I live in an ungated suburban complex of townhomes.

[MrScorpio]

Last edited Wed Mar 21, 2012, 06:45 PM - Edit history (2)

I've been here since I've moved back home to Michigan in 2008. It's a quiet place and the neighbors, for the most part, are white working class folks, many of whom are originally from within Detroit's city limits like myself.

Macomb County has gone under a demographic and attitudinal transformation over the past 20 years, in that it's become more diverse and a lot less hostile to people of color from across Eight Mile.

Let's say, knowing what I've experienced in this county in my youth, I was pleasantly surprised by the change.

Not once, since my return, have I've been subject to racial stereotyping or racist comments by angry white people. I feel very comfortable when I go out in public and not once have I been subject to an act of discrimination. The local cops seem to have it in for speeders and drunk drivers on the main thoroughfare near my home, but considering that it's right off a freeway off ramp and close to an popular night spot, their vigilance isn't unusual at all. (Macomb is full of speed traps anyway).

I get along with all my neighbors, we all get along and look out for each other.

Now the bad part: Michigan has a Stand Your Ground law much like that of Florida's. This is in place because of the Republican assholes who have run the state legislature for far too long. Concealed carried laws exist here too. Many of the same conditions that led to the senseless death of Trayvon Martin exists here in Michigan.

I'm sure that these same conditions exist in many other places as well in this country. This is not just a "Southern" problem or unique to Florida. This is an American one.

Last year, a friend of mine came by to pick me up to go into town. He's not from Michigan. While he was waiting in his car, he saw one of my neighbors walk into his house with a holstered sidearm in plain view. That sight really disturbed my friend, because he's not used to guns at all. There was no incident, nor was there any confrontation. But the sight of the weapon itself by a person who wasn't used to seeing people carry them openly caused a bit of concern.

One point, I don't doubt that my neighbor is a responsible gun owner, so this is not about guns, per se. It's something else.

The key dynamic missing here from what we have seen in Samford FL is that of George Zimmerman himself. A person full of fear and prejudice who was allowed to practice that fear and prejudice openly and with the tacit support of local law enforcement. Given slight changes to the story, this place where I live could very well be another Sanford FL, or where you live could be another Sanford FL.

We all could be living in Sanford FL.

The death of Trayvon Martin speaks to the conditions that exist in the very psyche of this country. There isn't a place where those conditions can't exist. All you need to do is add fear, prejudice and a happy trigger finger.

If these times don't compel us all to look at ourselves and drive us to find a better way to live with each other, then it'll be an opportunity sadly wasted.

This is a problem for every American to reflect upon and has an obligation to change.

[sikorsky]

1. It hasn't yet been proven that either the 'stand your ground' law, or overt racism was the main

factor in this tragedy. That is my humble opinion.

[SamG]

2. NOTHING has been proved, true, because ...

there has been no trial, and we don't have all the forensic and telephonic, and other evidence.

All we know leads us to certain logical theories, none "proved" in a court of law.

Even tho that hasn't happened yet, we still can be outraged that ANY 17 year old is dead for no reason and we can continue to want to know why and want all the facts to come out.

[sikorsky]

3. But your conclusion denies your premise (that we don't yet know. Isn't that confusing?)

It sure is to me.

[SamG]

31. My "conclusion" ? That we are OUTRAGED !

Outraged At the senseless death of a 17 year old. That's the only "conclusion" I have come to, so far.

I also want all the facts to come out, that's not a "conclusion" that's a wish I share with millions of other people.

[Taverner]

4. Um, it kinda has...

"Stand your ground" gives free license to all of the would-be Travis Bickles out there...

[arcane1]

5. "Stand your ground" is also the reason the killer wasn't taken in and questioned n/t

[X_Digger]

8. I believe he was handcuffed, taken to the station and questioned, *then* released. n/t

[arcane1]

9. Good, I missed that part

I thought they questioned him a little at the scene and that was all

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. Factually incorrect

Most reports say he was disarmed, taken into custody, taken to the station, and later released.

[arcane1]

30. Yep, X_Digger corrected me earlier

[sikorsky]

6. No it does not. If you think that, you do not understand the law.

And Bickles was a fictional character...hardly a basis for evaluating social and legal policy.

[Taverner]

12. What the law says, and how the public interpret it are two different things

Come one, you know better...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. Anyone who has taken FL firearms training knows better

[sikorsky]

16. You're correct...I don't respect the laws that say I can't marry my partner.

I guess we all have our axes to grind.

[MrScorpio]

7. Obviously you're not getting my point

Where do you think a law like "Stand your ground" comes from?

What kind of person would want it to exist?

Given the underlying fears and prejudices that exist in our society, from whom is the stand-your-grounder supposed to be protecting themselves from?

That law is simply Carte Blanche for people to shoot others that piss them off. The vast majority of people shot were unarmed, that's a fact.

Add fear, prejudice and happy trigger fingers without consequence and you'll end up with dead people, killed for no reason at all.

Either we're all are going to have to learn to live together in peace and harmony, or we're all going to have to live in fear of each other.

Which way would you rather have?

