Skip to comments.I am not Trayvon MArtin
Posted on 04/27/2012 1:49:34 PM PDT by Mark Mayberry
The picture is featured above and is also goes on to state that it was a meeting held by the NAACP on my college campus on April 4th. Now this flyer got me thinking as I stood in line to return my books and if you have never returned books on the last day of the semester, let me tell you, I had a lot of time to think.
I decided that even though most people want to believe otherwise, most of us are not Trayvon Martin at all. As a matter of fact, I am nothing like Trayvon nor would I want to be. It leads me to ponder this question, what does it say about America that so many people think they want to be like Trayvon Martin?
My parents were fairly strict on me as a child and although I hated it when I was younger, I now understand why they were and it is driven home a little more every time I see a cautionary tale such as this. I was never in trouble outside of the normal realms of being a bored teenager. For that reason I never found myself in a strange neighborhood after dark being pursued by a member of the neighborhood watch. I would have never dreamed of bringing drugs or stolen property to school mostly because I was raised with a strict code of decency and in my community we were all good people who didnt take part in such things. Also the fact that even at the age of seventeen I am fairly sure my father would not have been opposed to snatching me up for such deeds didnt hurt as a deterrent.
This story involved my parents quite a bit and I didnt even realize it until I started to frame out the article. Much of the things that have been unearthed about Trayvon Martim since his death are a result of absent parenting in my opinion. My father always instilled in me to respect everyone but most of all women. For that reason I would never issue public Internet statements through various social media sites using disparaging and misogynistic terms. I was raised in an atmosphere where that was not permitted and if you broke that rule there was a consequence.
From the time I was young my parents both taught me that there was something to be said for hard work and honest living. My parents, both of whom are successful in their respective fields of employment were great role models to support their claims. Because of that influence and example I am now on my way to being a successful person in my chosen field and never once have I thought it would be cool to dress in baggy jeans with a hood covering my face. Not to say that I dont own any hoodies but the hood is more of a useless addition to the sweatshirt and not to be worn. I am a firm believer that how you dress sways peoples initial opinion. I try to dress my best when I am around town and meeting people so I am taken seriously in public. For the same reason that I assume the guy wearing a badge is a police officer, I also assume the guy walking around with his pants falling down and wearing an oversized hoodie is a criminal. If you dont want to be known as a criminal then dont wear the uniform.
I have no middle finger pictures online nor do I own any gold teeth and although I do have one tattoo it is covered a majority of the time and no one is any the wiser. The point I am trying to make here is that Trayvon went to great lengths to convince people that he was a thug, living the lifestyle of a ghetto super star and there are consequences to this decision.
If I had to choose, I would say that I am George Zimmerman. George Zimmerman is a devoted husband who works diligently and does volunteer work with disadvantaged people and at risk youth. He also volunteered in his neighborhood and most people only have good things to say about him. Zimmerman has goals and career dreams that he hopes to attain much as I do and because of that I can understand the hard work that goes into pursuing a dream.
Much like Zimmerman I volunteer in my community and do what I can to help out. Until I moved to Tennessee for school I was a volunteer firefighter and still take part in many activities to help out those less fortunate.
Also I am a concealed weapons permit holder and this is the reason that this case was originally of particular interest to me. It wasnt until later when Zimmerman was crucified in the media with lies and omissions that I took up the cause. (Check out my story on the media bias in the Trayvon Martin case.) Anyone who carries a gun (legally) understands the responsibility and the risk you take in defending your own life. Because of this I know that unless some new unforeseen evidence surfaces, Zimmerman didnt shoot Martin on a whim or for kicks, as some would have you to believe.
So I will ask again in closing, are you really Trayvon Martin? Do you want your kids to be Trayvon Martin? I for one, try everyday not be Trayvon Martin and to live my life as a productive member of society and a point of pride for my parents not a point of failure.
Please read my comment #100 - it equally applies to you.
Either you are suffering from white guilt or you are one of Holder's people, meaning a black person who refuses to look at facts and only honors the color of a person's skin.
Maybe. You're speculating. I'll make up my mind about 'John' when he's the witness stand or given a deposition and cross examination.
What did John actually see? How did he interpret what he saw?
I'll wait for the trial before I form my opinion of what happened. There's a couple of things I need to know first.
If you had such proof you would be posting it all day long. But none exists. You lie.
You don't know, do you? So unless you have proof how about you keep your childish name-calling to yourself. I bet you can't.
Speaking of childish.........
IOW...you do not know what happened...got it.
Your statement presumes that TM assaulted GZ. Exactly how do you know this?
How do you know that GZ didn't approach TM with the gun showing and that TM wasn't fighting to keep him from pulling or using it?
