The Zimmerman/Martin incident was a really poor case for the NAACP to hang its hat on. Especially when you look into Zimmerman’s background, family, volunteer work, etc. it’s really hard to point at him and yell “racist!”
The media and Sharptons of the world jumped too quickly on this and got in over their collective head. Now they’re scrambling to keep the narrative as fact-free as possible because literally none of the facts support their contention that this was “profiling” that led to “stand your ground” that led to “murder.”
In the end, the result is going to be further racial tension and, worse, more dead young black men. Because if you look around the internet you’ll see that a lot of folks are reading this acquittal as some kind of permission slip: “if a black kid hits me, I can shoot him!” They’re taking the narrative from the NAACP plus the acquittal (based on actual facts) and merging them into NAACP’s facts = acquittal. The NAACP just told the American people that if a “white” guy purposely profiles, hunts down, and confronts an innocent young black teen, picks a fight with him, then shoots him to death the law says it’s ok. Is that really the message they want going out to the tens of thousands of idiots on Stormfront?
More importantly, is it the message they want going out to the general populace, pushing the pendulum a little farther toward “justified” when it comes to cases like this? The national psyche has been reprogrammed a bit and probably not for the better. I don’t think anyone would disagree that the “facts” as presented by NAACP spell out a pretty clear case of manslaughter. If things had happened the way the NAACP wants us to believe, then yes, Zimmerman should have gone to prison. But he didn’t go to prison. So they’ve accomplished nothing more than lowering the bar for the next claim of self-defense when a white guy shoots a black guy. Is that success in the NAACP’s eyes? I sincerely doubt it.
I talked to a good friend who’s a lawyer at the NRA a while back about how they pick which 2A-related cases to support. They’re smart. They don’t jump on the first case they see. Bad cases make bad law. So when something is going to reach national scope they look for the case that starts them with the biggest possible advantage. They look for a case where the outcome is obvious… not one in which all the legal pundits predict failure and a unanimous jury then delivers it.
The NAACP and Sharpton and President Obama should have done the same here. Does inappropriate racial profiling happen? Of course it does. You’re an idiot if you don’t believe that. Does it sometimes lead to unjustifiable use of force (even deadly force) against African American teens? Of course it does. So go find one of those cases to champion your cause, and many of us will be right there behind you. This case wasn’t it.
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG