Trayvon Martin: A bag of Skittles, a can of tea and a cell phone vs. a 9mm Handgun
Let's review what a dangerous weapon is class!
Trayvon was the one defending himself
I am so tired of those people who would blame Trayvon Martin’s death on Trayvon. Several people have commented that Zimmerman had a right to protect himself from Trayvon and that if this had been white youth and a white adult, the outcry would not be the same. Zimmerman’s lawyer has said that Zimmerman had a broken nose and a cut on his head so this was really self-defense. Let’s get something straight, George Zimmerman has no legal or moral recourse for killing this kid. A bag of skittles and a can of tea are not dangerous weapons. Wearing a hoodie and being black does not make you dangerous. Finally, if I had been Trayvon that night, and Zimmerman was following me and confronting me for nothing, I would have broken his nose too. George Zimmerman was not the law.
There is no moral or for that matter, legal ground for Zimmerman following Trayvon, accosting him, and then shooting him. Zimmerman’s responsibility, as a neighborhood watch captain, was not to follow Trayvon. His responsibility was not to confront Trayvon. His responsibility was to alert the police and let them confront Trayvon. However, Zimmerman broke all of those rules and his confrontation with Trayvon led to the teen’s untimely death. Zimmerman confronted Trayvon because in America, black men are considered dangerous until proven other wise. Zimmerman assumed Trayvon would be dangerous or carrying weapon simply because he was black.
Zimmerman had a 9 mm handgun. What was he doing patrolling the streets with it? Trayvon had a bag of skittles, a can of tea, and a cell phone. Where is the danger in any of these items? The dangerous person on the street that night was Zimmerman. He carried a weapon of deadly force. Why? Because he was looking for black kids who were “stealing” in his neighborhood and he knew that he would defend himself if he had too. His confrontation with Trayvon was unnecessary and it happened not because Zimmerman was scared, but because Trayvon was scared.
What about Trayvon Martin’s right to defend himself? This was a 17-year-old kid who should have had the expectation that he could walk to the store and not be accosted by some over zealous neighborhood watch captain. If Trayvon broke Zimmerman’s nose, he did it because he felt he was defending himself. If he cracked Zimmerman’s head open, it is because he felt that he was protecting himself. He had that right. Zimmerman had no legal right to confront this kid and that is what caused his death. Trayvon had the right to defend himself too that night. However, in American society, whenever a black man has defended himself against a white man, the use of deadly force has always been justifiable.
Trayvon Martin was not a criminal. His actions that night were in no way suspicious. Zimmerman, based on his other phone calls to 911, profiled the youth as dangerous because he was black and he had on a hoodie. However, Zimmerman’s lawyers and his friends are trying to spin this and make an unarmed black man appear dangerous for doing nothing but walking to the store.
Zimmerman had no reason to be afraid of Travyon, but Trayvon, as evidenced by his phone call to his girlfriend, felt he had every reason to be afraid of Zimmerman. Justice for Trayvon. Hoodies up!!!
More by this Author
Suzette's camp next to the community dump. by Bruce Bean Hidden beneath the Main Street bridge that crosses the semi-dry Santa Ana River bed in Riverside is a group of tents that house a surprising group of people. ...
I just finished watching a couple of documentaries about how gangs got started in Los Angeles. One of them is called Bastards of the Party and was put together by a former gang member named Cle ‘Bone’ Sloan....
What if I told you that Ronald Reagan and Oliver North knew that drugs were pouring into Los Angeles during the 90's and did nothing.