Trayvon Doesn't Get Justice

George Zimmerman was found not guilty today of any wrongdoing, proving, beyond a shadow of doubt, that it is perfectly legal in Florida for someone to stalk an unarmed, black boy through a neighborhood at night, confront him, and shoot him dead, and be able to claim self-defense.

The fact that he stalked the boy through his neighborhood, against 911 advice, without so much as identifying himself, was never in question.  The fact that Zimmerman confronted the boy and fought with him was never in question.  The fact that he shot and killed that unarmed boy was never in question.  The only real question was how lenient Florida law was for this to happen and get away with it.  Once again, the "Gunshine State" came through for the shooter.

Zimmerman is free, once more, to carry as many loaded guns as he wishes, anywhere it's legal to do so, and jump to whatever conclusions he wishes about the people he considers suspicious.  And so is anyone else, for that matter, who can then use this case as a precedent.  Mothers, don't let your kids walk alone at night in Florida.

Zimmerman will now have to live with what he's done.  Just like O.J. Simpson, he'll forever be considered guilty by the public.  He will forevermore be known as a killer of an unarmed child.  He'll forever be looking over his shoulder, wondering just how angry those people are.  I wouldn't be surprised if he leaves the country to find relief.  But, as Confucius said, "No matter where you go, there you are."  He'll never escape himself.

“Nothing I Own Is Worth Killing Over”

Here’s a scenario for you:  You arrive to your home, expecting that no one is present.  But when you arrive, you find a thief has broken in and is currently trying to rob the place.  You’re alone, but armed.  They appear unarmed, and upon seeing you, try to run away.  What do you do?

Do you turn and drive away, then call 911?

Or do you pull your gun and start shooting?

I’ve seen this scenario reported from time to time, and all too often the gun guys pull their gun and start blasting.  Consider, for instance, the following newsreport, from Myrtle Creek, in gun-happy southern Oregon:

A man came home to find two men breaking into his home on Dole Road, and the Sheriff's office says he fired a pistol at the men.

Deputies say they were called to a residence in the 2800 block of Dole Road at about 6:00 am, after the homeowner called and said he interrupted a burglary.

Both suspects ran from the scene, and have not been located.  

The Sheriff's office says it is unknown at this time if either of the suspects were shot.

(A follow-up article today confirmed the capture of one of the robbers, who had been shot in the hand by the homeowner.)

My comment on that first article was, “Nothing I own is worth killing over.”

The usual posse of pro-gun guys immediately responded in outrage, with cold statements wishing death to the thieves, an odd statement about the Revolutionary War, and even a threat about coming to rob me:

“You don't feel threatened if someone is in your home trying to rob you???  Can I have your address?” 

“Fortunately the founding fathers of this Country did not have your attitude or otherwise we would still be under British rule.“ said one, as if an isolated property-protection shooting was in any analogous to the Revolutionary War.

“If someone is in my house, you can bet your sweet a** it's self-defense to pull a weapon.  I would not allow an opportunity to be shot at first.  If you are a stranger in my home, I'm scared and it's self defense! Some states have laws that if you are trespassing...you can act in 'self-defense'.”

“Deadly force is justified against someone "committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling." So yep, he has every right to kill someone in defense of his property.”

“And the problem is??? to bad he didn't get one !”

“Too bad he missed. He needs to spend more time at the range.”

"I won't wait, hesitate or ask why...!  BOOM !"

But here was one that I felt truly represented the pro-gun opinion:

“Every single thing I own is worth more to me than the life of someone who would invade my home and try to take my things.”

"Every single thing?"  Really?  Your TV?  Your coffee maker?  Your smelly old houseshoes?

You see this response all the time from the gun crowd.  Consider this statement from one site that sells gun accessories: 

"We don’t want to hear any stories of how one of our readers became a victim, rather we’d like to see a news report on you gunning down a criminal during a home invasion. Nothing warms our hearts more than hearing those kinds of stories on the news."

Warms their heart??  Really? 

Or consider this lady.  She was so incensed when someone tried to jimmy a door lock and then ran off with a yard statue, that she has organized a “Glock block” movement to arm herself and her neighbors and advertise the fact:

Coy Tolonen, 65, said the idea came to her last Thursday after she tried and failed to chase down a thief who ran away with her beloved bronze yard statue.

Later that evening, the grandmother of three said she realized a door to her home had been jimmied open, possibly by the same man she said stole her statue.

