<p>Thanks, NYMomof2. That article is poorly written and confusing. It looks like the Sanford City Manager has asked the DOJ to step in, but the DOJ has not yet responded definitively.
<p>If you imagine a case where an unarmed white man and an armed black man had a confrontation resulting in the death of the former, do you really think you would have had this media frenzy? My bet is the race of the gun wielder wouldn’t even have been mentioned. Would there have been an army of white and black citizens wearing hoodies protesting the death of the white man and the racist overtones in the incident? When responses are not equivalent when the players’ races are reversed, to me that is the definition of racism. Of course given the gravity of the outcome, this case should be investigated and prosecuted as appropriate, but if it’s reasonable for the race angle to be elevated to the level it is, it should apply universally.</p>
<p>^^^ that’s a lovely, idealistic approach – and totally disingenuous. We live in a country where race not only matters, but can to a large degree influence everything from educational and medical opportunities to, yes, justice. We live in a country where racism is as american as apple pie and slave-owning founding fathers; in a country where only a few decades ago race forbid some people from eating in certain restaurants or taking certain bus seats. Where any affirmative action aimed at easing those barriers is met with holier-than-thou cries of reverse discrimination. </p>
<p>If you think this case is not about race - you’re dreaming.</p>
<p>Pointing out racism is not racism. Investigating racism is not racism. Prosecuting racism is not racism.</p>
<p>OTOH, accusing someone who points out racism of themselves being racist (or the classic, telltale term “racebaiting”)-- that’s a time-honored tactic of civil rights opponents.</p>
<p>I think many people believe that had the races been reversed, the police would have found probably cause and the armed black man would have been arrested and charged, regardless of a Stand Your Ground defense. This is exactly why so many are in a “frenzy.”</p>
<p>The automatic presumption that the police and the perpetrator in this incident are racists is destructive. As yet, there has been zero proof that Z was racially motivated or that the PD handled this matter in any way other than according to standard procedure. </p>
<p>For our justice system to work correctly, we must start from the premise that Trayvon did nothing wrong, Zimmerman’s intent to kill him is unknown, and that the PD followed reasonable procedure in this case. From there, the facts as they are discovered must be presented to an impartial jury to determine guilt.</p>
<p>Slandering people based upon nothing but unsubstantiated suspicion is harmful to lives and society.</p>
<p>If Zimmerman was a black man who was a local resident, respected in the community, who had an established relationship with the PD, and Trayvon was a white teenaged stranger with his hood up walking around the community that had been recently subject to several robberies, do you still think the PD would have treated Zimmerman differently? I don’t.</p>
<p>I live in NYC and I remember the Freddy’s Fashion Mart massacre in which Al Sharpton incited his followers and 8 innocent people ended up dead. I understand and share the anger, but we all have to remember how easily things get out of control. It wouldn’t be particularly beneficial to anyone or gain justice for Trayvon if Sharpton causes other people to be murdered, particularly if they had nothing to do with this tragedy. It is also worth remembering that Sharpton despises Jews.</p>
<p>And again, you’re ignoring the dubious prior history of the department of racial profiling and shelving similar past cases…which has been previously documented and has become such an issue that there’s a possibility of a Federal investigation into those issues. </p>
<p>This department has earned the suspicion based on its past documented actions/inactions. Continuing to have faith in a police department/local authorities even after the above factors illustrates the believer is extremely naive/sheltered or is a heavy subscriber to the “Established authority must never be questioned/scrutinized” school of thought. The former is understandable…even if it is regrettable. </p>
<p>The latter is IMHO scary…and goes against what the US of A is supposed to stand for.</p>
<p>Didn’t the Sanford police, including one of the same officers, recently have another significant racially-charged incident? The beating of a homeless man?</p>
Exactly. And it applies to many who only see the racism they choose to. I’ve lived in many societies where racism is the norm and people are open about it. It’s only here that it’s a label tagged on some at the first opportunity, while others are immune.</p>
<p>
In contemporary society, this tactic is used by the proponents, and successfully too.</p>
<p>Bay - those who ignore history (including that of racist tendencies on the part of certain law enforcement agencies) are doomed to repeat it. If Sanford police had been held to a higher standard a few years ago, maybe Trayvon would be alive today - or Zimmerman would be in jail, and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what you mean, katliamom. Are you saying that if the Sanford police had been labelled racists years ago, they would have interpreted the application of SYG differently today?</p>
<p>Clearly at least one police officer had a different interpretation of SYG in Zimmerman’s case - the one who wanted to arrest him. </p>
<p>And yes, if racism at Sanford police had been addressed with years ago, I believe there would have been more of those police officers willing to arrest Zimmerman if not right away, then in the days to follow.</p>
<p>“Hey George, sorry 'bout the handcuffs. Some of our patrol officers insist on going by the book after that Collison thing. No hard feelings right? We’re gonna keep you here for a few hours, just in case some ACLU-types are watching. Don’t want that now do we? And we have to keep your gun for a bit … same reason. You have other guns you could use, right? Go get 'em Tiger!”</p>
<p>Seem like a perfectly appropriate commentary to me. It’s not like Zimmerman did anything illegal, right?</p>