Posted on 08/17/2013 3:24:17 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
There is no question that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. There is no question that things would have ended better if Zimmerman had heeded counsel from 911 personnel and restrained himself from following Martin into the bowels of the residential complex. There is no question that Zimmerman had juiced himself into fear and hysteria on the speculation that Martin was “on something” and was necessarily “up to no good,” but a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea is hardly loot from a terminating burglary.
However, there is big contention about what happened when Zimmerman caught up with Martin. Martin was dead from a single gunshot wound, and Zimmerman had a bloody nose and a bashed head back when the melee was over.
Did Martin mouth off to Zimmerman and Zimmerman collar him? Did Martin respond to the contact by coming out swinging and taking Zimmerman down, a position from which Zimmerman believed he had to shoot to survive? Like so many things, we will never know the answer to these questions.
Of course, because of Stand Your Ground and the instructions to the jury – that if Zimmerman even believed that his own life was in danger he was fully authorized, under SYG, to take Martin out. One busted nose and a bashed in head back later, Martin is dead on the ground, and there was nothing the jury, the judge, the prosecutors, the governor or riled up, disgusted and frustrated middle-class people could do about it. Zimmerman could not be convicted of even illegal parking. This is the reality – racial patronage, platitudes, sentiments, appearances, and opinions be damned.
In fact, we know now why Zimmerman was not even arrested that squally night in April 2012, and less sentimental and platitudinous thinkers are also realizing that the trial was the saber-rattling product of a voyeuristic media yearning for the days of OJ, Rodney King and a racial judicial showdown that makes good main course for Court TV and riveting courtroom drama. Newspapers must sell, and the Nielsen ratings cannot wait until tomorrow.
Trayvon was not killed because Zimmerman hates black people. Fact is that Zimmerman is just as white as Barack Obama. Zimmerman cannot claim privileges for his whiteness anywhere in America. White people have made sure that you are not white in America until both your parents are born white. In fact there was a time when you were only three-fifths of a person if you were not white. Zimmerman would have been a three-fifther – hands down.
So, without a race-based murder or a hate crime, it could well have been self-defense. Where does that leave us?
It leaves us with context. The context that Zimmerman, like millions of other Americans, might have been terrified of a young black man he met up in the dark, even as he carried the responsibility of a neighborhood watchman to find out who Martin was and why he was in the complex. If you have ever been burglarized, you would want Trayvon Martin stopped and frisked, and you would not take kindly to Zimmerman’s cowardice.
Some have pointed out that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon, but that is not news. Everyone profiles young black men because if you do not, one could make you real dead. It is how you decide if you should call the police when a battery of them loiter in your neighborhood. It is how you determine if you should hustle to your car and get out of Dodge when one with menacing countenance, disorganized dreadlocks, and gravity-controlled trousers is friend or foe.
We are left with the context that neither was Trayvon a buttoned-down A student, or at 17 years was he free of all the prerequisite calling cards of young black men who are headed to their first armed robbery.
It has become clear that Trayvon’s parents were failing to sensitize him to the dead-end life of thugism, multiple school suspensions, ganja chic, pornography, gun-modeling rabble-rousing, racist diatribes and all the other stuff that the society depends on parents to stop and stop cold – no pun.
These two parents were failing Trayvon. That is a fact. Love and parenting do not end with hugs and facilitative visits. Those are important, but surely not the whole story of child raising. Every African-American knows Trayvon Martin before he committed his first serious felony. So, why do we pretend that in America, today, the die had not been cast for Zimmerman to have serious misgiving about Trayvon’s presence in the community – even withstanding the instructions from 911?
Do not forget that the backdrop to Zimmerman’s intensity was a rash of community burglaries, from which young black men were seen running away.
Do we chalk it up as bad luck if we go out to march for Trayvon Martin and come back home to find that young black men, like Trayvon Martin, have ransacked our homes looking for flat screens, jewelry, cash, and Xboxes?
Do we say “this is different,” if we go out and march for Trayvon Martin’s memory but are carjacked by young black men, like Trayvon Martin, as we pump gas?
The answer lies in getting real about the context of Trayvon Martin’s death.
There will be more Trayvon Martins as long as we continue to avoid these contexts.
The author
He WAS found not guilty WITHOUT the stand your ground law.
SYG was NOT the defence in this case; basic self defense was argued and won.
This is a follow-up attack on our freedoms and 2nd Amendment. It is all made up conjecture and BS.
Another fact-free liberal opinion on this matter.
And then some reality injected into the screed.
It wasn’t that good. It’s full of many of the same old talking points about white racism through which you have to wade until you get to the root of the problem... He was raised in a pattern of thinking every bit as destructive as racism and that pattern is justified by the rest of the article. It’s called a left handed compliment... Loosely.
Sigh.... Caucasian.
Time for coffee : /
“There is no question that Zimmerman had juiced himself into fear and hysteria on the speculation that Martin was “on something” and was necessarily “up to no good,” but a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea is hardly loot from a terminating burglary. “
There is no question that this author has an ax to grind.
There is no question to where this story is going.
There is no question that Trayvon was a racist,homophobic gangsta thug who attacked Zimmerman because he felt “disresptected” by Zim keeping him under observation:
http://blackracismandracehatred.blogspot.com/2013/07/trayvon-was-wanabe-gansta-thug.html
comments? Total BS
Some have pointed out that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon, but that is not news. Everyone profiles young black men because if you do not, one could make you real dead. It is how you decide if you should call the police when a battery of them loiter in your neighborhood. It is how you determine if you should hustle to your car and get out of Dodge when one with menacing countenance, disorganized dreadlocks, and gravity-controlled trousers is friend or foe.