"It just made my blood run cold because our grandkids are playing here a lot, and one of them could have been snatched just as easily as the statue," she told ABCNews.com.

"These guys need to know if you're going to pick on a little old lady, then lots of the ladies I know are packing [guns]. They're sweet ladies but if it's their life, I'm sorry you're going to lose yours," Tolonen said. ….

Tolonen began printing flyers for her neighbors to hang in their windows, with a picture of a gun and the warning: "This is a Glock Block. We don't call 911." She said so far more than a dozen neighbors have shown interest.

Sorry, but I don’t feel a jimmied lock and a statue are worth killing over.  But the pro-gun crowd was cheering.  “Bag em and tag em Grandma” said one pro-gun commenter on the page.  “Get rid of cops. We can defend, protect and kill on our own with our own guns “ said another.  “Good for them!” said this extremist blogger.

Naturally, the police are concerned about Mrs. Tolonen’s new “Glock block”:

"What we're really talking about here is property crime ," Sgt. Robert Wurpes told ABCNews.com. 

"We don't think firearms are the answer to this problem. However, we do understand gun ownership is a right."

Wurpes said he and his fellow officers have been on plenty of calls in property crime cases and many times have realized victims hadn't been communicating with their neighbors or hadn't even met them.

"Get to know your neighbors," Wurpes said.

"We understand that it's frustrating when people get things stolen or are victims of crimes," he said. "Our concerns come into play when guns are involved because they're dangerous. "

Now, don’t get me wrong.  I’m not sympathetic to criminals bold enough to break into a home.  They should know they can expect a dangerous reaction, and they deserve to be caught and to do time.  However, unless they are attempting or threaten violence against the homeowner or his family, I don’t feel that they deserve a death sentence for their action, and even then it would depend upon the circumstances. 

Some years ago, before I bought a home alarm system, someone threw a rock through my sliding glass door and stole a TV from my home.  When we got home and discovered it, we felt violated.  But at no time did I wish the person to be killed for their action.

And just finding a stranger in your home shouldn’t, on its own, illicit a kill-or-be-killed response.  Situations happen quite often, where someone is drunk and wonders onto the wrong property, or is trick-or-treating, or just winds up at the wrong door.  Shootings happen all too often under these circumstances.  Did those people deserve to die, too?

Sadly, the number of people buying guns out of fear has drastically increased, despite falling violent crime rates.  From a CNN article:

A national survey published in March by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press reported that nearly half (48%) of gun owners say the main reason they own a gun is for protection, up from 26% who gave that answer in 1999. 

Less than a third (32%) cited hunting as the main reason, down from nearly half (49%) in 1999.

The findings make no sense, since violent crime in the country overall has dropped by 48% since 1993, according to Kellermann.

Perhaps even more important -- and less understood -- is the evidence that the benefits of keeping a gun for protection are far outweighed by the risks, he said.

Right now, the trial of George Zimmerman is taking place in Florida, and, once again, the country is debating "stand your ground" laws and whether it is right to kill someone over a perceived injustice without taking an opportunity to evade the situation.

Unfortunately, here in Oregon and an increasing number of other states with “stand your ground” laws, it is perfectly legal to shoot a stranger in your home that you perceive as trespassing.  But just because you have the right to kill doesn't mean it’s the right thing to do.  

This "kill the intruder" talk is the philosophy of the NRA and their gun-selling masters at work.  This is their definition of "freedom."  It’s time to bring a new trajectory to our society away from gun violence, and stop using guns and the threat of lethal violence to solve our problems.

UPDATE (7/2/13):  Some more extreme comments from a follow-up article about the shooting mentioned at the first of this blog post. Once again, in the comments section, I reaffirmed that nothing I own is worth killing over.  Upset at my comment, here is what the gun guys had to say to me (bolding added):

"Your logic has helped many homeowners end up dead because they chose your method. You liberals believe in being victims and creating victims instead of protecting your families. Many of us grew up with guns, joined the military and continued training with guns to keep proficient. We didn't play with dolls or yell for a teacher when ever a kid on the playground took our ball,we beat his ass. We are the most qualified to protect our families and if you step foot in my home I will blow you away, everything in my home, my children and my wife are worth killing for. You don't like guns, don't buy one!" 

"If I were to catch a low life burglar at my home trying to take what I worked hard for, they better be ready to meet my 357 Magnum and I will shoot without hesitation. That's right...shoot first, ask/answer questions later! Cuz if I don't do it first they will...whether it be by gun, knife, baseball bat...etc. BANG!!!" 

"I will without hesitation empty an entire clip at an intruder from his navel to his knees."

.

Trayvon Martin's Killer Has The Gall To Ask For More Donations

It's one of those shake-your-head moments again.

George Zimmerman, the guy who stalked unarmed teen Trayvon Martin and shot him dead because, as he put it, it was "God's Plan" to do so, is asking once again for donations for his legal defense.

From an article:

George Zimmerman plans to step up fundraising to pay for his expenses while he awaits trial for fatally shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. 

The former neighborhood watch leader's attorney said Wednesday that Zimmerman plans to launch the New George Zimmerman Defense Fund next month. 

Donors will receive "thank you" cards individually signed by Zimmerman. 

Attorney Mark O'Mara said an existing fund has raised $140,000 since last May, but the money it is running a bit low.

You don't say.

I think it's sick to send money to someone who is so clearly a domestic abuser, paranoid murderer and abuser of children, who has a violent past, for the sake of their legal defense.  But then, pro-gun extremists will do anything to support their twisted philosophy for carrying guns anywhere and shooting whomever you think seems "scary" (-- here I'm thinking of the recent case of another guy who shot dead another black teen in Florida for having too loud of music, in a car with other "intimidating" black teens, then fled the scene of the shooting, claiming it was in "self defense."  Will they send him defense money too??  But I digress).

But let's say you think like the pro-gun extremists and saw the stalking and shooting of Trayvon as completely valid and justified.  I STILL think they're nuts for sending money.  After all, Zimmerman had previously lied to the court about how much money he had raised the first time he asked for donations, then used his wife to try to hide it by shifting the money around in different accounts, then prepared to skip the country.

With such obvious and calculated abuse of donor money, and his bad behavior even after murdering Trayvon, only someone who sympathizes with criminals would still be willing to give this lunatic money ... AND want a signed thank you card in return!  Just another example of how pro-gun extremists are also pro-criminal.


ADDENDUM (11/30/12):  Zimmerman's lawyers attempted to distance Zimmerman from his blatant attempt to sell his signature for money.

Meanwhile, Zimmerman's wife, Shellie, is attempting to have her perjury charge thrown out, despite her obvious guilt for lying about and trying to hide her husband's donated funds.  See HERE for details on how she moved money from his account to hers, and from his account to his sister's, to hide it.

HERE is an interesting article, detailing the drugs that were in Zimmerman's system the night he stalked and killed Trayvon Martin, and their potential side effects, which may have contributed to Zimmerman's lethal behavior.

George Zimmerman Says That Targeting And Shooting Trayvon Martin Was "God's Plan"

George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin's shooter, was interviewed by conservative right-wing FOX pundit Sean Hannity yesterday, along with Zimmerman's lawyer.  It's highly unusual for a suspect in a high-profile murder case to be interviewed on live TV.

In the past, Zimmerman has made a public apology to Trayvon's parents.  Well, not really an apology, since he didn't express regret for his action.  He said, "I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son."  That's the sort of thing an acquaintance would say to the grieving parents upon meeting them in the hallway.  There's no "I'm sorry I killed him" in there anywhere.

But tonight he was much more defiant and tried to distance himself from any decision-making leading to the shooting.  He said "it was God's plan" that the shooting happened, that he regretted nothing, and, at the end, stated, "I do wish there was something, anything I could have done that would have put me in the position where I didn’t have to take his life. And I do want to tell everyone…that I’m sorry that this happened.”

Here's a revealing clip:

Interesting.  Apparently he doesn't feel he had a choice about arming himself that night.  He feels it was "God's plan" that he defy the advice of 911 and get out of his car, stalking the teen through the apartment complex.  Apparently he does not regret shooting to death an unarmed 17-year old.  These are choices that most people would not have made.  I'd say that the other choices are "something, anything" that he could have done to keep from being in the "position where he didn't have to take a life." 

Zimmerman said in the interview, "I feel that it was all God's plan.  And for me to second guess it, or judge it, um... " [here he shakes his head]

After the interview, Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, issued a statement: "We must worship a different God, because there’s no way my God would have wanted George Zimmerman to kill my son.”

Hannity asked Zimmerman, "Is there anything you would have done differently, in retrospect, now that time has passed a little bit?" 

