Trayvon Martin Case

Who says I'm not concerned about the Chicago shootings? And in case you didn't notice, this is the Trayvon Martin thread? #applesandoranges

See, here's the thing -- through your posts, I see your emotionalism in this case tied up in the race of the victim rather than the generic concern about the death of an unarmed teen. Unarmed teens are shot and killed multiple times a month in Baltimore. Did you wear a hoodie for them? Did you rally for them? Have you notified the Mayor and members of the city counsel of your outrage through a simple phone call or letter?

If you do feel the same outrage at these killings, and you may well, I sincerely apologize. What I see from your postings, however, is concern for a victim wrapped in race rather than outrage over the death of a teen due to unnecessary violence - regardless of race.

This case is like many other murders throughout the nation. Mistaken identity, over-zealous gunman, etc. It is not, and has never been, worthy of the national news and only remains so b/c of the race based coverage it received early on.

@Joe, I'm a native Washingtonian from the '80s. Grew up in N.E. when D.C. was the murder capital of the nation. Many that I grew up with were either murdered, committed murder, or incarcerated. I've seen urban violence up close and too f*cking personal.

I'm not sure what little box you think I'm in regarding Trayvon Martin or how I'm supposed to feel, but my outrage is mine and mine alone. I'm not trying to prove anything here.

See, here's the thing -- through your posts, I see your emotionalism in this case tied up in the race of the victim rather than the generic concern about the death of an unarmed teen. Unarmed teens are shot and killed multiple times a month in Baltimore. Did you wear a hoodie for them? Did you rally for them? Have you notified the Mayor and members of the city counsel of your outrage through a simple phone call or letter?

If you do feel the same outrage at these killings, and you may well, I sincerely apologize. What I see from your postings, however, is concern for a victim wrapped in race rather than outrage over the death of a teen due to unnecessary violence - regardless of race.

This case is like many other murders throughout the nation. Mistaken identity, over-zealous gunman, etc. It is not, and has never been, worthy of the national news and only remains so b/c of the race based coverage it received early on.

Don't parse my posts and interpret what you think they mean or what I'm trying to say.

Who are you to say this case isn't worthy of national news? Tell that to the parents of Trayvon Martin who's killer roamed free for over a month before charges were even brought. Zimmerman, in likelihood, would still be walking the streets today had it not been for the outrage of the Sanford community.

No. It wouldn't. Law is a human creation intended to be for humans and adjudicated by humans.

So are computers.

Inherent in its creation is the use and consideration of human emotions (bias, mercy, prejudice, compassion, etc.). To then remove emotion from the application of such a creation is to create a systematic flaw.

I'm not seeing any evidence of the removal of human flaws creating a more flawed system.

The resultant and inherent inhuman application of such laws would lead to attrocities and the "logical/rational" choices in which a mechanical being would make no attempt to save a drowning child.

WTF?!?!??! Where are you getting this from?

For good or ill, the law is our creation. It is meant for us and for us to apply it. I for one, chose not to surrender the adjudication of my actions to a highly sophisticated calculator. Accordingly, I will ask no one else to either.

It's called progress.

Don't parse my posts and interpret what you think they mean or what I'm trying to say.

Who are you to say this case isn't worthy of national news? Tell that to the parents of Trayvon Martin who's killer roamed free for over a month before charges were even brought. Zimmerman, in likelihood, would still be walking the streets today had it not been for the outrage of the Sanford community.

That's fine I just wonder where this outrage is everyday a kid is killed in the inner city. If this much attention and effort went toward that then maybe something would actually happen to stop the senseless killings. In many of those killings the community turns its back to law enforcement but now when it convient they want the cops involved.

@Firstdown. I posted this two months in response to a question posed by 56Fan. I have no desire to delve into the differences between the Trayvon Martin murder and black on black, but this post somewhat captures it.


56Fan, you seem to be conflating civil rights and the rule of law with the plight of the black community at large. I'm neither a Sharpton supporter or apologist, but his role if you will, in the black community is - he speaks to civil rights issues. Admittedly while there is a civil rights component at play, black on black crime in and of itself is not a civil rights issue. It is, however, a gravely important one that needs to be addressed for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, there's an economic imperative as well as the achievement gap that needs to be bridged. There's an inextricable link between urban poverty, black on black crime, and education. It's one thing to march and "demand" that black men stop killing black men, it's another to start a conversation about the achievement gap in the black community or job programs to ensure employment post-prison. In other words initiatives and policies that directly impact urban poverty, particularly education, which tends to curb violent behavior, drug abuse, early drop out rates, and teen pregnancy. So you see, the murder of Trayvon Martin and black on black crime, are two distinctly different conversations that must be approached and unpacked differently in order to understand them and remedy the problem.

Now if you arguing that Al Sharpton, as a prominent leader in the black community, should broaden his scope and speak to some of the ills that have plagued the black community for decades, well he's actually doing that. It may come as a surprise to some that Al Sharpton and Newt Gingrich have teamed up with the President and the Secretary of Education on education issues.

Arne Duncan, Al Sharpton, and Newt Gingrich Join Forces - On Education (usnews.com)

Al Sharpton and Gingrich have appeared on Meet The Press and other venues across the country to champion initiatives that address education in minority communities. This is where it starts. You can't make some angry teen who is feeling disenfranchised put down his gun, but you can build up the schools around him so that the next kid named Trayvon won't resort to violence and drugs, but sees education as his ticket out of the hood.

