Last night, the American Federation of Teachers injected itself into the Zimmerman case with the following press release:
“While we believe in the rule of law and the jury has spoken, the implications of the acquittal are profound. It is very disappointing that a racially profiled, unarmed African-American young man wearing a hoodie can be shot dead and there be no consequences for the perpetrator. This case reminds us that the path to racial justice is still a long one, and that our legal and moral systems do not always mesh. The proceedings in the Sanford, Fla., courtroom may well have dealt with the criminal aspects of the case, as defined by Florida law, but we will continue to deal with the moral ones. As the AFT pledged in a resolution passed at our 2012 convention, we remain steadfast in our commitment to fight for laws, policies and practices that will prohibit racial profiling at the federal, state and local levels.
“The disposition of this case is the antithesis of what we teach our children in school—that the law protects innocent victims and that no one has the right to take the law into his or her own hands. Everyone’s child matters. We pray for the strength of Trayvon’s parents and loved ones in this difficult time.”
After beginning the statement with an insincere nod to the “rule of law” and the decision of the jury, AFT then spends two paragraphs explaining how the rule of law was wrong in this instance and the jury was wrong in this instance. Those things led to, “the antithesis of what we teach our children in school…”
What in the world are you teaching our children in school?
Are you teaching them that it’s appropriate to stalk someone you think has somehow “disrespected” you? That’s it’s ok to knock that person to the ground, climb onto his chest, and smash his head repeatedly into the concrete?
Are you teaching them that it’s only appropriate to defend yourself if the person cracking your skull open is from a certain ancestry? Are you teaching them that it’s OK to assault someone violently as long as they think that person is white?
Are you teaching them that racial profiling only occurs when the victim is of a certain ethnic background? Are you teaching them that it’s not racist to refer to someone as a “creepy-ass cracker” right before throwing him to the ground and bashing his skull in, but it is racist to answer “black” when a 911 operator asks about someone’s race?
Do you want our nation’s children to grow up to be the kind of jurors who ignore evidence — evidence so obvious that it led both the police and the local prosecutors to clear Zimmerman almost immediately — and instead convict the innocent to satisfy the demands of an angry mob?
So please, tell me what you would teach our children to do if they found themselves straddled and being beaten half to death late at night by a stranger. But wait, apparently you cannot answer that question until you know what color skin each person has.
It seems like you want different laws of self-defense that depend on race. It seems like you want a different definition of “profiling” that depends on race. It seems like you want a different rule of law that depends on race. It seems like you want a different standard for juries that depends on race. Next you’ll want different seating areas on your school bus for people of different races… and isn’t that a giant step backwards?
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
Todd:
Excellent post. It is clear that the AFT not only has almost no idea about the evidence in the case, but it really doesn’t care. It wants to believe that this case was similar to the atrocities of the 1950’s and 1960’s so it can show how boldly and bravely it is taking a stand against racism.
These people don’t know it, but what they are really urging on us is mob rule and not the rule of law. One would think that we had painfully learned why mob rule is wrong, but apparently a good part of the political class has learned nothing.
Best blog post yet! When you run for office, I’d vote for ya
After reading this I had to check out their website and read it at the source. One of the first things I noticed after I read it was that there is no contact information for their president who penned that little rant. There’s only a contact email and phone number for whom I assume is some middle man. Then I proceeded to check out the president’s twitter account. This asshat is doing his best to coordinate a mob rule to hang Zimmerman for anything. He’s helping to coordinate other major uber left organizations such as the naacp via their twitter account. This has got to be called out and ended somehow. These are very powerful organizations who are acting beyond the rule of law. Something has to be done.
I’m glad that they took the time to write out a nice press release about a murder case they have no control over, instead of using that time to worry about the flaws in their own education system-such as schools getting rid of dodgeball.
Are you teaching them that it is ok to stalk someone, provoke them into attacking you (maybe Zimmerman threw the first punch), and then shooting them in “self defense” when the fight isn’t going your way. No one really knows what happened except Zimmerman and Martin, and only one is alive to tell his story. Why isn’t Martin, who was unarmed, able to stand his ground and defend himself? This is why stand your ground laws are dangerous. Without other witnesses, they pretty much grant the victory of the battle immunity to justice because only one person is left to give an account of what happened.
You’re right Chris. Zimmerman beat his own face in and shot Treyvon Martin in a way consistent with what he was describing. Never mind the recorded phone call and sworn testimony of witnesses.
Pandering idiots, AFT are.
No consequences?
Excuse me, sir…but what the bloody fuck does one call a full on criminal trial before a jury?
No consequences? Seriously? No consequences?
OK. I guess reality is subjective.
Chris,
So what you’re saying is that we should convict people based on what we want to think.
