Posted on 04/13/2012 2:14:57 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
A new Ipsos/Reuters poll offers what looks to be an unfortunate preview of what lies ahead for the trial of George Zimmerman – particularly as it relates to how the population will potentially react.
Perhaps it’s not surprising to see that the attitudes towards Trayvon Martin’s fatal shooting are heavily divided along racial lines, but it’s not any less disheartening. The poll finds that 91 percent of Blacks believe Trayvon was killed unjustly. Yet, only 35 percent of whites feel that way. The online poll also revealed that 59 percent of Hispanics believed Martin was wrongly shot by Zimmerman.
On the report, Ipsos pollster Chris Jackson said, “This incident is one of the clearest splits we’ve seen between whites and Blacks.” You don’t say, Chris. You don’t say.
As comforting as it’s been to see the mainstream media respond to social media’s call for greater attention to the death of an unarmed Black teenager at the hands of a glorified vigilante, not every onlooker has reacted with empathy towards the situation.
New York Times columnists Charles M. Blow, a staunch advocate for Trayvon in print and on MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, recently shared a racist voicemail he received on Twitter. Paid for his opinion, Blow’s commentary has been understandably passionate, which sadly welcomes an equally more fervent (albeit stupid) reply. But even the mildest of sentiments conveyed about Trayvon Martin are garnering mean spirited kickbacks.
In “I AM: A Young Black Man,” videographer Luis Antonio Thompson gathered several hood-donning Black youth to speak on racial prejudices that undoubtedly played into Zimmerman targeting Trayvon the night he died. Tonally, it was a highly subtle retort to the thug caricature Travyon and other Black men are subjected to over a piece of clothing. Even that, though, got one conservative blogger to peg it as “liberal race baiting propaganda.”
Surprise, surprise: The poll also finds biases on the matter straddle along political lines as well. How hard do we have to fall before we see how detrimental the current news culture is to our collective sensibilities? It seems like much longer than I’d like.
The same seems so for the racial biases to blame for the great disparity in viewpoints.
Terry Keleher, Director of the Racial Justice Leadership Action Network at the Applied Research Center, which publishes the site Colorlines, said of the findings: “What’s most troubling about this is that the views of most whites seem to align closely with those of the Florida law enforcement establishment, which, by its actions and inaction, has been mostly sympathetic to the perspective and plight of a light-skinned armed and aggressive assailant than an unarmed and murdered black youth.”
Ideally, the facts will be presented in the trial, subsequently challenging whatever attitudes and the political persuasions that mold them white skeptics seem to have, and ultimately leading to some sort of meaningful dialogue. Some white people might even see the light…and seriously consider just how much a hue can lead to something horrific!
Unfortunately, based on that poll and what I’m starting to see with each passing day, such a scenario feels about as likely as a love fest on Basketball Wives. As time ever so consistently shows, when we fail to learn from one’s mistake, it’s only a matter of time before someone else repeats it.
****
Michael Arceneaux is a Houston-bred, Howard-educated writer currently based in Los Angeles. You can read more of his work on his site, The Cynical Ones. Follow him on Twitter: @youngsinick
90% of the public, whether White, Black, or a lovely shade of blue has not read the concise, accurate, undramatized, dispassioante, report written by ....gasp.... a BLACK MAN ... Napoleon Norton, the City Manager of Sanford, FL. Make that 100% of the MSM, The CBC, and Eric Holder, The New Black Panther spokesman in DC.
www.Sanfordfl.gov.
I must tell you, Vet, that after thoroughly reading it (and it is updated) I much preferred the MSM story. You know, the one where the 65-lb 8 year old kid with the 240 IQ was stalked by a crazed white man while delivering a hot meal to a sick and shut in old (white) lady? Yeah. That story. He was shuttling between cello lessons and bible study when this fanged villain shot him down like a dog. The Ofay's assault weapon, the dreaded KELTEC 9*, pumped 37 well aimed shots at the hapless victim. They had to be well aimed to miss the thick bible and the AP Calculus text. Throughout the episode, the shooter was shouting racial epithets at the shootee. My God youda thought it was RAP lyrics or somethin'!
Much better than
BTW, where's the autopsy report and the toxicology. Where in the body was he shot. From Below? From above? From behind? From the side? Was he high? Low? Cracked up? Guru, get that seasoned wise head over to Sanford and get on that jury. Enquiring minds want to know what the heck happened!