"No sir," Zimmerman said, shaking his head.

Really??  If I had to kill someone in what I felt was self-defense, I would be incredibly remorseful, particularly if it were an unarmed teenager, and I would be second-guessing every step that led to it.  Even if my attacker were a giant of a man with a felony murder record, blasting an assault rifle at me, I'd still be questioning the steps that led me to be in the situation.

But not George Zimmerman, a man who used his wife to hide money from the court, who mayhave been preparing to leave the country while on bail, who is accused of molesting his cousin as a child, and who has had a number of previous violent behavior incidents, including with police and his ex-fiáncée.  He said, "I'm sorry that this happened."  But is he, really?

UPDATE (7/20/12):  A statement from Trayvon's mother, Sybrina Fulton:

"I think it's absolutely ridiculous. God did not have a plan for Trayvon to die and for George Zimmerman to shoot Trayvon for no reason," she told CNN's Soledad O'Brien on Thursday.

What Choices Would You Make If You Were Being Stalked At Night?

Take a moment and ask yourself what you would do in this situation:

Imagine for a moment that you are walking at night, since you don't have a car.  You left your apartment to go to the corner store to get a snack, and now you're walking back.  There's a light rain.  The neighborhood has had a number of break-ins lately, so you keep an eye out for trouble.

Then suddenly you realize a man you don't know is driving slowly behind you, following you, watching you intently and muttering into a cell phone.  He isn't a police officer.  What do you do?  Do you blithely continue on your way, or do you dart off and try to lose him?

You choose to try to lose him.  The man gets out of the car and hurries after you, stalking you.  What do you do?  Do you head straight home, leading the man to your family, or do you try harder to lose him?

You try harder to lose him.  But suddenly he catches up to you.  The man doesn't say his name or why he's following you.  You ask, "Why are you following me?"  All he says to you, in an accusational tone, is "What are you doing here?!"  Then he pushes you.  What do you do?  Do you assume he's no threat, after stalking you through your apartment complex and refusing to say who he is?  Do you turn and try to run some more and hope he doesn't catch you again?  Or do you defend yourself?

You figure you could take him, so you decide to punch him.  A struggle ensues, and you continue to fight back, falling to the ground with him.  That's when you discover the man has a loaded gun hidden under his jacket.  What do you do?  Do you try to run away and hope he doesn't shoot you in the back?  Or do you fight harder, maybe even try to get the gun away from him?

Would you have made the choices I described above?  Trayvon Martin apparently did, and I don't blame him.  The above description is a summary of events as described on the 911 phone call from Trayvon's shooter, George Zimmerman, an account from Trayvon's female friend (whom he was talking to during the event), and Zimmerman's own account to police, which was just released in police interview videos.  Of course, Zimmerman's account is his word against that of a dead boy and a few half-coherent observations from witnesses.  Sadly, it ended with a single gunshot and a fatal wound for the boy, through his heart and lung, so we will never hear his side of the story.

Trayvon was scared, according to his female friend.  But imagine how much more scared he would have been if he had known that his stalker was armed with a loaded 9mm handgun, that he had a history of violence, that he was paranoid enough to make dozens of 911 calls in previous months for things as simple as open garage doors or children playing, and that he was using medication that could arouse aggression and hallucinations.

Zimmerman suggests that he was the victim.  And yet he obviously pursued and shot the unarmed boy.  If Zimmerman is to be trusted, why then is he back in jail after committing perjury for lying about his finances, using his wife to move money around and hide it, and trying to hide a second passport?  Does this sound like the actions of an innocent man who has nothing to fear from the truth?

But the gun extremists don't care about all that.  They've donated at least a couple hundred thousand dollars to this murderer's cause, beginning even before the facts in the case had come out.  They are apologists for Zimmerman, downplaying Zimmerman's violent past or justifying his attempt to follow the boy.  They instead attack the victim, Trayvon, because the boy had a brush with marijuana usage in his past and a miniscule, trace amount of THC in his autopsy report, and blow it way out of proportion with speculative hearsay designed to demonize this boy and make the murder seem to match the fantasy that conceal carry permit holders are only going to shoot thugs and druggies. 

The choices made by Trayvon that night, as reasonable as they seemed, served only to reinforce Zimmerman's toxic preconceived notions and vigilante tendencies.

Would you have made the same choices as Trayvon?

Would you have made the same choices as Zimmerman?