Newt Gingrich and Al Sharpton team up to rally for education on tour - NY Daily News

Don't parse my posts and interpret what you think they mean or what I'm trying to say.

Not trying to. Went back and reread them including the post you reposted above. I apologize for impression that I was attempting to box you into a particular response. I am not. Your responses have been aimed at the issues specific to this case and, when appropriate, to the larger issue of black on black crime. I apoligize for anything said that may be percieved to be impugning your lack of concern for other victims of violence.

Who are you to say this case isn't worthy of national news? Tell that to the parents of Trayvon Martin who's killer roamed free for over a month before charges were even brought. Zimmerman, in likelihood, would still be walking the streets today had it not been for the outrage of the Sanford community.

I am someone who thinks that it one of countless cases that occur every year where known killers walk free uncharged for a significant period of time. Is this truly the crux of your concern - that a killer went uncharged? Where is the national outrage in the countless similar situations? What do we say to the victims of loved ones in those cases which do not become media darlings?

Why does this case deserve national attention when similar cases do not? Had this been a black on black crime or if had been originally reported as a minority on minority crime, I assert it would not have garnered national attention and, for that reason - b/c the national attention seems to me to be purely racially motivated, I believe it should not be a national story.

So, in turn, I ask you why do you believe this IS a case of national importance?

@Joe, I wish it weren't of national importance. I wish Zimmerman would have listened to the dispatcher and never left his vehicle. I wish Trayvon Martin would have listened to his girlfriend and run like she told him to, but none of that happened.

I can't make the point any clearer than I already have why this isn't the same as black on black crime. We're dealing with two completely different context's and different set of circumstances surrounding this particular crime.

But hypothetically speaking I'm not personally aware of any black on black shooting incidents, where the aggressor was freed within hours of killing an unarmed teen and allowed to roam the streets for more than a month, do you?

No. It wouldn't. Law is a human creation intended to be for humans and adjudicated by humans.
So are computers.

The law and computers are human creations. Each is created differently to serve different functions. When we create computers that can demonstrate and apply the concepts of justice tempered by mercy and compassion in their manipulation of data, then it may be possible to do as you assert. Try as I might, however, I haven’t found an app for that yet.

Inherent in its creation is the use and consideration of human emotions (bias, mercy, prejudice, compassion, etc.). To then remove emotion from the application of such a creation is to create a systematic flaw.
I'm not seeing any evidence of the removal of human flaws creating a more flawed system.

Emotions are inherent in creation and application of human law and have been since the inception of law within society. Accordingly, as currently written, there is a necessary emotional variable in the equation used to evaluate evidence, pass judgment as to compliance and determine appropriate sentencing under the laws that govern us. Further, I accept it as true that a processer of information unable to adequately manipulate all the necessary variables of a system – such as computers attempting to compute and apply “justice” – will be inherently flawed and consistently render unreliable/incorrect results. I would have thought someone as rational as you could see such an obvious systemic flaw.

If, however, you consider our corporate humanity to be a flaw that must be removed from the creation and application of our legal system, the only way to do so is to cede the right to govern ourselves (i.e. the right to create the laws which will apply to us) to mechanical devices that, at their core, simply store, retrieve and manipulate compilable data. Again, you may wish to surrender to the coming computer overlords. I do not.

The resultant and inherently inhuman application of such laws would lead to attrocities and the "logical/rational" choices in which a mechanical being would make no attempt to save a drowning child.
WTF?!?!??! Where are you getting this from?

From the simple fact, as highlighted by CRed above that "being human" involves more than weighing odds and manipulating equations. The concepts of “right” and “wrong” are not mathematical equations based on data retrieval. A process incapable of understanding such concepts will inevitably make choices resulting in specific cases of inhumanity – such as giving more weight to the probability of survival then any other factor when choosing between saving the life of an adult over that of a child.

For good or ill, the law is our creation. It is meant for us and for us to apply it. I for one, chose not to surrender the adjudication of my actions to a highly sophisticated calculator. Accordingly, I will ask no one else to either.
It's called progress.

I am sure you will be happy with the Borg assimilation.

@Joe, I wish it weren't of national importance. I wish Zimmerman would have listened to the dispatcher and never left his vehicle. I wish Trayvon Martin would have listened to his girlfriend and run like she told him to, but none of that happened.

I wish the same.

@I can't make the point any clearer than I already have why this isn't the same as black on black crime. We're dealing with two completely different context's and different set of circumstances surrounding this particular crime.

Different contexts and surrounding circumstances which, at their core, are driven solely by the presumed race of the shooter and actual race of the victim. To be clear, I was not trying to make this a direct comparison to black on black crime. Whether this was a black shooting a white, a black shooting a hispanic, a white shooting a white, etc., to me - this was not a case of national importance and is only so b/c of the race of the victim and the originally presumed race of the shooter. I find such a motivation for national media coverage incendiary, divisive and wrong.

But hypothetically speaking I'm not personally aware of any black on black shooting incidents, where the aggressor was freed within hours of killing an unarmed teen and allowed to roam the streets for more than a month, do you?

Fair question. No. I am not. While I firmly believed it has happened (again, regardless of the races involved), I have no examples. While I admit I am about to shift the point a little and feel free to call me up on it, I guess I think it is my sense that "Injustice happens everyday. Why did this injustice rate national coverage?" that rankles me in this matter.