Because, ya know, that’s just such a better objective measure than evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Sure, just make up a narrative and go with it because that’s what you want, who the flying fuck cares about evidence.
Chris,
If Zimmerman has the power to make all physical evidence support his story despite it not being true he’s a wizard and no prison could keep him from escaping anyway. Or his story is actually true and you’re just making things up to support your delusion.
Btw, you should look up the legal definition of “stalking”, because it’s impossible for Zimmerman to have done that to a guy he met the first time. While you’re at it you should also take a look at the timeline of this case and realize that Zimmerman couldn’t have followed (still legal and no excuse for assault, no matter how hard you spin it) Martin for long and that Martin must have seeked the confrontation between the two.
I notice you didn’t tell Todd to look up the legal definition of “stalking”. Clearly Martin didn’t have any concern of his own when a strange man keeps ‘following’ him. I think I might have cause for concern if a man was following me in a vehicle and then got out and started following me. As far as I know, correct me if I’m wrong, there were no witnesses at the start of the altercation, so I’m glad you can definitely say Martin started the fight.
Plenty of people get away with crimes in our system of justice because of lack of evidence (think of all the gang lords and drug dealers the police know about but can’t arrest). That doesn’t mean Zimmerman didn’t do something wrong, and should be hailed as a hero to justice!
My main point is that 99% of the firearms sites I have read treat Zimmerman as practically a hero, placing 0% culpability on him and 100% on Martin, like this case is some shining beacon of law that should be put up on a pedestal. This whole case is a muddled mess and only two people will ever know what really happened. Everyone who cheer leads this decision just makes the whole firearm community reflect poorly to the rest of humanity.
Cases like this just make me think it would be best for every CCW holder to add a GoPro, Google Glass, etc to their daily carry on top of gun, ammo, keys, wallet and all the rest. Last thing I need is to be called a racist for shooting somebody a different race than I and face jail time because members of X race want “justice”.
The verdict does not mean that Zimmerman made good choices from start to finish, or that he bears no responsibility for what happened that night. It simply means that he was found to be not guilty of the crimes he was accused of committing.
There’s been a lot of very good, serious discussion of this case and the lessons it holds for people who carry. I don’t think anyone with a grain of sense who has studied the incident sees Zimmerman as a role model. But they also don’t see him as a murderer.
What disturbs me about this case is the assumptions everyone is making about that brief window of time where only Martin and Zimmerman were there. You can tell quite a bit about a persons way of thinking by listening to their account of the events and how they project their prejudices on to the actions of the participants while selectively ignoring the facts that are available.
I agree with AFT – Mr. Martin paid the ultimate price for his racial profiling. What Mr. Zimmerman did was criminal profiling – something an alert, armed citizen needs to be doing every time they’re in public.
Chris:
Allow me to disagree. I do “cheer” for the jury’s decision because based upon the evidence in front of the jury there were no grounds on which to convict. None.
As for what actually happened, neither you nor I nor anyone else except (maybe) Zimmerman knows. I think the best guess is that Martin, angry at being followed, turned around and ambushed Zimmerman much as Zimmerman told the police. However, other alternatives are certainly possible as well. We don’t know and we can’t know. What we do know is what the EVIDENCE was, and that evidence was plainly insufficient to convict Zimmerman. Indeed, it was plainly insufficient to charge Zimmerman or to even allow this case to go to the jury.
Thankfully, the jury was the one group that honored their oaths and did their jobs. And I am very, very thankful for that because the alternative is mob rule and political justice.
We dodged a bullet here. A decision convicting Zimmerman because of mob pressure would have had an extremely bad effect on the country and would have endangered all of our rights.
Chris — I appreciate your position insofar as we don’t know what Martin might have said if he’d been asked about what happened. All we have is one person’s version of events (Zimmerman’s) and a lot of physical evidence.
Zimmerman’s version of events and the physical evidence tie together well enough that a jury found his story credible. It may be worth keeping in mind, as well, that even before the jury verdict most of the mainstream media outlets were predicting an acquittal. In other words, legal experts of all political stripes from all around the country were nearly unanimous that the evidence was insufficient to convict.
You seem upset that many people are believing Zimmerman’s version of events but you seem perfectly happy to believe an alternative story with absolutely no evidence or testimony to back it up whatsoever. Basically, you’re upset that Martin was killed — understandably — and you’ve decided that someone should be held responsible.
The problem is that you’re blaming the wrong person. The person responsible for Martin’s death is Martin. If he hadn’t doubled back and attacked Zimmerman after their initial meeting had ended, Martin would still be alive today. If he hadn’t pounded Zimmerman’s head into the concrete so hard so many times that Zimmerman was in fear for his life, Martin might still be alive today. If Martin hadn’t reached for Zimmerman’s gun, Martin might still be alive today.
