How Common Are Deaths Like Trayvon Martin’s?
The widespread public upset about George Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, falls into two different categories: concerns about Florida’s gun laws, and concerns about racism by Sanford police. The decision of the Sanford police to not arrest George Zimmerman does not seem like evidence of racism at all, but of a realistic evaluation of the evidence available to them.
Zimmerman’s claim was that Martin attacked him, knocking Zimmerman to the ground. At least one witness reported that he saw two men fighting on the ground, one on top “beating up the other guy.” Zimmerman had a bloody nose and blood on the back of his head. It appears that Zimmerman did not exercise good judgment in chasing Trayvon Martin down, leaving the safety of his car to catch a teenager who had at this point done nothing wrong. Nonetheless, Zimmerman’s version of what happened, corroborated by what the witness saw and evidence of injury to the back of Zimmerman’s head, suggests that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, pounding him pretty hard. Under those circumstances, Zimmerman had a plausible basis for shooting Martin.
Perhaps Zimmerman’s version shades the truth. Perhaps Zimmerman attacked Martin, not the other way around. Martin might have told a different version of events, but he is dead. The evidence that was available in the aftermath of the shooting created reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed a criminal act. (Stupid, perhaps, but not everything stupid is criminal.) Nothing that has shown up since, not even Martin’s girlfriend’s recounting of a cell phone conversation that she had at the start of his confrontation with Zimmerman, contradicts Zimmerman’s claim.
Trayvon Martin’s death was a tragedy, but not every tragedy is a crime. Unless someone finds a witness or physical evidence to prove that Zimmerman lied about what happened, or to show that Zimmerman started a fight with Martin, there really is no basis to pursue criminal charges against Zimmerman. (There may well be a civil case against Zimmerman, where the burden of proof is much lower than in criminal court.)
Some states make a point of gathering data on permit holders who are convicted of crimes. The results are generally positive: for 2009, Texas reported that 101 concealed handgun licensees were convicted of crimes, out of 65,561 convictions statewide. Since there were 402,914 licensees in 2009, in a state with just under 25 million people, this is actually pretty impressive: 1.6% of the population had 0.15% of the criminal convictions. In short, Texas licensees had less than one-tenth of the criminal conviction rate of the general population.
From 2003 through 2010, I gathered news accounts of American civilians using guns in self-defense: a total of 4,699 such incidents. (You can read a detailed report at the Cato Institute.) What I found quite startling as I compiled those reports over the years is how few incidents I found where concealed weapon permit holders used those guns in a way that was lawful but foolish. The case that was most obviously analogous to the Zimmerman-Martin tragedy took place in Aurora, Colorado, on November 13, 2004. There was a white man with a concealed handgun (Glenn Eichstedt), and a black man with a bad attitude (Aaron P. Davis). It started as a dispute over a door ding in a parking lot. At the end, Eichstedt was alive, and Davis was on the way to the hospital, where he died.
The same screeching about racism appeared because the shooter was white and the dead man was black. The difference is that there were lots of witnesses to what happened. Some say that Davis pushed Eichstedt, others say that Eichstedt punched Davis. Still others reported that the first physical contact was when Davis attacked Eichstedt with a solid metal bar eight inches long and 1 ½ inches in diameter, hitting him in the head. This is the point where Eichstedt, in fear for his life, shot Davis. Not surprisingly, the grand jury refused to indict Eichstedt.
Like what appears to have happened with Zimmerman and Martin, cooler heads needed to prevail. Both Eichstedt and Davis had been drinking (although they were not legally drunk), and it may have contributed to this tragedy. Both men should have backed away from the confrontation, exchanged insurance information, and let it go. Eichstedt, being armed, especially should have backed away. A paint chip isn’t worth someone’s life — ever. But once Davis attacked Eichstedt with that metal bar, Eichstedt was completely lawful in using deadly force.
As I said earlier, we do not know, and likely never will, exactly what happened in the dark between Zimmerman and Martin. The burden of proof works to Zimmerman’s advantage, as it inevitably must in a criminal case. This is not a problem of racism; this is a natural consequence of the high standard of proof required in a criminal case.
I do have one final disturbing thought on this matter. A lot of energy is being focused on the death of Trayvon Martin as a sign of racism in our society. Yet I find myself deeply troubled by the very selective upset of civil rights leaders. In 2010, 6470 blacks were murdered in the United States, more than 17 per day. Examining the single offender/victim table shows that 90% of black murder victims were murdered by another black. (No surprise: most murder is within race.) I don’t mean to suggest that Trayvon Martin’s death is unimportant. But where is the outrage and fury of the civil rights groups about the 16 black-on-black murders that happen every day in the U.S.? We don’t know if Zimmerman did something criminal, or just something stupid that led to Trayvon Martin’s death. But we do know that every day there are sixteen black-on-black murders in the U.S., and they almost never receive this kind of attention and concern. Or is it only a concern if the killer isn’t black?
Also read:
Interesting – but probably not in the way you intended. I just realized, upon reading your post, that I’d heard a lot of noise about alleged racial issues and the “Stand Your Ground” law in connection with this case, but heard nothing about anyone trying to make this a concealed-carry issue. Not to say there is none, just that I haven’t noticed it among the other noise.
Is it possible that the enraged mob has finally realized that it’s a non-starter? That would seem to be the most parsimonious explanation, but then again the hoplophobes trot out the “streets will run red with blood!” meme every time a state looks to liberalize CC laws, but it never occurs, and they never learn.
I have to wonder…
Not as common as unprovoked killings of innocent whites by criminal blacks.
One tires of this racially polluted logic.
CC laws are not constitutional and are a violation of the 2nd amendment.
Remember that the vast majority of all murders are within race: whites killing whites, blacks killing blacks.
As a % of total population, blacks are statistically far more dangerous. And if you acknowledged that the Government lumps whites and Hispanics together, when you place non Hispanic whites outside of that grouping – the % of black on white crime is staggering.
Here is a link to NCVS (National crime victim survey) and FBI crime stats summed up on an easy to read flyer: http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/flyer1_crime.pdf
The NCVS (2008) clearly shows that black criminals target whites.
• Single-offender crimes: blacks committed 83% of the 520,000
violent inter-racial crimes involving blacks and whites nationwide.
• The victims of black violent crime are mostly white: black
criminals chose white victims 54% of the time. White criminals
chose black victims only 4.6% of the time.
• Blacks were 32 times as likely to attack whites as whites were to
attack blacks. For robbery, they were 67 times as likely.
• There were over 19,000 black-on-white rapes/sexual assaults.
That’s about 53 every day. However, the NCVS found zero cases
of white-on-black rape or sexual assault.
• Multiple-offender crimes: blacks committed 142,000 violent
gang crimes against whites nationwide, including 89,000 assaults
and 49,000 robberies. That leaves 4,000 gang rapes/sexual
assaults, which is about 10 every day. The NCVS found zero
cases of violent white-on-black gang crimes of any kind.
• Gangs of black criminals chose white victims 55% of the time.
As with single-offender crimes, blacks prefer to attack whites
This data is offensive; I have checked some of it in the past and found it to be true. One point worth mentioning, however: because whites are the vast majority of the population, and blacks are a relatively small minority of the population, it is not surprising that black on white crime is quite common while white on black crime is not. If you pick a victim at random, the chances that your victim will be black is about 11%. The chances that your victim will be white is far higher: about 85% (if include Hispanics as white, as FBI UCR does). So even random attacks are going to be disproportionately white.
The fallacy in your argument is that the races to not live in a homogeneous blend. Which is to say , whites live with whites and black with black. The crime is part one of convenience…. what targets are around.
And the greatest fallacy you present is your “attack at random”. It does nothing to alleviate the truth that 50% of murders/crime or thereabouts every year… year after year are committed by blacks. 12% of population. Particularly black males … 6% of population, particularly black males between ages 12 and 35… 2% of population.
You can randomize the victims in your fantasy model. But you cannot randomize the perps.
Yeah, Truth is “offensive”.
Facepalm.
I seen and heard some mental jujitsu before but yours is a winner. Wow! Do you really believe the crap you wrote?
Hey do us a favor: Run down to Compton, Harlem or SE Chicago and pick any street and tell the residents you think the white man is out to get them based on your stats, and report back to us what condition you are in after your visit. Better yet join the NBP and offer to be their statistician. Tell them you have renounced your race and want to be part of theirs.
I am impressed how many people missed the juxtaposition of “offensive” and “accurate.”