Good line
Good read. Thank you, sir, for pointing exactly what the root of the problem is. The proper upbringing of our youth-—black, white, yellow, red, what have you...
On one hand, Zimmerman was hardly the white Hispanic claimed.
On the other hand, the author is totally ignorant of the reasoning behind the three-fifth rule.
It had to do with condition of servitude, not race. Most, but not all, northern states had abolished slavery with the constitution was ratified. Black people counted for a full citizen for enumeration purposes there and in any other state where they were not slaves.
The other dirty little secret is that the states where slavery was illegal didn't want to count them at all. The states were slavery was legal wanted to count them as a full person. The 3/5th compromise was used to resolve the issue. But the facts wouldn't make a good narrative, so they are ignored.
Well, I’ll give the author credit for waiting until the second sentence before starting the Big Lie. Many Travonites can’t even do that much.
Even Crayola used to have a "flesh" (now "peach" )colored crayon to use when drawing peeps back in the day.
Trayvon wanted to roll a queer to get money to buy a blunt.
as a black form was quietly moving between the darkened homes of the peaceful neighborhood...........
Think amnesty on steroids.
Can't have those rebels voting and making a difference. Why they might vote our taxes higher up North and send it down to the po folk in the South!
The author obviously did not listen to the trial, or if he did he didn't pay attention. The non-emergency operator asked Zimmerman 'what direction is he heading?'. Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and started walking to the last point he saw Martin before Martin took off running around the corner of the building. When the operator heard the wind on the phone, they asked GZ "are you following him"?. GZ said yes. Operator said "we don't need you to do that".
Zimmerman was already out and walking between the buildings.
"There is no question that Zimmerman had juiced himself into fear and hysteria on the speculation that Martin was “on something” and was necessarily “up to no good,” but a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea is hardly loot from a terminating burglary."
Total made up opinion not gathered from testimony at trial. If there were fear and hysteria, why didn't he have his gun out as soon as he stepped out of the vehicle? HE WAS TRYING TO KEEP MARTIN IN SIGHT!
"Of course, because of Stand Your Ground and the instructions to the jury – that if Zimmerman even believed that his own life was in danger he was fully authorized, under SYG, to take Martin out. One busted nose and a bashed in head back later, Martin is dead on the ground, and there was nothing the jury, the judge, the prosecutors, the governor or riled up, disgusted and frustrated middle-class people could do about it. Zimmerman could not be convicted of even illegal parking."
Total nonsense. Zimmerman never invoked SYG at the trial. His lawyers never argued it. This was a straight self-defense trial.
Hey idiot, there was nothing they could do about it because Zimmerman justifiably defended himself against a vicious, unprovoked attack. That is the law.
I didn't even read any more after that tripe.
Martin attacked Zimmerman, NOT THE REVERSE. And for that, Zimmerman was completely justified in killing the little thug. He is in the ground, and the world is better off.
I agree with you one the article's deficiencies and the facts concerning how that attack happened - but the writer isn't trying to reach *us*. Unfortunately, he's wasting his time trying to open the eyes of people who bought the Ben Crump/Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson narrative.
Something much like that happened to me when I was 17. Fortunately, I was alert enough to run the red light and escape.
The first time I was unarmed, but since my graveyard shift job required me to drive through that bad neighborhood five nights a week, I armed my self with my dad’s old .38 Police Positive before my next shift.
The next time I was prepared, and when my car was approached at a red light by a black man who, to my eyes, anyway, had ulterior motives, I pointed the pistol at him. He straight away turned around and ran.
I have carried ever since, and, in the intervening 55 years, have had to show my weapon 6 times to protect myself and my family. Never pulled the trigger, but came close twice.
You will NEVER convince me that being unarmed is a good thing!
At first it seems odd that the author thinks Zimmerman should have confronted TM immediately, but didn’t due to “cowardice”. GZ’s police training said not to confront people, and the Left condemns GZ for being so bold as to exit his car in his own neighborhood.
But the accusation reflects a larger trend wherein some blacks, get a thrill out of thinking that whites are “intimidated” by the bad behavior of some of their fellows, as if this were a recognition of superiority. The author errs by implying that it is reasonable to assume all black men are intimidating, potential criminals. Some are, most aren’t. Packs of thugs are. People have to be sized up by circumstances, behavior, and context, not just race.
Black teens and men who dress in the uniforms of success are neither intimidating nor likely to be taken for criminals. Black teens and men who dress in the uniform of criminal thugs are (not surprising, since gangsta chic derives from ill-fitting prison clothes). Black teens and men working at a job, going to church/school/college, playing sports/music, or doing anything productive are not intimidating or taken to be criminals. Guys of any race who loiter about without any obvious reason might well be “looking for trouble.” The appearance of intimidation is a fashion or political choice for some, but a defense mechanism and offensive weapon for those who stake out turf and live by the law of the jungle.
This desire to be intimidating (like North Korea, it’s all they have) moves society toward the jungle, in a morass of fatal mistakes and escalation. To survive, a society must have the will to enforce civilized behavior. The US lacks such a will at present.
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.