KELTECs pretty much go off when they feel like it, occasionally even when some one pulls the trigger. This is Zimmerman's real problem: questionable taste in firearms.
“Zimmerman ignored a 911 directive to not pursue, he did not ‘Stand His Ground’ because he pursued and fired”
Firstly, the 9-11 operator was not a cop; those were not authoritative orders. Secondly, I don’t think we know whether he kept pursuing after the operator told him not two. Thirdly, he didn’t fire at the end of his pursuit. He fired, according to his story, after Martin attacked him. I don’t think there’s any evidence that he provoked Martin into attacking him. Continuing to follow after getting advice not to does not constitute such evidence.
While you may not provoke an attack in order to shoot someone in self-defense, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did provoke the attack. More than that, for it to be second degree murder, he must be especially motivated by malice and hatred, or however they put it. I’m almost certain they can’t demonstrate that.
As for your knee-jerk reaction to the 9-11 directions, I’ve hear plenty of other people react similarly. I don’t get it. Since when do we live in a world where you can’t follow people? I understand if there’s a restraining order, or if you do it every day, or if you do it while nude and licking a knife. But following and reporting is not inherently provocative, and it certainly is not in itself an invitation for violence.
We must not let the bar be lowered, especially considering the open door it would allow for politically correct prosecutions such as this. Violence should not be instigated without an overt and obvious threat. I’m talking fighting words, brandishing of weapons, sudden movements after hostile actions, etc. Merely following is not enough.
If Zimmerman had chased Martin and then shot him in the back when Martin was running away, at least 93 percent of white Americans would think Zimmerman was guilty. Probably more like 99 percent. (Every race has a few nutcases, which is why I’m not saying 100 percent.)
Let’s not even make it that clear-cut. Let’s say Zimmerman had confronted Martin, and Martin takes umbrage and starts taking a few steps toward Zimmerman. Zimmerman then shoots him. Almost all white people would say “guilty.”
But if Zimmerman’s story is true that he gave up following, returned to his car, was attacked by Martin, and that Martin went for his gun, a legitimate self-defense argument arises.
Anyway, I wasn’t there so I don’t know whether Zimmerman’s story is true. But it’s up to the state to prove otherwise, and the evidence that the story is untrue is pretty weak at this point, unless they have evidence not yet in the public sphere.
So I wish people would understand that the VAST MAJORITY OF WHITE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO MAKE IT LEGAL TO RANDOMLY SHOOT MINORITIES.
If the shooting went down as it has been told, meaning Martin sucker punched Zimmerman and then was smashing his noggin on the ground then here in Florida it is a good kill.
Blacks will go crazy as they have been fed a load of hooey by the media and race hustlers.
Get a gun and learn how to use it and keep it with you ALWAYS.
Seems pretty clear to me. I left this site a long time ago cuz I got tired of dealing with irrational logic. I was one of the first members. I see that not much has changed. Decided to get back on tonight, and now I’m leaving again, for good. Got better things to do than this....
After that you are free to say whatever you wish. But read it first.
1. Get a few gallons of gasoline.
2. Get plenty of empty Molotov cocktail bottles (is easy...just save their Ripple and Colt .45 bottles).
3. Steal a handful of those plastic Bic butane cigarette liters from the corner Shop & Rob. (Can't start the fires without some flame)
4. Tear up some streets and sidewalks to get some chunks of window-breaking material.
5. Scout around downtown and do some early window shopping and making "shopping lists" before the riots begin, so they can go straight to the stores that have items like big screen tv's, booze, mp3 players, iPads, etc, etc. Don't have to waste time breaking windows and then finding out it's a toy store, Goodwill or local food bank.
Ahhhhh....life will be good....
I’m a yooper too, and agree with you. Except I’m not 100% sure he kept perusing Trayvon, I just don’t know. At any rate, if I were in Trayvon’s shoes that night, I’d have been very nervous about someone following me. How could he possible know that Zimmermann wasn’t going to attack and kill him? My guess is Trayvon probably thought he was defending himself from an attack. Or possible he actually had to defend himself. Did Zimmermann wave his gun around or show his gun to Trayvon? If so, Trayvon for sure did the right thing in attacking him and bashing his head into the ground. Oh...and I’m white too and a far right conservative.
“You all cannot defend this man on grains of straw”
Since when does straw have grains?