What really impresses me is how many of you have mistaken me for a liberal. I’m just making the point that assuming that the differentials here are entirely based on racial prejudice is an error. I do not dispute that there is substantial black racism out there–perhaps even more than there is white racism today. But that is not the only explanation for these disparities.
thanks..for some reason didn’t see it before
Black crime is a problem — brought to you, not by “racism and poverty” (Blacks in the deep South during segregation were not nearly as violent), but by the collapse of the Black family due to the intellectuals’ belief in the “all families are equal” (as in, “nothing wrong with a 15-year-old having a kid out of wedlock”) and “welfare is a human right”. The result of this attitude to young black women wasn’t even, “don’t bother about school, get married and have kids”, but, “don’t bother about school, don’t bother about marriage, get pregnant and live on the dole, have children who do the same thing”. Is is any surprise one of the results is that the kids who grew up in such a home often became criminals?
But the given statistics here are a good case of “how to lie with statistics”. They are true — but they don’t show what they say they show, at least not nearly to the degree the author implies.
A few examples:
>>>>>.• Single-offender crimes: blacks committed 83% of the 520,000
violent inter-racial crimes involving blacks and whites nationwide.
First of all, that’s INTRA-racial violence (between races), not INTER-racial (within the same race). As intra-racial violence is relatively rare compare to inter-racial one, this statistics doesn’t show as much as one would think.
• The victims of black violent crime are mostly white: black
criminals chose white victims 54% of the time. White criminals
chose black victims only 4.6% of the time.
>>>>>This means that Black violent criminals attacked other Blacks about four times as much on average than they attacked whites — because about 80% of the population is white, and about 50% of black criminals attacked that 80% and another 50% the other 20% who aren’t white (round numbers). So it is hardly an indication of some “war” by Black criminals on White people — it is simply an indication that Whites are the majority.
• Blacks were 32 times as likely to attack whites as whites were to
attack blacks. For robbery, they were 67 times as likely.
True, because Blacks are about five or six times to be criminals (for various reasons) AND there are four times as many Whites in America than Blacks. A serious problem indeed, but the “32 as much” is distorting the picture since it ignores the fact there are 4 times as many Whites.
• There were over 19,000 black-on-white rapes/sexual assaults.
That’s about 53 every day. However, the NCVS found zero cases
of white-on-black rape or sexual assault.
I am very skeptical of such claims. When someone starts with the “XXX every day” — “17 women are raped every day”, “7 children abducted every day”, “18 babies sacrifices by Satanists every day” or whatever — I become very suspicious, as it is almost inevitably a case of trying to use the fear factor. Where did this “53 a day” come from?
>>>• Multiple-offender crimes: blacks committed 142,000 violent
gang crimes against whites nationwide, including 89,000 assaults
and 49,000 robberies. That leaves 4,000 gang rapes/sexual
assaults, which is about 10 every day. The NCVS found zero
cases of violent white-on-black gang crimes of any kind.
None whatever? White gangs such as the Russian mafia or the Aryan brotherhood are surely less common than Black gangs like the Crips or the Bloods,not ONE single Black guy was ever beat up for going on the white gang’s “turf” ever? Allow me to be skeptical.
>>>>>• Gangs of black criminals chose white victims 55% of the time.
As with single-offender crimes, blacks prefer to attack whites
Yes, and as with single-offender crime, this means Blacks, at 50% of the population, suffer 50% of attacks from Blacks criminals, which means the Black criminals actually tend to attacks Blacks more; it’s simply that there are many more White people than Black people.
So, folks, you see? Black crime in a huge problem. It is liberal-caused, mostly: people are responsible for their own actions, but I can see why the black kid who grew up in a broken home in the ghetto because liberals told his mom “all families are equal” and who repeatedly saw criminals lionized as “rebels” and “fighters against the racist system”, would find a career in crime as a possible choice far more appealing than the white kid who grew up in that opressive, evil mom-and-dad family and who joined the evil, opressive unjust capitalist exploitation by getting a job. But still, that doesn’t mean junk statistics like the ones above are the way to look at reality.
I’m too tired to think about everything you are saying about these statistics, but I do have to point out one bit of ignorance on your part. You ask “Where does this ’53 a day’ statistic come from?”
When you are given a number, say 19,000 per year, it’s very easy to follow up with something like “That’s about 53 incidents per day.” You do this by calculating 19,000/365 = 52.054794520547944 (according to a floating-point calculation), which illustrates that the original person giving the statistic of ’53 per day’ was too aggressive in rounding; I personally would have said “52 per day”.
Yes, using “X per day” makes things sound scarier; statistics, however, can dehumanize and mask the problem, by making a serious issue sound like sterile numbers. Sometimes, too, you have to pull away from the statistics altogether, to really think about the problem and its implications.
I would also add that, if you ever encounter a “X per minute/every minute X” or “Y per day” statistic, it’s a very good idea to multiply it out, to get a “Z per year” statistic. In some cases, the number will become absurd; in other cases, the number will be so small, that “Do something, anything, to fix it! Even if it makes the problem worse!!!11!1″ hysteria suddenly becomes a lot less pressing.
In all sincerity…I would like to see/hear the stats on black on white crime..all we ever hear is the poooooor black man got hurt trying to do something illegal..
How many whites are killed, injured by blacks in our country? Is there a stat anywhere?
“CC laws are not constitutional and are a violation of the 2nd amendment.” Why?
Usually a CC person has some training, different from criminals. Re-check the data, and see the percentage of shooting done by CC persons.
Why are CC laws unconstitutional? Because the right to keep and bear arms is not to be infringed.
Imagine, for a moment, that you could own a blog, but before you do so, you have to get a license, which includes a libel-and-slander training requirement, and a fee that you have to pay every five years. Admittedly, the training sounds like a good idea…but, do you really think that such legislation is going to be found Constitutional?
There are a lot of gun rights supporters (myself included) that can’t help but conclude that such logic ought to extend to the Second Amendment as well. We endure the Concealed Carry Requirements because it helps to open the door to Constitutional Carry, and because we generally try to be law-abiding–even if a given law in question, is, in fact, unconstitutional.
Indeed, Vermont itself has tried to pass a Concealed Carry Permit Law, but their courts have struck such a thing down as unconstitutional many decades ago. That’s why, to this day, if you can legally own a gun, you can carry it in Vermont, concealed or openly, without a permit. You don’t need training, either. And with Vermont’s low crime statistics, it’s very doubtful that training is going to reduce crime, or gun deaths, or any other statistic you choose to pick.
Not quite correct. State v. Rosenthal (Vt. 1903) struck down the City of Rutland’s ban on carrying of deadly weapons because it was a general ban–it applied to both concealed and open carry.
Amazing article, thank you for the numbers !
Those numbers are tragical !
Why nobody cares about 16 black-on-black murders a day ? THIS is true racism !
It isn’t useful for race hustlers like Al Sharpton to inflame black public opinion. Many years ago, Rev. Jesse Jackson made the observation that he had reached an age where, if we walking through a big city, and he heard footsteps behind him, he would be relieved if he looked over his shoulder and saw white teenagers there. He went on to say what an embarrassment it was to be afraid of his own race.
Bill Cosby has made rather a lot of enemies in civil rights leadership circles for pointing out that this gang culture is not intrinsic to being black. It wasn’t part of the society that Bill Cosby grew up in during the 1940s in a very poor Philly neighborhood. And it is destroying black America.
It isn’t useful for race hustlers like Al Sharpton to inflame black public opinion.
That depends on your *purpose*, doesn’t it?
What do you suppose is Al Sharpton’s purpose? And more importantly: what do you suppose is his end-of-road?
I harbor no illusions about where a lot of the racists jumping on the Trayvon bandwagon are going, whether they care to know it or not. By way of hint, I will point out that we are less than a month away from the 20th anniversary of the Los Angeles riots.
What Mr. Cramer meant:
Talking about black-on-black crime is not useful to Sharpton in his business of inflaming black opinion.
Seerak understood you. He’s saying that $harpton’s game is that he WANTS a LA-style riot. These people WANT to kill people and destroy property. They WANT cities to burn. So does Obama. How else can you justify rounding up good ol’ white boys in the sticks of Montana over a riot that hppens 1000 miles away….?
Well, yeaaahhh!
If Jesse and Al were going around protesting every time a young black man was murdered by another young black man they would run out of gas in a day. And it wouldn’t provide good ‘face time’ on the networks. So, no real point in doing that is there? There’s no profit in it. No profit at all.
Clayton I think you are confusing Race Hustler Jesse Jackson with Obama’s WHITE grandmother . He told this IDENTICAL story about her feelings when describing how ashamed of her “RACISM’ he was. Or perhaps more plausibly Obama copied Race Hustler Jesse Jacksons story and applied it to his dead Grandmother to slander her memory. Either way its just a story designed to inflame Race Hatred. Obama has a history of INVENTING imaginary situations you only have to read his book ‘Dreams….’to see that.
No, Clayton isn’t mixing the two up. Jesse Jackson really expressed that sentiment, and he was expressing his sadness that black crime was so bad, he would be relieved to see a white guy behind him.