Either scenario could be true and both are plausible.....so....please tell us exactly how you know what happened.
And please don't say, "because the killer said so."
It is in keeping with your style but it doesn't do anything at all to prove a thing. But don't let that stop you...maybe there's somebody out there who doesn't see through it.
“It is in keeping with your style ......”
You obviously have never paid attention to my works on FR. But that’s fine. I don’t pay attention to yours either.
All I am saying is Zimmerman’s story should be questioned. He told LEO Martin pounded his head on concrete. If the medical evidence does not support this, why are all freepers taking his word as gospel? My friends are laughing at the fact I am being painted as an Al Sharpton wannabe. I have voted conservative since 1980 when I was in college. Trust me, I have always been the outsider. I truly believe that BOTH sides have rushed to judgement in this case. There are enough questions to have this go to a preliminary hearing.
I’m sorry to hear that, I’ve worked with several ex-boxers and several college football players when I worked in acute rehab. Your story is a classic example of closed brain trauma. I hope you are doing well, I wish you the best. And you are correct, Zimmerman could have signed a waiver, Zimmerman would have had to be alert and orientated times three. (person, place, and time) This is usually not seen in someone who had their head “slammed” into concrete within minutes of LEO arriving on the scene. As to the cuts, well, let’s agree to disagree. Personally, I just want more info. regarding the whole night. Best wishes to you.
At the bail hearing, the investigator admitted that they had no evidence to refute Zimmerman's claim that he was returning to his truck when Trayvon attacked him. Nor do they have any evidence to prove one way or the other who started the fight.
If you are unarmed and someone approaches you, with apparent ill intent and a weapon exposed or drawn, you're going to attack him to disarm him? You're straining credulity here.
There's a lot more physical evidence and witness testimony to support the "Sweet Widdle Twayvon attacked big meanie George Zimmerman" than the converse.
The fact that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin doesn't automatically make everything he says wrong.
You're showing every sign of being one of Rev. Al's "Useful Idiots".
And in Post 81 you suggest that since Sweet Widdle Twayvon didn't have a gun that George Zimmerman should not be allowed to use his.
You also ask "Why does Zimmerman get due process?" Why shouldn't he?
>If Zimmermans head had been smashed into concrete, there would have been severe damage, most likely scull fracture and concussion.
With all due respect, how would you know that? Are you a doctor?
>I saw two small cuts, no stitches, no hospitalization.
Did you examine Zimmerman?
>Untill I see medical records charting severe head trauma and a broken nose
And here you admit to not having seen Zimmerman’s medical records. Shouldn’t you put off judging either way until you seen them?
You are LOST.
I’m not going to waste my effort proving Z innocent due to medical records and will not bother producing them for you.
The subject I hit was you give yourself away, you’re not worthy of debating, by nonsensical statements that T was a 17 yr old and the other guy had the gun.
That right there, shows you up.
Then you do worse...you demand everybody prove everything to you, to demonstrate by links, etc, that Z isn’t the guilty party.
It doesn’t work that way, even though the info we have so far appears to support Z’s account...waiting for further info, and for the trial if one occurs, but so far the info is good for Z.
But the way it works is, Z is innocent of the charge of second degree murder until in a court he is proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Meanwhile, you make a bunch of prejudicial statements that show how lost you are.
Again, it doesn’t matter if T was 17 and Z had a gun...lawful carry by permit, btw...
It only matters what happened. IF, and I said IF, T circled around behind or to the side of Z instead of going home, and if he decked him and got on top and slammed his head into concrete and if the gun possession was part of the struggle, then for Z it was kill or be killed or horribly injured.
The age of the assaulter or whether he was with or without a gun is irrelevant.
That you love to fling those words into the faces of people you disagree with on the case is very telling.
You’ve made your posts as irrelevant as these items you love to feature will be in a court of law.
Straining credulity to suggest that a 17 yo would fight to keep from being shot or to fight to keep the stranger who followed him from pulling the gun? What would you do? Beg or fight?
And, no, I do not believe everything that anybody who has just killed somebody says about how it happened.
Show a statement from a reliable witness that corroborates GZ's version and I'll accept it. Got one? If not then it's nothing but CYA.
And what is it about you guys that you can't discuss the unknowns without name-calling? Do you think that doing so somehow makes your speculation more accurate? sad.
According to the investigators, they have no evidence to dispute GZ’s version that he was returning to his truck when T jumped him.
Also, according to the investigators, the available evidence tends to support Z, such as John's statement that Z was on the bottom yelling for help.
Remember, the cops probably had no love for Z, since Z was instrumental in getting a cop's son arrested for beating down a homeless black guy.
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.