“Zimmerman is guilty, and your posts here trying to find SOME justification for his actions only serve to embarrass our claims to our gun rights”
This may be something you think only liberals say, but in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. So it’s not us who need to find some justification for his actions; it’s you who have to rest on evidence stronger than your feeling that he’s overzealous and the “directive” by an operator who had no directive authority and which we don’t whether he obeyed or not.
You need actual evidence, along the lines of proving he instigated the witnessed violence, he had malice aforethought, he was not in reasonable fear for his life, and he wasn’t acting with force to prevent a felony, etc. None of this evidence exists. What you thought was the more solid and common sense position is actually a willow-the-wisp of feelings and non-evidence.
not two = not to
So you missed the irrational logic, and decided to come back to comment, and your off again?
And you feel Zim is guilty?
Hmmm..
No thnk you. I seen all of his shit I want to see when I read the,”article” you posted.
Or if he’s found guilty of less than Murder 2
Or if he doesn’t get the needle
Or if his girlfriend is grilled on the stand
In short, any reason to let loose and riot, burn, shoot, rob and rape is fine.
There will be riots regardless. Count on it.
I heard Zimmerman woke up in bed this morning and said “Coleman, I’ve just had the most absurd nightmare. I dreamt I was poor and no one liked me. I lost my job, my house and Penelope hated me. And it was all because of this terrible, awful negro.”
“How could he possible know that Zimmermann wasn’t going to attack and kill him?”
He couldn’t, but you’re not allowed to attack someone because you’re not 100% sure they’re not going to attack you. You must base it on something more substantial, like fighting words. We restrict when you get to instigate violence, for good reason.
Anyway, what you’re doing is placing the bar lower for Martin than for Zimmerman. Which would be fine, if indeed Zimmerman instigated the violence. It’s not like I’m comfortable taking his word for it and calling it a day, but there’s no evidence he did. There’s every evidence, outside of arm-chair psychologist with wild epileptic tree theories about how he hates people in hoodies and plotted to get Martin to attack him in order to assert self-defense,that Zimmerman was 100% certain that Martin posed a threat. That is, according to Zimmerman’s story.
I find it funny, is all, that people would give the benefit of the doubt to the one who started the fight that he was somehow provoked, but not to the one who asserts self-defense, even though there’s evidence that he was losing the fight and no evidence that he started it.
“My guess is Trayvon probably thought he was defending himself from an attack.”
That seems a reasonable assumption, if you add “possible future” before “attack.” But in that case, knowing what we know, he would be in the wrong. Because the law does not allow for preemptive violence on the basis of not liking being followed.
I guess you forgot Zimmerman’s broken nose. gashed head and the fact that his KelTec malfunctioned. The way it malfunctioned is possibly due to the two men struggling for the weapon. As someone licensed for CC, Zimmerman would have known he was not allowed to expose or brandish the weapon.
If the firearm had jammed, I might be more lenient on Martin. But given the neighbor’s statement that he saw a larger man beating Zimmerman while he was defenseless on his back and reviewing the other information proven to have been posted by Martin, anyone who thinks Martin was some innocent is missing an important window into his life and thought.
The long amount of time that elapsed between Martin leaving the 7 Eleven and the time before he aroused Zimmerman’s suspicions shows Martin was in no hurry to get back to the house even though it was raining. He should have already been home at least 30 minutes before Zimmerman returned from work.
What we know from the 911 tapes syncs with Zimmerman’s supposed statement. Martin;s actions as an innocent on the other hand do not fit.
If any of this peaks your curiosity, look up the knockdown game as played by urban black youth.
“Did Zimmermann wave his gun around or show his gun to Trayvon?”
Assuming facts not in evidence. You see, this sort of question demonstrates how little people understand the law. It’s well and fine to question whether Martin was provoked beyond Zimmerman. So long as you’re idly speculating, that is. But when it comes to whether or not there’s an actual case against Zimmerman, you must remember that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. You can’t merely suggest that maybe Martin was provoked; you need actual evidence that he was. No such evidence exists, so far as I know.
I’ve never heard of a `yooper.’
http://yoopersteez.com/post/worst-yooper-definition-ever
Yooper — “Person from north of the bridge. a second class citizen of the U.S.. A canadian trapped on american soil.”
Example: Yoopers think they’re American, but everybody in America hates them. which is why Michigan is selling the u.p. to Canada for a carton of cigarettes.
Don’t go away mad old-timer.
He don’t look French-Russian at all...
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.