And I completely agree with Jesse Jackson on this one. We shouldn’t automatically feel a measure of relief, just because the footsteps behind us are made by a white person instead of a black one. It’s a travesty that black culture–and gang culture in general–has pushed us to this point.
And, frankly, such a feeling isn’t going to stop, until gangs disband, and blacks clean up their act. Unfortunately, there are times which I fear that the opposite will happen: that we’ll feel discomfort won’t go away, even if we see a white person behind us, because white society chooses to embrace the gang culture, instead of black society choosing to destroy that culture.
Sherab: “Why nobody cares about 16 black-on-black murders a day ? THIS is true racism !”
Not “racism”, but “racialism”.
The horrid statistics about black-on-black murders are ignored because such a discussion necessarily changes the racialists meme that the ills that have befallen black Americans are due wholly to white racism. And that just won’t do…
Racialists and the government subsidized/supported racialist industry they have built in America are dedicated to expanding and aggravating the racial divides in America because racialists and their cronies profit from pitting one race against another. Were the races to just get along, racialists would be out of business.
Racialists gain votes, money, power and “fame” (of a sick sort) by splitting us along racial lines and agitating those with weaker minds who are most susceptible to their deviant yet obvious coercion.
The racialist’s most powerful weapons are the words “racist” and “racism”, and liberal white-guilt and the “entitlement mindset” they have induced into the black community over the past 40 years.
However, the racialists have overused and abused the words so much that, as in the story of the ‘Boy Who Cried Wolf’, the racialists who cry “racist!” over and over and over are no longer wield the power they once did. They still have power, but it is fading.
The vast majority of Americans just want to live their lives and get along with those who want to be a positive, productive members of American society regardless of their race, color or other human subtlety.
When we the people finally destroy the racialist industry and eradicate it’s toxic infections from our laws, regulations, academic environments, and mindsets, all people of all races will be far better off than we are now.
Some years back, one of the national civil rights groups (I think it might have been NAACP) put together a public service announcement showing a Klan cross-burning, and then the number of blacks murdered annually in hate crimes (which is tiny–usually a handful), then some images of gang members, and then the number of blacks murdered by other blacks in gang-related incidents, and it was in the thousands. The point of the ad was to try and get young black men to stop murdering young black men, by reminding them who the real enemy is. Not surprisingly, the reaction to the ad was so negative that it was immediately withdrawn.
Not “racism”, but “racialism”.
This distinction is as meaningless as that between “anti-Semitism” and “anti-Zionism”, and has the same motives.
Seerak,
The racism you are describing has a name.
It’s a Liberal/Left invention called the Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations.
It works like this:
Make endless excuses for riots, rape, and violence because they “cant help it” and, well, they’re “different”
Create and enforce rules that compel the hiring of their most unqualified, incompetent, and dishonest, because “they cant REALLY compete, right?”
Condescend to the most evil and violent ones in their organizations by hosting lavish radical chic parties, to get a “feel” for how “they” live. “oooh, its SOO dangerous, I love it dahhhling!”
Never judge any of their “leaders”, elected officials, preachers, celebrities, sports figures or musicians by reasonable standards of civil conduct and behavior because “that would be racist”. Corruption, cronyism, fraud, money laundering, even drug abuse IN office, caught ON camera…SHHHHH! They’ll think we’re saying it because (wisper) they’re BLACK!
Encourage (require compel demand) everyone to study ridiculously unimpressive and low accomplishment “cultures” while pretending they are the same as high achievement advanced classical civilizations, because “they need to feel proud”
Make as many of “them” professors of these “disciplines” (that have zero marketable value in the real world) as you can, because, you know…what ELSE can they learn?
Count faces and arrange by shades…(demand) the dispersal of them in perfect, predetermined distributions everywhere you can, just like a cute little garden. Stand back and admire your work! Gosh Im SO inclusive!..oh wait, would ANOTHER one look better….over…THERE?
Give their absolute WORST criminal race-baiting vultures the air of respectability by calling the “The Reverend”….give one his own TV show, and never, never EVER mention his participation in a proven, premeditated, artificial ‘Hate Crime” designed to sow racial discontent because “well, they need SOMEONE to look up to”
Find an unqualified empty suit who’s “articulate and clean” and just so dreamy good looking that we dont CARE about the content of his character, we’re just DYING for vote for the color of his skin….
…and feel SO good about ourselves, because WE’RE not racists, not like those “constitutionalists” rednecks who demand EVERYONE be held to the SAME standard.
Dont they know some people are different?
Put this in a blender for 50 years, add increased welfare payments and food stamps for every extra out of wedlock kid you have, “because well, Black people NEED someone to raise their kids…”because hello, they’re blAAAA-aack?”
And there you have it.
The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations
The Hallmark of liberal thinking, and the absolute root cause of all the racial strife we now have.
Of course it’s whiteys’ fault that so many blacks get killed. Honkies should be out there in the ‘hood where they can get robbed and shot! Them racists are just staying away on purpose, just so more bro’s get killed!
And of course, that sort of thing encourages even more racism and segregation. A friend, some years ago, got off the Interstate in Detroit late one night looking for gasoline. A police officer pulled him over, and asked what he and his friends were doing there at this hour? He told them that he was going to escort them back to the freeway, and that they should NEVER get off in that part of Detroit again. Ever. And without directly saying it, they received the very strong impression that being white was effectively an incitement to mob action.
Even in bad neighbors, there are a lot of black people who would never find this acceptable. But they are kept in terror by a relatively small number of savages.
White people are getting sick to death for paying a price for something they never participated in (news flash – most white people did NOT own slaves) by people claiming victomhood over something that never happened to them.
Black people are true racists in the sense that they feel superior to white people because they never participated in slavery:
Yo black people! For the most part you are here because your ancestor lost a war. Your ancestor was war booty sold into slavery by other black people.
I’m so sick of this whole thing that I really wish that Thomas Jefferson would have had the backbone to ship every.single.one.(black people)over.to.Liberia. Just end it! Get rid of them! Go build your own d@mned country!
Why is it that when blacks commit hate crimes “civil rights groups” don’t stand in solidarity with the victim? Occam’s Razor would suggest it’s because most of them are virulent racists and that their movement is nothing more than a badly disguised supremacist movement. There is no other legitimate reason why they have such a “see no evil, hear no evil” attitude toward members of their race committing hate crimes while stridently attacking when they are the victims.
Could it be that the soft bigotry of low expectations exists in the black community as well? Why do you suppose they don’t try harder to reclaim their neighborhoods from the drug-selling thugs who dominate them?
Mr. Cramer: I wouldn’t be so agnostic about what happened. There is now enough evidence in the public domain to indicate that Martin was the aggressor and that Zimmerman was well within his rights to use lethal force on Martin.
You are of course absolutely right about concealed permit holders being extremely law abiding, and you are absolutely right about how demagogues, pretending to be leaders, are using this case for their own ends. It would be much better, as you indicate, if they worked to end the dysfunction in the black community so black-on-black homicide rates would not be so horrendously high. But that would take a lot of hard work, and hard work does not seem to be in their vocabulary.
And some of that information has appeared just since I wrote this!
Your article is time stamped …”March 28, 2012 – 9:13 am”
This info was available at least… at least… a day ago. Please try to stay current. It will save you much embarrassment and loss of credibility.
Keep it up along this line and you will join that racist Ruben Navarrette nut.
Fantom this is not the first incidence of Clayton confusing truth and fantasy he seems to think he can just invent stories and that no one out there is as smart as he is so will just swallow his BS. When he is caught out come the feeble excuses.
It would be one thing if Clayton were a reporter, trying to keep current of the latest in a given story. He’s not. He’s a blogger, a software engineer, a telescope tripod wheel manufacturer (part-time), and sometimes a professor. And all this doesn’t take into account what it takes to publish something on PJ Media. (I have no idea how the approval process works, but I can easily imagine it taking a day to get this article approved, assuming Clayton had to get approval to publish a blog post on PJ Media.)
There’s nothing wrong with writing about what you know, from what you’ve read, and having new information sneak in under the radar (even if it snuck in a day or two ago).
If every blogger, indeed, every reporter, were to wait until he had every last iota of information to write on something, then nothing would be written, ever.
I submit an article, and it takes anywhere from two days to two weeks before it appears here.
There is a personal, family tragedy, a dead youth in Sanford Florida. More over there is national melt down in basic civility, even basic common sense. What precisely, legally, “..are Deaths like Trayvon Martin’s?” People who universally preface their bias with, “I do not know what happened, but….” continue to blather on a subject they admittedly know nothing about. Stand your ground. Neighborhood watchers. Hate crimes. Racial profiling. Concealed weapons. How white is an Hispanic? Hoodies are worn in the well of the House of Representatives.
I too, do not know what happened in Sanford Florida, but I am certain that idiots are running wild everywhere else in America. Legions of pundits who fault these young men for rash stupid judgments, far exceed them in quiet hindsight.
