to wait for the police car that was in route, He was ATTACKED by TM, the rest, sadly is history.
My final point is towards the behavior by those who did not agree with the Jury decision, and have embarked on harming innocents in TM's name. A sane question would be, what would this encourage would be victims to do? The answer is one they may not have considered. With random beat downs, knock out games, etc. I see an armed citizenry more ready than ever considered, ready to no longer be silent victims... When you take the path of mob rule and lawlessness, you may pay a higher price than you planned.

Martin was not killed because he was Black. He was not killed because of a racist profiling a black man. He was killed because of a culture that glorifies the gangsta rap I can do anything cause I am Black and I am entitled mentality. This is what caused Martin to think it was acceptable to react violently and attack Zimmerman. Martin paid the ultimate price for that mentality. Sadly, until that mentality is changed this scenario will play out many more times. That Martin is dead is a tragedy, but it is not a tragedy of racism. It is a tragedy of culture.

Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?

This is a Black Rage Ping List, (by request,) to cover the aftermath of the GZ trial and archive the incidents. Let me know. And please add "blackrage" to the keywords. Thank you.

What’s truly odd about the discussions of this case are the complete disconnect between blacks and everyone else in answering the question “Who started it?” wrt the Martin-Zimmerman altercation.

Whites will say that Martin performed the initial assault by punching Zimmerman. The evidence is: Zimmerman’s testimony, eyewitness testimony (called by the prosecution), forensic testimony, injuries to GZ, none to TM. Physical assault is a felony offense, thus becoming the trigger for the eventual self-defense shooting.

Blacks will say Zimmerman committed the assault, for a vast variety of wholly invented reasons that are pure supposition and not supported by fact. “Stalking,” “following,” “getting out of the car.” I’ve heard arguments that GZ is racist, GZ chased down and caught TM at gunpoint, GZ was holding TM at gunpoint, and stuff that goes even more off the tracks than that in an effort to claim TM was “standing his ground” against an “assault.” Yet the only acts that are supported by evidence (keeping an eye on/following), are not criminal in nature.

There is this absolute and razor-sharp disconnect in the ability to accept the evidence, and continually promulgating theory after theory by which GZ would be criminally culpable. And if the jury acquitted then they’re criminally culpable too. I have no idea where this comes from but there you go. It’s damn near universal in what I’ve heard from self-described members of “the black community.”

What’s truly odd about the discussions of this case are the complete disconnect between blacks and everyone else in answering the question

Agree.. Frankly, it's a little frightening to me... the absolute disconnect with reality.

If you're going to shoot someone,in cold blood... you don't SCREAM for help for 45 seconds before doing it.. OR.. just in case you think it was TM screaming, you don't ALLOW someone to scream that long before shooting them... that just attracts attention, and perhaps gets a witness to see what you've done.

GZ was, clearly, getting beaten.. and screaming.. for QUITE a long time. Shooting was NOT his first thought. It was a last resort.

It's hard to believe SO MANY people seem SO CERTAIN about a fact set that is SO WRONG!

Yes they do. I live in a good neighborhood non-minority neighbor of mine had a 19 year old non-minority son who went with 3 non-minority friends to burglarize a house in another part of the county for the second time in a few weeks. My neighbor’s son went through the jimmied window of the darkened house first. He was greeted with a blast from a 12 guage 00 buck shot round in the chest from the homeowner. Died instantly. His 3 accomplises fled but were caught and are serving time as accomplises to murder. Home owner has not had anymore unexpected guests. The 19 year old grew up here and was a good kid until he moved out and went to live with his birth father.

A fascinating incident. Bad habits are so much easier to develop than good ones. That is why society was so ‘oppressive’ towards young people back when we had an intact family structure and a functioning national culture. Even with a culture that had very long teeth there were plenty of boys from ‘good’ families that ended up wearing stripes. The difference, and a big one, is that they were considered disgraces and not ‘cool’. The crumbling of the family is bring the thug culture to white middle class America right along with soaring illegitimacy rates and the plague of fatherlessness.

Exactly correct. You get an A+. His father had been totally absent. While his mother had really tried to keep him on track and did a good job until he wanted freedom from rules. At 18 he moved in with his deadbeat dad and had free rein. Pretty good deal to have no rules. It only cost him his life.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.