If you're following along, you'll note there's not a single consideration of Trayvon Martin's rights. Only George Zimmerman's. No mention of the weight difference - a hundred pounds or so difference is pretty substantial. No mention that Mr Martin had a legal right - because we're not in the Soviet Union or China - to be where he was. No thought is given to why Mr Zimmerman might have pursued Mr Martin. An assumption is made that a slight 17 year old was beating Mr Zimmerman, while point 4 is that "no one knows what happened".
- Zimmerman was out doing his neighborhood watch thing and saw Martin.
- He called 911 and followed Martin in his vehicle.
- When Martin walked someplace that Zimmerman couldn't follow in his vehicle, he got out of his vehicle and followed on foot.
- ???
- In the process of getting his ass beaten, Zimmerman busts a cap in Martin.
The lack of empathy is appalling, but typical. In the comments, not a single person wonders if the shooter was wrong. It's basically a blame the victim mentality. Oh, and "the media" is keeping the story alive. For nefarious and commercial purposes, etc. (The idiocy and silliness is tangible.) To be fair, The Raving Prophet regrets that Mr Zimmerman's actions haven't done "CCW" (carry a concealed weapon) any favors. Mostly because Mr Zimmerman "bust[ed] a cap in Martin", presumably when the 17 year old kid did what a lot of scared 17 year old kids do - which is take on a guy who outweighs them by a hundred or so pounds. (How do we know he as a scared? He told his girlfriend, who said so in an affidavit.)
The other thing I note is that most people think the President was playing for political points with his comment about how Mr Martin could look like his son. Take a look, people - if the Prez had a son, he'd probably look a lot like Mr Martin. These people discount that he could speaking from his heart, truthfully and with empathy and humanity. Something that is distinctly lacking [in] the commentary I read.
All in all, the impression I got from reading the post, others like it and the various comments to this and other posts? "Who cares? One of the monkeys got busted, so what?" People are more concerned about what it will do to their right to be fearful idiots, pretending we live in the Wild Fucking West and they desperately need the blankie of their concealed weapon than in any consideration for Mr Martin. [In general]
Carolyn Ann
Edit: I added [In general] because I want to make sure this comment wasn't particular and was generalized. My apologies to Tam for not being as clear about that as I should have been.
Hm.
ReplyDeleteI specifically mentioned that Martin had every right to be where he was, and intimated "Mall Ninja" behavior on Zimmerman's part. Zimmerman may well be a racist yayhoo; I don't know. He is certainly what cops refer to as a "Strange Ranger" or cop-wannabe.
None of this is legally germane to the case, however. Legally, wannabe cop Zimmerman had as much legal right to hop out of his truck and follow Martin around as Martin did to walk around.
Legally the whole thing turns on who actually started the initial physical altercation, because that generally removes the legal protections of self-defense. If Zimmerman grabbed hold of Martin and told him to "Respect Mah Authoritah!", well, Martin had no duty to retreat, either.
FWIW, I guess you didn't read the post immediately before that one; the one where I basically implicated Zimmerman as an idiot for getting out of his truck in the first place.
Even if he were 100% legally in the right and his story and initial police reports are 100% true, nobody had to die that night.
No, I didn't read your prior post, Tam. I wasn't particularly interested in reading much beyond what I did, and after reading some of the other blog posts that were along the same lines as your's, I felt a trifle ill. That's why I discuss my impressions, and picked your blog post - it was mild in comparison, even if the comments were more typical. What I got from it all is that the National Rifle Association spokeshorde are more interested in their precious right to be offended and kill someone as a result than in any moral or ethical points; your blog post echoes that theme.
DeleteI have little doubt that George Zimmerman was a wannabe-cop, with a Dirty Harry complex as well.
I believe your interpretation of the law is incorrect, by the way - I haven't heard mention of any "he started it!" clause. Besides which, that would indicate that Mr Zimmerman "started" the altercation and should now be languishing behind some well-earned prison walls.
(Also, I love being called "right-wing". It tickles me to death. ;) )
ReplyDeleteIt's one of the only generalizations I've found to be generally sustainable. If I read something that looks like an NRA or Tea Party manifesto or press release, I've generally found it to be an accurate indicator to the political views of the writer. Unlike more "liberal" bloggers, whom tend to be all over the map, often in the same post and sometimes in the same sentence.
DeleteThat is the problem with the political situation in this country in a nutshell.
Delete"(My team) has widely varying and independent opinions that we arrived at through logic and reason, while (those other guys) think in lockstep and get their marching orders from their puppet masters and party leaders." I see that on "Conservative" and "Liberal" blogs all the time.
I'm a pro-choice gun-toting atheist who is generally against foreign wars, thinks we should end the war on drugs, slash taxes across the board, abolish both the Department of Homeland Security and most federal social services programs, legalize gay marriage, and dozens of other opinions that could be considered "left" or "right" wing, depending on who you asked.
People in this country have turned politics into something as dumb and posturing as professional sports tailgate parties. Are you wearing a red jersey with a #43 or a blue jersey with a #44? Whichever, all those people wearing the other color jersey are idiots, and barely human...
You're arguing against human nature. :-) Politics in this country are divisive because they can't tell the difference between fact and fiction, or agree that differing views on what a problem is, never mind the solutions, isn't unpatriotic or "communist" or "socialist" or whatever. When the right takes prosecutes its own solutions (ObamaCare), there's a problem of perception.
DeletePersonally, I think that society has a responsibility to its members. That makes me slightly/somewhat liberal. I separate the ideas from their implementation; Homeland Security is a good idea implemented badly, for instance. I think society owes its members a reasonable degree of safety; if that includes not having "wild west" laws and ideas that have *never* been considered good ideas (such as that Stand Your Ground law), then that's fine by me. Standing your ground is one thing, permitting people to shoot and kill others because they're a trifle worried? Not a good idea.
"So great is their need for weaponry, so great is their fear someone will attack them and they won't be fully armed and ready like some amateur fucked-up Rambo..."
ReplyDeleteFWIW, I've had to work with a therapist to banish those crazy, unfounded fears. Haven't had a nightmare about it in over ten years.
I apologize for my wording. I could, and should, have been more precise with that point. I'll add a disclaimer in a wee while, when I think of how to phrase it.
DeleteI didn't mean to offend you or cause you any distress. Sorry. :-(