I strongly recommend that we are a nation of laws, color blind laws, and we should let the legal system work. “Just the facts, ma’am.” The rest is despicable garbage, uttered by despicable people, of every race, and party.
Sir
“I strongly recommend that we are a nation of laws, color blind laws, and we should let the legal system work.”
I applaud your civility and sense of fair judgment
Unfortunately, that sentiment died within the hearts of our “leaders” before I was even born. I learned most of it from my father and his brothers, men who fought WW2, but precious little of it did I ever see from anyone “in a suit on TV” in the last 40 years.
“The rest is despicable garbage, uttered by despicable people, of every race, and party”
Again, correct you are, and I am at times guilty. The deceit and dishonesty from the Left all of my life builds a rancor and thirst for revenge that can indeed be unhealthy….
But vent we must at times, or else I fear we may begin to kill, with our bare hands, the treasonous vermin in their beds while they sleep.
That is a bridge I’d rather not cross,
(for now)
Why does it take a foreign media to hear about black on white crime? Should it really matter what color they victims are? Maybe if Trayvon Martin wasn’t looking for trouble, he wouldn’t have met an awful end to his life.
These people were just minding their own business, and so was this little white boy. And Mark Levin brought an interesting point up the other night. Why do they keep showing photos of this kid at 13? He was 17 and 6′ 2″.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2117695/Brutal-home-invasion-Oklahoma-couple-ends-65-year-romance-meeting-blind-date.html
Teens set kid on fire for being ‘white boy’
MEENA HART DUERSON
Sunday, March 04, 2012
A 13-year-old boy who police say was doused with gasoline and lit on fire last week while walking home from school is recovering from first-degree burns to his face and head.
The boy was just two blocks from his home in Kansas City Tuesday when two teenagers began to follow him and then attacked him, his mother, Melissa Coon, said.
Police have described the suspects as black 16-year-olds, while the victim is white.
“We were told it’s a hate crime,” Coon told KTLA.
Thank you for posting that.
But, you’ll find precious little mention of that…yours is the first I’ve seen, and it confirms the dis-information rampant by showing only a much younger black boy. Any male 6’2″ is no “boy”.
Thank you for posting that.
“Why do they keep showing photos of this kid at 13? He was 17 and 6′ 2″.
But, you’ll find precious little mention of that…yours is the first I’ve seen, and it confirms the dis-information rampant by showing only a much younger black boy. Any male 6’2″ is no “boy”.
Re the Kansas City boy “set on fire” story – I understand why the national media won’t want to cover it. But the local media dropped it immediately, and the local police said they doubted it was a hate crime. Well, it was either hate crime or they didn’t believe the kid; frankly, the idea that a 13 year old was playing with matches and invented a story to avoid a ghastly punishment (losing his Nintendo?) probably occurred to them.
Bonus cause for concern – Rush Limbaugh, who once worked in KC and ought to have contacts who can give him the scoop, has ducked this story (as far as I can tell from his archives). Media bias?
I dunno, maybe that explanation of the KC story is valid…
But here in Philly, there have been several OBVIOUS anti-white hate crimes in the last month, two of them full-on murders, that never get classified as such:
A shooting on a white mans front steps, after they circled the block following a verbal argument with his son. Why shoot the dad (or was it the uncle?) because he was a “White Motherf*cker” too.
A beating death of a white college kid near the Liberty Bell by a gang of “undetermined” race. No robbery, just beaten to death.
The best was the white cabbie dragged from his car and mercilessly beaten while they yelled “cracker” and “white motherf*cker”. Documented, witnessed, no speculation about it full on racial slurs screamed at him as they beat him. Details reported in the papers and on TV…
But our (black) police chief explained it away as “they werent “racists”, this is not a hate crime….it just knucklehead kids, talkin’ trash” and the press dropped it immediately
And AMAZINGLY, there were no riots of white people storming a Popeyes Fried Chicken, to vent their rage by looting a two piece combo, and a GIANT orange soda.
Go figure
We don’t know if Zimmerman did something criminal, or just something stupid that led to Trayvon Martin’s death.
We don’t know if either of those possibilities is true. It is entirely possible that Zimmerman did not do something criminal, and also did not do something stupid. It’s a mystery to me why so many pundits on the right seem to be determined to convict Zimmerman of something – either stupidity or criminality.
Information that has come to light since I wrote this makes me more inclined to think that Zimmerman may have done only one stupid thing: following Martin.
Did you write this 3 or 4 days ago? Zimmerman’s innocence has been clear for at least that long from public sources.
If your goal is to help the police locate the suspicious person, it may not merely not ne stupid, it may be required.
Seriously dude. Just stop it. Mr Zimmerman was doing a great civic duty.. at great risk to himself. Keeping watch for his neighbors.
And it turns out he was right about the thug who attacked him.
the fact that Zimmerman was not arrested at the time of the incident or shortly thereafter is that an investigation had taken place, and the police concluded on the basis of the evidence that no charges were warranted.
That being said, it is certainly true that mistakes, sometimes even accidentally on purpose, are made. When there are doubts, reasonable doubts on that matter, reinvestigation is the thing to do.
Unfortunately, the current reinvestigation and the temporary resignation of the police chief, are taking place in a most unhealthy atmosphere and under threats of violence. Hopefully, the grand jury will not succumb to this intimidation.
I fear that if the new investigation is conducted properly but its results do not satisfy Sharpton, or the Black Panthers, etc., violence will take place anyway. Obama’s silence now, his failure to condemn the vigilante lynch mob mentality and nip it in the bud, will be directly responsible for the ensuing turmoil, if it happens.
I think, however, Obama may like nothing better than an outbreak of such violence nationwide.
Come to think about, the only thing he said when he did put his 2 cents in, just made things worse.
Dear Mr. Cramer,
You present some inconvenient truths which are not fit for discussion.
Now, back to our regular programming, President BH Obama is uniting people.
Wait, I meant inciting people.
There is another 911 caller who partially corroborates that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. Toward the end of their call, they mention the guy on top had on a white t-shirt. Upon questioning they report it was to dark to see the person’s skin color or pants color. Further questioning elicits that the person in the white t-shirt was on top of another person.
Also, if you listen to all of Zimmerman’s 911 call, you see that after the dispatcher says they don’t need him to follow the person, he says “okay” and the heavy breathing and wind noise stops. Within a few seconds, Zimmerman reports the person ran and he no longer sees him. So the charge he continued after 911 suggested he not, is erroneous.
My state is concealed carry unless prohibited. Anywhere you go in urban Alaska, the odds are almost certain that somebody in your field of vision is carrying a concealed weapon. Outside urban areas, everybody except greenies and tourists is carrying, usually openly. Frankly, I don’t like carrying in town; it really takes too much thought and discipline. If you see a gaggle of young men in hoodies and baggy pants OF ANY RACE approaching you, the odds are pretty good that they’re going to try to make you give way or even get off the sidewalk. If you stand your ground, at minimum you’re going to get the teenaged two word speech and likely even more of a confrontation. If you reciprocate, they WILL attack you. Nobody, I mean nobody, is going to hurt me, and if attacked, I WILL kill you if necessary. You can see that evolution of events coming, so why let it come; avoid them. Likewise the rice rocket with illegaly dark tint or the similarly tinted Escallade with 22s that cuts you off or runs a light in front of you forcing you to evade; that middle finger or even a horn WILL get some sort of retaliation. I’ve lived and worked in high crime areas. I’d much rather have made the two block walk from my shop to the bank in downtown Atlanta in the early ’70s without my pants on than without the pistol tucked in my waistband. But, even there, you usually had to go looking for trouble and as a white merchant walking south of Auburn Avenue, you were definitionally looking for trouble. You didn’t do it if there was a Plan B; I usually took my bank bag home with me and made my deposit in a nice, safe, read white, suburban branch, but sometimes I had to go to the bank downtown or go somewhere to transact some sort of business and I carried – always. Looking back, I was way too ready to pull that pistol out and I’m just lucky nobody ever pulled one on me in return. Sure, it is comforting when the gaggle of young men approaches to reach inside your jacket and assure yourself with the presence of that weapon, but that steel confidence shouldn’t motivate you to not avoid the situation when you can avoid the situation, and, yes, when you can retreat. I don’t believe you should have a legal duty to retreat or avoid, but I do believe that you should impose a personal duty on yourself to avoid or retreat whenever you can do so without risk to yourself – and I don’t mean without risk to your ego. Sure the punks are going to chuckle that they forced the old man to avoid them or that they got away with cutting you off or whatever, but the alternative is ALL TOO LIKELY to be that you’re going to have to kill them – or they you – if you don’t avoid them, and I really don’t want to be living the life Mr. Zimmerman is living right now. Then maybe we can start putting some thought into how to get young men of ALL RACES to stop walking around in packs wearing hoodies and baggy pants and leaving a puddle of spit everywhere they stop. It drove me crazy that my stepsons and all their friends, all from well-off white families in an almost lily white town, Juneau, all wanted to dress, talk, and act like black gangstas from Southcentral LA, and as long as they were in the house I didn’t dare leave a handgun where they could access it.