The Left wants to focus solely on Zimmerman’s initial approach to Martin. That is all the excuse they need to blame him for everything that happened. But here’s an important fact, Chris: it’s perfectly legal for someone to walk up to a stranger in his neighborhood and ask, “What are you doing here?” It’s perfectly legal to follow someone on a public street. Maybe it’s rude under some circumstances but it’s perfectly legal.
It’s NOT perfectly legal to turn around, follow someone you feel has “disrespected” you, jump him, throw him to the ground, and repeatedly smash his head into the concrete. That’s NOT self-defense.
Considering the sort of trouble that its members have tended to get into or accused of in recent times, I would think that the AFT is a little too quick to offer negative criticism of the jury system…
Speaking as a teacher, I’m glad I’m not a member of AFT because apparently their president is an idiot of the type I try to teach my students NOT to be.
[sigh] I teach upper-level science, including a class on how to logically analyze arguments and research studies—and I’m really tired of idiots who haven’t bothered to learn the facts (or the laws regarding self-defense) spouting off their inane blathering. (I’m ignoring a LOT of my Facebook newsfeed right now, because I just can’t stand the stupid.)
I’ve gotten a couple of my fellow teachers interesting in shooting, and into CCW over the last several years. I think—that my goal this year is to get a minimum of two more into it.
I wouldn’t say Zimmerman exactly “got away” with anything. His life is being threatened, the chances of him finding a job are about nil, he is subject to other court action, etc.
Let’s face it. Nobody “won”.
Zimmerman made the mistake of letting Martin get too close to him. He should have taken Southnarcs class. (my hind sight seems 20/20)
“Zimmerman made the mistake of letting Martin get too close to him. He should have taken Southnarcs class.”
As someone in the comments section at my blog said, if either man had taken MUC, they’d both be alive today.
I live in an upcoming neighborhood in a Midwest city. Over the past ten years or so that I have lived here there have been numerous confrontations. Several murders, shootings, armed robberies, home and vehicle break in’s, home invasions and theft, there are several homeless camps close by which have provided a gang mentality. Much of these crimes have been from black folks. All coming for what they consider easy meat.
My background is Army brat and twenty two years serving my country with all colors protecting my back at one time or another. My friends are of all colors and loved equally. So coming to the point as Zimmerman was a watch for the neighborhood and knew the gated community, rather than profiling perhaps he saw that Mr. Martin was not from this area hence his action. Although I feel Zimmerman as well as Martin could both have saved each other from this horrible mess. When you see a black guy cruising a more or less white area or a white guy cruising a black area is it profiling when you stop them (and please I am not talking about walking through or driving through or innocent behavior. I am talking walking by cars checking them out late at night, riding through an alley checking out the houses etc.) ?? By the way regarding Mr. Obama comments recently, I have been profiled in a black neighborhoods which resulted in drawn weapons, how about the white ladies being harassed in the street by a group of blacks, or blacks slaughtering whites. Nothing is ever said about this, no media coverage no nothing
In my neighborhood, my black partner and neighbor and I do the same thing, are we profiling or are we going by common sense. The police are great in my city but cannot always be there when they are needed. As I said I live in nice area called the art district, recently we had an altercation in front of my home with a group of eight multiracial “young” homeless people there were weapons drawn from my partner and I, no weapons were discharged. But had I shot one of the black guys would I be called a profiler or a child killer and would the racial profiler Al Sharpton be at my door??
I leave you with my indiscretions, long ago at seventeen I illegally bought my first pistol and carried it along with my edged weapon. Being fairly good with my hands I definitely could beat someone stupid with my hands, which I did. All of the tools of self-defense were used. So when I see the cute pictures of the young and defenseless child of seventeen that the news portrayed rather than the seventeen year old hard core, it is hard to get my head around.
I mean no disrespect to anyone but I grow beyond tired of the Sharpton’s, the Jacksons and mostly the media pushing this minutia. I know there is discrimination in our country which needs to end, there is enough crap in the world to keeps us all busy without racism while I say this all are guilty. Comments like white assed cracker is just as offensive as the N word and when you have blacks squalling about the word niggardly as was done several years ago and our President lamenting the arrest of his professor friend and the mean stupid police that did the deed without the President knowing the facts and he could have been my son, another example. Come on friends it is apparent that white are not the only racist.
Thank for reading my drivel, I care greatly for our country and without the great black leaders Colin Powell and his ilk our country would be less that it is. Even our black President (even as a Democrat), has brought a lot to table and he was voted in twice by all colors, even though numerous blacks considered him not black enough.
As I read somewhere the Bear (Soviet Union) is dead but the wolves abound and our country needs everyone to keep us all safe.