Juneau also has the offspring of the “elite” (spit), namely, the legislators and lobbyists, who are protected from punishment for their acts. Not that the legislators and lobbyists are all that law abiding. (Used to live and work in JNU.)
Not so much, hardly at all since Palin and the 90 day session. Three legislators live in Juneau, the rest the good people of the rest of the State send there and then complain about what “Juneau” is doing to them. A few lobbyists live in Juneau, but most only come down and camp out for the Session. Few legislators bring their families down for the session. The recent Governors of Alaska have been an Anchorage businessman/legislator/lobbist, a Wasilla Mayor, a Ketchikan via DC banker and former US Senator, an Anchorage restauranteur and former mayor, an Anchorage hotelman and developer, a Fairbanks lawyer, and another Anchorage hotelman. That takes us back 30 years. Frankly, since Republicans established firm control of the Legislature in the ’80s, Juneau has become positively dull; no more doing lines on desks in the Capitol, no more doing staffers, and even the ocassional attractive female legislator, on desks in the Capitol, no more quickies in the elevators of the State Office Building, no more clouds of pot smoke in the SOB parking lot at break time. I worked in Juneau for all those governors except Sheffield, Palin, and Parnell, and I worked for Parnell when he was a Senator. The only time I saw much in the way of a “the rules don’t apply to us” elitism was under Knowles who brought in a bunch of his Anchorage graspers and picked up the worst of Juneau’s lefties as well. Most of them left Juneau after Knowles left the Governor’s Office and found a nice home with Begich in Anchorage.
I lived in ANC from ’74 to ’84 and again now since late ’10, lived in Juneau in between and have friends in both. I’ve never gotten a good response from my Anchorage friends when they bitched about “Juneau” and I said, “Hey, we don’t like the people you send here either.” Now Juneau like any capital city has its fair share of lefties, but ANC will have them too when they finally succeed in taking the capitol de jure instead of de facto. I know it is a nice meme in Alaska about how Juneau is some nest of corruption and snobbery and there is a grain of truth in it, but I find the Carr’s/Safeway on Huffman Rd. or New Sagaya Market on Old Seward in ANC a whole Helluva lot snobbier than Super Bear or even Rainbow Foods in Juneau. And there’s a Helluva lot more Mercedes-Benz driving trophy wives in Anchorage than Juneau, where there might be two or three M-Bs and a “trophy” is a woman not wearing red rubber boots.
Palin shared the usual redneck attitude towards Juneau and let all her commissioners and directors live wherever they wanted; Parnell hasn’t really changed that, so there are only a couple of commissioners in Juneau and not many directors anymore. To the extent there is an elite, it is only there for the 90 day Legislative Session and doesn’t generally bring kids. After the ’12 election, Juneau won’t really have the power to protect itself any more, so while it might keep the star on the map a little longer, it really won’t be the capital anymore; it hardly is now and hasn’t been in some time; there are far more State employees in Anchorage than JNU. The original deal at Statehood was that Juneau would be the capital, Anchorage would be the transportation and commercial center, and Fairbanks would be the entrepot to the Bush and have the University of Alaska. Knowles stood by and let Clinton kill logging and the pulp mills so Ketchikan and Sitka are now tourism towns with a Third World economy of a few rich owners and a lot of poor wait and retail staff, both turning more and more to the left. As the government departs for Anchorage, Juneau becomes more like KTN and SIT. Military cutbacks and Sarah’s taxes on the oil industry have reduced the presence of the military and the oil industry in Fairbanks and the University in Anchorage is much larger, though they did leave those boring old hard sciences and such mostly intact in FAI. The good people of ANC won’t be happy until the rest of the State is wilderness.
Thanks for the update. I was there for Sheffeild, Cowper, Hickle, and Knowles. Pipeline corruption was street gossip, right out in the open (it took /how/ long for charges to be brought?) (“not guilty”?????). I think Hickle was corrupt, the rest decadent.
Yup. Blasted Californians and Seattle people want to come up for the low crime rate, then change the rules so crime goes up. And all in Anchorage.
Phil,
Its a real drag when the sh*theads follow you, aint it?
I fled the People Republick of Jersey for Freedom in PA a while ago….so did a lot of others, but they brought their bad voting habits with them.
Now the teachers are paid 100K, threaten to strike for more at every contract, and taxes are through the roof.
I’m a stones throw from Washingtons Crossing, my house was built in 1750. Down the street is his headquarters where wrote Congress of his intentions to attack the Hessians on Christmas.
So who do YOU think was THE FIRST historic figure to be mentioned in my kids kindergarten class?
You would think, but you’re WRONG.
My kid came home one day in February, telling me there was no school the next day because “a KING was killed, and everyone is sad” and then tried to pronounce a difficult new word: “assassinated”
This they tell to 5 year olds…
When you can actualy SEE the monument where The Crossing took place, if you just climbed on to the roof of his school…But alas, old G.W. is just a D.W.G. (dead white guy?) to the radical commies that run the schools now.
…and it all happened in less than 10 years.
And I think you’re clueless. Gov. Hickel’s second administration did some dumb things, but there wasn’t a corrupt bone in the appointee level; almost all were old and rich, so they had no reason to steal or throw bones. The most corrupt sons of bitches I’ve ever been around was the first Knowles term, but they did it the Democrat way, mostly, they didn’t steal, they performed great services for friends in the expectation of a later great service in reture. That said, I watched Knowles’ first commissioner of administration lead the way in wiring and computerizing the State and then when he finally got chased out of office going to work for one of the biggest computer companies in the Country, to which he’d passed millions and millions of dollars – and take his IT director with him. Oh, and the Anchorage Daily News didn’t bat an eyelash over it because Democrats can do stuff like that because they’re good people.
Fundamentally, the definition of corruption is something Democrats and their pals don’t like. Since the media are all Democrats and Democrat politicians are their pals, there is very rarely anything a Democrat Administration does that the media doesn’t like, so people outside government never know about the corrupt stuff they do.
Art,
When I carry, I take care to look ahead and avoid anything that looks like it will lead to even the most minor unpleasantness.
Zimmerman’s actions precipitated the death of Trayvon Martin. He should not have stalked him, but Martin should not have retaliated. If there is not enough evidence for a criminal prosecution, perhaps Zimmerman can be made to pay his debt to society through a civil action?
As Trayvon Martin’s halo is being washed away by evidence from his social media use, and the reasons for his suspensions from school, I am not sure that there is even going to be much of a civil case against Zimmerman.
What debt to society? A civil cause will only discharge a presumed debt to Trayvon’s heirs, not society. A debt to society would be identified by a criminal prosecution.
Just more Judge Lynch law on display…
Zimmerman was “tailing”, not “stalking”.
…Since Mr. Zimmerman used his gun as the last resort, not to threaten or intimidate, but to end Mr. Martins life so as to save his own, how is that ” lawful but foolish ” ?
He should have avoided Martin, and let the police handle it. Once the confrontation was under way, he had no choice, just like Eichstedt. Avoid confrontation as long as you can, especially outside your home.
Martin should have avoided Zimmerman and not thrown the first punch.
Clayton, Zimmerman was walking back to his SUV, as the police advised, and afer losing sight of Martin. Martin then came on him, they had words and the words suggest it was Martin who was the aggressor. Martin then punched him. How could Zimmerman have avoided Martin at that point?
The problem with letting the police handle it is that in most cases all they (the police) do is draw a chalk outline. They rarely stop crime.
My personal rule when carrying is that my sidearm is for stopping attacks on me and others. Pursuit, under virtually all circumstances, is out of the question and is the job of law enforcement. While I could pursue/follow as Zimmerman did, my personal opinion is that the bad outweighs the good.
Zimmerman should not have followed and should not have had contact with Trayvon. He had that right to do that, but it still was a bad idea. I am sure Zimmerman agrees with Clayton right now.
What is happening here is clear, at least to me. Obama’s reelection team saw this Florida death as a way of mobilizing/energizing Obama’s black block in preparation for the election. Remember JouroList? It didn’t go anywhere; it was just renamed and adopted tighter membership requirements. The White House ordered it’s media people to beat the racism drum and Sharpton and Jackson to Florida.It’s as easy as that!
“It appears that Zimmerman did not exercise good judgment in chasing Trayvon Martin down, leaving the safety of his car to catch a teenager who had at this point done nothing wrong.”
Why don’t you edit this out since “chasing Trayvon Martin down” is not supported by any witness or police statement that has been released so far and is certainly prejudicial and inflammatory language.
Also, do you think watch members (or just good neighbors) who are on foot should cease observing suspicious persons because they are not in a vehicle?
The evidence that Martin pursued Zimmerman has just appeared in the last day or two, and it does appear that Zimmerman pursued Martin at one point.
And yes, it is a darn good idea to avoid chasing someone when you are alone, there are no witnesses, and the police are on the way. For exactly what happened.
Mr. Cramer — why not take the full dive and reveal the stats for both white-on-black crime and black-on-white crime? My guess (based on personal experience and anecdote) is that black-on-white crime is far higher than white-on-black crime. Do the stats bear that out?
Yup, higher. The data appears above in another comment, although slightly misleading for the reason that I am going to mention there. One of the “that can’t possibly be true” claims that came out after the Duke lacrosse attempted legal lynching turns out to be the case. The vast majority of rape is within race: black men raping black women, white men raping white women. There is a small amount of black men raping white women (so little that for individual years it is statistically insignificant), but white men raping black women is so rare that even for multiple years of NCVS data, it is statistically insignificant.
Remember that this is based on crime victim surveys–not based on charges filed or crimes reported to police, so this isn’t a sign of our racist society, but an indication that white on black rape is almost zero, and black on white rape, while rare, is certainly not zero.
I never used the word “chasing,” I don’t know why you slipped it in. However, you are certainly right about chasing in the situation you described.
But there was a witness. And no one seems to understand that Mr. Zimmerman lived in a gated (as in you need a code or a rfid key to get into the community unless you jump the wall. Also, Mr. Zimmerman’s community is more than 50 percent minority black and latino.
Just outside the walls of this gated community is a high crime area and the community itself had been the subject of burglaries within recent weeks.
I find it strange that the 911 tape was edited at first publication to purposely show a slanted view of what happened. I also find it strange that people are so quick to find fault without even the knowledge available to the Sanford PD. I am not a big fan of SPD but they are not the keystone kops and they have a huge population of unemployed minorities with serious thug culture and gang issues.
Well written article, but I do have a couple of points to make
1. There is enough facts form both the 911 call and Zimmermans own testimony to show that Zimmerman committed assault (Legal definition at the bottom) which could reasonably be expected that Martin used physical force to defend himself.
2. The Race issue reared its ugly head because of the comments and actions of the Sanford PD. There are witnesses that have made public the demeanor of the officers to Zimmerman at the time of the shooting and their comments that show their bias towards Martin and their willingness to close the investigation based on Zimmermans account alone and their attitude towards young blacks dressed “urban.”
Finally to those commenting on here about Trayvon Martins past; nothing in his “past” has shown a propensity for violence or unprovoked attacks upon others; Now Mr. Zimmerman on the other hand does have those issues.
Assault is the tort of acting intentionally, that is with either general or specific intent, causing the reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.
Now if you were followed by a stranger in a car who then left the car to chase or follow you would you not have “reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.”
So let me ask you, If someone who is bigger and stronger than you and towers over you in height has you pinned to the ground and is repeatedly slamming your head against the concrete aren’t you going to be in fear of your life? You should be.
1. Tort is civil liability. I am skeptical that merely following someone, even being aggressive in your language, is going to be found by any jury to justify Martin engaging in battery. I assure you that if someone was following me, and then they backed off, and I went and pursued them (as Martin appears now to have done), no one would find that Martin was in the right to attack Zimmerman.
2. Even if Sanford PD had expressed a willingness to believe Zimmerman because Martin was dressed “urban,” it would not make any difference with the evidence from witnesses and injuries to Zimmerman. These all present reasonable doubt.
3. Some of the social media activities of Martin, and his school suspensions, do suggest that he was a low-level pot dealer, and might have been involved as either receiver of stolen goods or was an actual burglar. There are also remarks by one of his peers in those same social media that suggest Martin had taken a swing at a bus driver a few days before. While Zimmerman did not know these things, it might well be the case that Zimmerman saw behavior and actions consistent with these. They certainly make his claim about being attacked a lot more believable.
There is no evidence Zimmerman committed assault, and multiple witnesses to Martin committing assault and battery.
If Martin felt threatened, and had a cell phone, why didn’t he call police? Why didn’t he just continue to his uncle’s home?
Ron – You say: “There is [sic] enough facts form [sic] both the 911 call and Zimmermans own testimony to show that Zimmerman committed assault.” This is the first I hear of that. What is your source?
Then you say: “The Race issue reared its ugly head because of the comments and actions of the Sanford PD.” Again, what is your source. Remember, initially the homicide investigator charged Zimmerman with negligent homicide (or manslaughter – I’m not sure which) and that it was the prosecuting attorney who quashed it.
Then you say: “Finally to those commenting on here about Trayvon Martins past; nothing in his “past” has shown a propensity for violence or unprovoked attacks upon others.” Well, there was this tweet to his cousin where he said he had an altercation with a bus driver, so I would think that would be showing some propensity.
Finally, you say: “Now if you were followed by a stranger in a car who then left the car to chase or follow you would you not have ‘reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.’ ” That might be true, but Zimmerman had lost sight of Martin when Martin came up on him. Had Martin stayed where he was he would probably be alive today. There was no need for him to come up on Zimmerman and have words with him, and then deck him and then keep on beating the cr*p out of him.
Total BS.
Mr Zimmerman acted in self defense. Martin attacking Mr Zimmerman and slamming his head into the pavement is attempted murder. No different than if the thug had picked up a rock and slammed that into Mr Zimmerman’s skull.
Dear lovable Trayvon was neither unarmed nor innocent. His wah the only heart that held murder that night.
You may well be right, and there is evidence that somewhat corroborates Zimmerman’s version of events. But your overwhelming certainty on this is no more justified than the lamestream media’s overwhelming certainty that Zimmerman is a bad man, unless you were there, or have witnesses that saw the whole interaction.
In the absence of clear evidence, one way or the other, Zimmerman gets the benefit of the doubt.
Your subtitle for this article, “Statistics show that concealed carry permit holders are far less likely to commit gun crimes than the general population.” implies that Zimmermann committed a crime and I object strenuously to that characterization.
Trayvon Martin was 6 feet 2 inches tall and 180 pounds. George Zimmerman was a middle-aged guy a full five inches shorter than Martin. Martin was thrown out of school and recently found in possession of burglary tools and an empty bag that formerly contain marijuana.
Martin charged Zimmerman, punched him in the nose hard enough to break it, shoved Zimmerman to the ground and repeatedly slammed ZImmerman’s head against the concrete. All corroborated by a witness.
If someone has you pinned down and is repeatedly slamming your head against the concrete you should be in fear of your life. There should be no doubt that Zimmerman was justifiably defending himself in a deadly altercation.
Liberalism and gun control: the theory a Zimmerman who is dead due to blunt-force trauma to the head is somehow morally superior to a live ZImmerman explaining how his attacker got that bullet hole.
1. The subtitle wasn’t my doing.
2. The subtitle is true, and is intended to remind people that whether or not Zimmerman committed a crime (something that was unlikely when I wrote this article last weekend, and is rapidly getting more unlikely), concealed carry isn’t the problem.
3. Unfortunately, at this point racial politics matters more than mere facts.
I think the most plausible scenario is that Zimmerman was on neighborhood watch and saw a guy wondering around the area. He decided to keep an eye on him as is his duty. The guy turned on Zimmerman and decided to beat the crap out of him. Zimmerman pulls out his piece and defends himself.
That seems more likely than Zimmerman was on a man hunt.
Lester – You’re so right, but it doesn’t fit the Leftist & LSM meme.
It does seem that, for the “civil rights” industry, a black life is incalculably more valuable when it is terminated by a white person than when ended by a black person. And, of course, a white life ended by a black person draws no interest at all.
People who carry have a responsibility to act more rationally than those who don’t. Many folks might take exception to that. The 2nd amendment doesn’t say that only the rights of RATIONAL people to bear arms shall not be infringed. However, when I carry, which is any time I’m outside my home and not in a “gun free zone” I work extra hard to be polite and to suppress my ego. It’s simply not worth it. I will only pull that weapon if there is no other choice. Avoiding is my first choice, running away is my next choice. If neither of those is available, attempts to deescalate come next. Finally, if there is no other choice to protect myself or other innocent parties, I’ll pull. And if I pull, I will not hesitate to shoot. But I sincerely hope I never get to that.
My concealed weapons instructor in California told our class that if you ever have occasion to shoot someone in self-defense, even if you are completely in the right, plan on spending at least $15,000 defending yourself from the civil suit. (This was in 1990; I’m sure it’s more today.) There had better be a very compelling reason to draw a gun.
“There had better be a very compelling reason to draw a gun.”
How about having an athletic 17 year on top of you banging your head on the sidewalk after just punching you in the face and breaking your nose? Now maybe Zimmerman had it coming, I doubt it, but it seems like at the point of pulling the piece Zimmerman could clearly be in fear of his life.
Without question. He should have called the police and stayed in his car.
Martin should have continued to his uncle’s.
I agree Martin should have continued to his uncle’s place. But so what? Avoiding confrontation is a good idea for everyone.
The expense of the defense is part of the punishment we face for having the sheer gall to defend ourselves with a weapon.
Non judicial punishment, just like the way the police slam people into the ground, drive a knee in the back of their necks, and shove a gun against the back of their heads. Without a warrent, just “reasonable suspicion”.
Several weeks ago I finished reading a book titled: “After you shoot: You gun’s hot, the perps not, now what,” by Alan Korwin. I would recommend it because it shows just how murky the laws of self-defense tend to be. Oh BTW, if you’re a member of USCCA, you can buy insurance for legal defense in the event you’re carrying and shoot someone in self-defense.
In Tennessee where I live we have a “carry law” you may carry openly or concealed the choice is yours. I carry openly in my vehicle and concealed when going into a store or pumping gasoline. We also have the “Castle Doctrine” that not only allows the use of deadly force anywhere you have the legal right to be including your vehicle and along with this “Castle Doctrine” if you use your weapon in a justifiable manner and cause death or serious injury not only can you not face criminal prosecution you can not be held civilly liable (no lawsuits)!
Clayton,
Clint Smith in 1998 said that the first bullet out of your gun, no matter how justified, carried a $150.000 price tag. He also said that having your gun with you might well be what makes it possible for you to still be here worrying about how to pay that bill.
I know the parents of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom sure wish Chris had been carrying the night they were carjacked, tortured, raped and killed.
Why shouldn’t Channon been carrying?
There’s no evidence Zimmerman “chased” Martin.
He apparently followed Martin, in spite of being encouraged by the 911 operator to not do so.
“Following” is not “chasing” and neither is justification for punching someone in the face, knocking them to the ground, repeatedly slamming their head into the ground, and attempting to take their firearm. Particularly since the attacker had a cell phone and could have phoned the police if he felt he was in danger.
The best evidence is that Zimmerman was returning to his truck when he was attacked.
I agree, although the news reports indicating that Zimmerman was returning to his truck apparently appeared after I wrote this article.
What? No time machine attached to your computer?
Clayton this is the THIRD time on just one thread where you have been caught shouting off your mouth and then offering when challenged the feeble and demonstrably FALSE excuse ‘oh that information came to light after I posted’. Your credibility as a poster is completely blown.
I’m not sure what Pragmatist’s problem is. I wrote this article last weekend. PJMedia is not a blog where an author posts something and boom, there it is. I submit to the editors, and a few days later, it goes up.
One of the brightest articles I’ve read about this case and the phoney, made-up furor over it. 90% of black folks are murdered and it’s a signal of white people hunting blacks? The liberal Left in this country can literally look at black and see white. Also, see: George Orwell.
Unruly Students Also Poor Achievers And Law Breakers
(21 July 2011) Nearly 1 million Texas public school students’ discipline records were studied for their 7th through 12th grades. Nearly 60% were suspended or expelled at least once. 15% were suspended or expelled 11 times or more and more than half of those students had been on probation or incarcerated by juvenile justice authorities. 60% of students disciplined 11 times or more did not graduate. 31% of students disciplined one or more times repeated their grade at least once. (Sources: Public Research Institute of Texas A&M Univ., Council of State Governments Justice Center, 18 July 2011 Austin American-Statesman)
And Lowest Percentage Of Teens Are Working
(6 July 2011) Only 24% of teens 16 to 19 years old are working, the lowest percentage since statistics began in 1948. In 2001, 42% were working. Instead of learning valuable job skills and gaining work experience, millions will spend the summer playing computer games or hanging out. One of the reasons for the high rate of teen unemployment was the raising of the minimum wage from $5.15 in 2007 to $7.25 in 2009. (Sources: Dept. of Labor, 1 July Wall Street Journal)
Used to be high school students would study hard and work a parttime job, too. Now, High school students study very little, play computer games or hang out.
Now, this report:
Public Schools Are Educational Failure And Disaster For Taxpayers
(7 December 2011) U.S. students rank 31st in math among 65 industrialized countries. 68% of 8th-grade students cannot read at 8th-grade level. 30% do not graduate from high school. These dismal statistics are in spite of expenditures per student for elementary and secondary public schools increasing from $5,718 in 1980-81 to $10,441 in 2007-08 (corrected for inflation). (Sources: Broad Foundation, U.S. Dept. of Education, 10 October 2011 Forbes)
America’s newly “Lost Generation.” God Bless America.
As I’ve said repeatedly, and you seem to be echoing me (modesty being one of my more attractive qualities): I don’t know if Zimmerman broke the law, but he definitely is an idiot, and his actions led to young Martin’s death. Stupidity should be painful.
Why Zimmerman got of his SUV to follow Martin is still not clear. Before we pass judgment on Zimmerman’s IQ we have to find out his motivation for tailing Martin. He did apparently stop tailing Martin when he was to do so. (In fact, he lost sight of Martin, so he clearly wasn’t tailing him that closely.) I have also read that Zimmerman helped stop some burglaries on earlier watches but I am less certain of that. Just remember, though: Don’t rush to judgment on incomplete information.
Police are NOT special.. just saying..
Zimmerman was doing what all CITIZENS are expected to do.. be vigilant
WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO FOLLOW, WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO UPHOLD THE LAW
Martin’s parents failed to instruct their son how to be a responsible CITIZEN who would respond to being followed by acting in a manner that showed himself to be an upstanding decent human being..
instead young Martin chose to be a caricature of his skin color.. every ‘thug’ embracing black person should feel guilty.. not one ‘white’ person should do anything but be wary of ‘black folk’ that embrace the term ******
may he rot in hell
A right to follow and confront, yes. But there are consequences when things go wrong.
Martin’s whole gold teeth thing just reeks of someone intent on pretending to be a criminal. Why it became acceptable, even fashionable, for young black men to play to the worst stereotypes, is just beyond me. Talk about a way to promote racial prejudice.
“How Common Are Deaths Like Trayvon Martin’s?
Statistics show that concealed carry permit holders are far less likely to commit gun crimes than the general population.
The premise is BS. It implies that Martin’s death was a crime. A better and truthful premise would be … “How many Martins die committing a crime against a concealed carry permit holder.”
“
Every justifiable shooting is a crime prevented, and many crimes deterred. Unfortunate, but necessary and to be preferred to the alternative.
Successful use of force in self-defense is not a bad thing; on balance, it is a good thing.
Here’s an interesting counterpoint item pasted here from “Sky News” via Google……
…..”11:49pm UK, Wednesday March 28, 2012
Florida Teen Guilty Of Killing Brit Tourists
11:49pm UK, Wednesday March 28, 2012
Teenager Shawn Tyson has been given two life sentences after being found guilty of murdering British tourists James Kouzaris and James Cooper in Florida.
The pair were gunned down they walked drunkenly into a public housing estate in the Newtown area of Sarasota last April.
Tyson, 17, was found guilty of two counts of first degree murder by a jury at Sarasota County Courthouse.”
One wonders what Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will have to say about these reversed circumstances.
The unintended consequences of the Race Hustlers , Obama, Jackson, Sharpton, Black Panthers, the Congressional Black Caucus etc etc etc, outrageous biased Racist outbursts and actions over the Tayvon killing will be that many naive, gullible white folk will at last wake up to the obscenity of BLACK Racism, Violence and criminality. Hopefully that will then see the end of RACIST Affirmative action too after all who wants hordes of underachieving Blacks hoisted in to positions of authority where their incompetence, Racism and inability to perform will just continue to downgrade the efficiency of wherever it is that are infiltrated into.
Tayvon was in a GATED Community i.e. an area which has GATES to keep out undesirables such as he. Zimmerman was just DOING HIS JOB as a Neighbourhood Watch man checking up on NON RESIDENTS wandering around inside the GATED Community. So the Black Thug with a record of drugs and violence was in a place he did not belong and a place where people such as he had a history of criminality. Tayvon was just an accident waiting to happen.
He had a right to be there, as that was where his father lived. And while Zimmerman’s account suggests that he might not have committed any crime, and while what he says might indeed be true, for now it’s just _his_ side of the story.
I don’t see any reason to think Martin did not “belong” there. He was visiting someone that lived in the neighborhood.
This rush to emotions-only judgment and attempts to bypass due process of law by nefarious, anything but ‘justice’ (from ‘P ussy A ss Cracker’ – t-shirts – for a mixed race Zimmerman, Maxine Waters calling this a ‘hate crime’, Spike Lee providing though later apologizing the address of Zimmerman for ‘justice’, Congressman wearing a hoodie in the Senate chamber, bullying the Sanford PD with talk of ‘the Fed taking over law enforcement’ the attempted repeal of SYG etc.,) means is a sad state of not only many folks in the Black community but our nation as a whole.
Reactionaries are a sign of weak minded, myopic people. Lacking sound judgment and unconcerned in pursuing truth or an accord.
An aside; Black crime is an overwhelming result of the near-complete deterioration of the 2 parent family unit.
The Sharpton’s, Jackson’s, Jackson Jr’s, Farrakhan’s etc., are thee cog for that FACT to remain and GROW.
Nearly 3 out of 4 Black children are born to single Black mother’s.
Whereas MANY Black communities have a high # of ‘cousin’s’ amongst their community. As well as multi-generational welfare takers due to Black men having numerous trysts. Producing children and not raising these children accompanied with little/no contact or financial means whatsoever.
I recall reading of the 50+% out-of-wedlock Black children born in the 70′s being called an, ‘Epidemic’. What would today’s % be labeled, considered?
Admittedly I’m shocked, saddened by such #’s. I grew up in ‘diverse’ Easy Bay, CA without realizing or caring of, ‘diversity’.
My Cub/Boy Scout and short time Webelos Master was Black and his son 1 of my best friends since 1st grade.
My same friend’s mother worked in the office of our Jr. High School and was a constant ‘Motherly-like’ presence when going though the riggers of teen angst.
The same can be said of my Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino and Afghan friends.
All, including myself had 2 parent households. Some friends were upper-Middle and others low-Middle class. it truly didn’t matter. Class envy or racial lines were unheard of.
Though the situation’s changed drastically. That same area is very racially divided.
‘Strangely’ the divide grows ever larger the more government intervenes (‘to help or save us from ourselves’ of course via real estate availability/loans, television, radio ads, lesser standards for a myriad of possessions, programs etc.,) and Illiberal bumper stickers praising said, ‘multiculturalism and diversity’.
What a ridiculous bubble the aforementioned have created, live in. For they can’t admit or can’t see the damage they’ve sewn.
And like what’s occurring now – blame others for their less than ideal utopia. Scary stuff.
Lastly I’m concerned how this hubris is going to affect The Guardian Angels organization.
Living in Colorado, D.C. those brave souls put themselves in harm’s way on a near-constant basis.
I hope this tragedy doesn’t deter their presence, work in the many communities they patrol.
to Dr. Deano:
“The vast majority of Americans just want to live their lives and get along with those who want to be a positive, productive members of American society regardless of their race, color or other human subtlety.”
I believe the reason Obama was elected president was that many white voters thought that by casting their vote for a black man they were saying,”Let us finally end our societal struggles over race. Let us just get on with the promise of living.”
Unfortunately, Obama’s sales pitch of unification, reconciliation, and post racialism swiftly fundamentally transformed itself into Marxist and racist demagoguery.
Yup. I have a co-worker whose parents in their 70s are besieged with white guilt, and felt that they had no choice but to vote for Obama. I was astounded to see that exit polls in 2008 found that one-third of Obama voters described themselves as conservative.
I came here to read some useful info.
I braced myself to read some conservative and/or red-neck opinion mixed with the info.
However I never expected to read so much basic racial prejudice, and that the NRA would have high-jacked the post.
Someone posted that he carried and never went out without carrying due to fear of the neighborhood…
at THAT is supposed to be the appology of the 2nd amendment?
Due to the fact that everybody has a gun, that “dangerous guys” have has much right to carry a gun as you but are more likely to use them, you live in fear and never leave your home without carrying….
IN both your examples;.. would the guy with the gun have had his behaviour if he wasn’t “boosted/reassured/more aggressive” due to his back-up : a gun.
Thus the dangerous guy is the one carrying.. unconsciously he increases the tension as he knows he is more dangerous than it seems.
and all your arguments about trayvor being 6′ and 180 pounds and zimmerman smaller are confirming that. Without carrying, would zimmerman have left his car?
The one who carries a gun should bear the responsability of an homicide if in any way his behaviour had a critical impact on the violent devlopment of the situation. I think zimmerman acted in a way that increased the potential for danger. trayvor might have started the violence, but zimmerman’s clearly sow the field that travor reapt with a bullet in his head/body, and zimmerman did so because he had so much self assurance due to carrying a gun.
We don’t know what zimmerman said to trayvor that pushed him to hit him.. did he insult him? did he call his girlfriend a bitch that everybody in the “gated community” banged? did he insult his mother? did he menace him to have him killed the next time he show his face here ?? all of that would have merited a strong punch in the face.
But maybe, I conced it, maybe taylor attacked without provocation.. but you’ll have to prove that. It’s trayvor that is dead. He was not a burglar, not a dealer. He was going to see family. He is the victime. The guy that killed him is a killer. maybe not a criminal, maybe at the last instant he feared for his life… but certainly he is a killer.
You are making a lot of assumptions here, and overwhelmingly in favor of Martin. I’m not sure that it makes any more sense than to make those assumptions overwhelmingly in favor of Zimmerman. You seem upset that Zimmerman was armed, and that is driving your assumptions. I see no reason to do that.
and I might add this :
March 28: ABC News EXCLUSIVE: A police surveillance video taken the night that Trayvon Martin was shot dead shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman. The initial police report noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of the head and nose. His lawyer later insisted that Zimmerman’s nose had been broken in his scuffle with 17-year-old Martin.
I don’t know the solidity of this info.
It just seems to be so opposed to all that some are saying here…
Unless the blood was cleaned up by paramedics before he reached the police station, as seems quite common.
35 misTakes
I came here to read some useful info.
I braced myself to read some conservative and/or red-neck opinion mixed with the info.
However I never expected to read so much basic racial prejudice, and that the NRA would have high-jacked the post.
Since the original publicizing of the Martin/Zimmerman case was done under the “racist white kills innocent black” narrative, the obvious conclusion is that your statement is simply a restating of that narrative.
and so?
“I” didn’t use the racist white…theme.
I’m using the “self-proclaimed vigilant killed an innocent guy because he “looked” like a loot/hoodlum”.
It is a given in the US that a black guy with a hoody has more the hoodlum look than a white in suit. Further, it is very probable that Martin being black increased zimmerman inconscious perception of him as a hoodlum.
For me, even if that is not pure racisme, it is still a prejudice against black youngs. however I will not launch the stone to anybody on this. I have the same reaction to blacks in hoodies and arabic in hoodies and flinch when I become conscient of said reaction. But the difference is that contrarily of zimmerman I don’t carry a weapon and don’t play the vigilant and won’t try to roughen the guy just because I have a gun.
End of the story. When one has a gun and one no weapon (and is not a super-nija martial artist), the gun-guy ending alive and the other dead has made a mistake and a big one. With greater power (gun) comes greater responsability.
In my country, if you drive a car, you are responsible if you have an accident with a pedestrian, even if he jumped under your car. However you can have mitigeating circumstances and end “acquited”.
It is the same here. And maybe worse.
Playing the vigilant and carrying a gun, following the guy should be aggravating facts. The only possible “non-aggravating” circumstance is if it was true that in the end Martin bashed zimmerman’s head to the ground repeatidly.
However, when I count, there are 3 aggravating circumstances for zimmerman (4 if you count that Martin is dead and not just wounded) and 1 for Martin (3 if you count being black and punching zimmerman in the face…).
Black blet karateka are judged more heavily in case of fist-fights that degenerate than “normal people”… it should be the same with guns.
However there is something that should be mentionned : it is true that zimmerman being guilty as hell of homicide does not mean that there is enough evidence (or even matter) to charge him with a crime under those stupid and dangerous “stand your ground” law.
misTakes
“I” didn’t use the racist white…theme.
And I quote from your comment #36
However I never expected to read so much basic racial prejudice
Perhaps you had better learn the meanings of some words. Try using a dictionary. It can be very helpful.
Que payaso sos.
That’s not useful.
Simple enough, no?
(There may well be a civil case against Zimmerman, where the burden of proof is much lower than in criminal court.)
Not if Zimmerman is cleared, there won’t. A major aspect of Florida’s self-defense law (as in the other states with similar laws) is civil immunity. So if Zimmerman isn’t indicted, or is indicted but acquitted at trial, he cannot be sued for killing Trayvon. This immunity was included because black criminals (or criminals’ families, if they were killed) were constantly filing frivolous lawsuits against intended victims who had the temerity to fight back. The practice was so rampant it had its own nickname — the “ghetto lottery.”
This brings us to the news that Trayvon’s mother is trying to trademark phrases related to him. If the family can’t make a buck off Trayvon’s corpse one way, they’ll find another way. I suspect their lawyer is the “man behind the curtain” in this scheme, and will skim 1/3 or so off the top.
Given the doubt about what happened, perhaps Zimmerman will be convicted of attempted false arrest for pursuing Martin, and Martin’s family will use _that_ as the basis for suing him.