[Vincardog]

13. Anyone who can look at the facts we know in this case: 1) The shooter was a self appointed

"leader" of neighborhood watch.
2) He had called the police over 40 times in the last year in similar circumstances.
3) He chose to exit his vehicle and peruse the "suspect" against advice of the police.
4) He was heard to say "They always get away".
5) He had been previously arrested for assault of a police officer.
5.a) He muttered to himself "Fucking Coon".

Anyone who can look at these facts and assert "We have no proof of overt racism/i]"
is in my opinion being disingenuous. The only thing more overt would be if he were in full Klan regalia at the time.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. You are incorrect in your points

Where do you think a law like "Stand your ground" comes from?

Questionable prosecutions for not retreating were the cited cause.

What kind of person would want it to exist?

Those who understand that being second guessed by people not there and often with little similar experience over action taken in a potentially life and death is not particularly helpful. In other words DAs who have never been mugged telling someone who just has been what they should have done.

Given the underlying fears and prejudices that exist in our society, from whom is the stand-your-grounder supposed to be protecting themselves from?

Legitimate self defense has nothing to do with fears and prejudices.

That law is simply Carte Blanche for people to shoot others that piss them off. The vast majority of people shot were unarmed, that's a fact.

Stand Your Ground has NOTHING to do with if deadly force was appropriate in any given circumstance. Those statutes remained unchanged, requiring a reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death.

What is the basis for your claim that "vast majority of people shot were unarmed"?

Add fear, prejudice and happy trigger fingers without consequence and you'll end up with dead people, killed for no reason at all.

Fear and prejudice have killed a lot of people over the centuries, firearms are one of many methods. There are serious consequences for killing without a legally justified reason, as I hope Zimmerman soon finds out.



Stand Your Ground is not the real issue here. It is just noise and nonsense. The key point is whether or not Zimmerman had reasonable fear of GBI or death. I cannot see how that can be true, based on what has been released so far.

[Hoyt]

23. I'd like to see some examples of "questionable prosecution."

I'm sure MRA lobbyists have a long list.

[MrScorpio]

25. Obviously, there's a difference of opinion here

Questionable prosecutions for not retreating were the cited cause.

But… It's a fact that Stand Your Ground was heavily advocated by the NRA as just another way that they play on the fears, anger and prejudices of Americans against a perceived existential threat of criminal behavior. Zimmerman didn't need to have any proof that Trayvon Martin was engaged in criminal behavior. But he did use the preexisting fears of criminalized black males to impel himself to act to "protect" his community.

The police gave him pretty of cover for that by allowing him to go free without any danger of arrest and prosecution.

The fact that the initial action of the police refused to arrest Zimmerman for either murder or manslaughter blows your "questionable prosecution…" argument of of the water.

Those who understand that being second guessed by people not there and often with little similar experience over action taken in a potentially life and death is not particularly helpful. In other words DAs who have never been mugged telling someone who just has been what they should have done.


Again, the NRA wants this to exist:

ALEC Has Pushed The NRA's "Stand Your Ground" Law Across The Nation
March 21, 2012 11:41 am ET by Matt Gertz

The legislation apparently preventing the successful prosecution of Trayvon Martin's killer was reportedly adopted by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as model legislation that the shadowy group has spent years promoting across the country with the help of their allies in the National Rifle Association.

Formed in 1973 by conservative activists including Paul Weyrich and state legislators like then-Illinois State Rep. Henry Hyde, ALEC has earned infamy throughout the progressive movement for its ability to promote model legislation favorable to its corporate funders through statehouses across the country.

Legal experts have noted that Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law may prevent George Zimmerman from ever being successfully prosecuted for the killing of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman has claimed that he acted in self-defense, and court precedent indicates that the State has the heavy burden of disproving this in order to win a conviction.

Florida's statute on the use of force in self-defense is virtually identical to Section 1 of ALEC's Castle Doctrine Act model legislation as posted on the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD). According to CMD, the model bill was adopted by ALEC's Civil Justice Task in August 2005 -- just a few short months after it passed the Florida legislature -- and approved by its board of directors the following month.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203210004

In short, it's a Right Wing meme that's being imposed on American communities.

Legitimate self defense has nothing to do with fears and prejudices.

If people are being shot for nothing more than the crime of walking while black, we have a problem here.

Stand Your Ground has NOTHING to do with if deadly force was appropriate in any given circumstance. Those statutes remained unchanged, requiring a reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death.

What is the basis for your claim that "vast majority of people shot were unarmed"?

If your assertion is correct, then why was there a tremendous rise in justifiable homicides following the passage of the law?

But the law has also been used to excuse violence in deadly neighbor arguments, bar brawls, road rage — even a gang shoot-out — that just as easily might have ended with someone walking away.

Has it cheapened human life?

• • •

Miami's police chief made a prediction shortly before the law took effect:

"Whether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house,'' Chief John Timoney told the New York Times, "you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used.''

Four years later, Billy Kuch got drunk, so drunk that at 5 a.m. one day he stumbled to the door of the wrong house in a look-alike neighborhood and tried to open it, twice.

Before the "stand your ground" law, homeowner Gregory Stewart would have been expected to hunker down in his Land O'Lakes residence, dead-bolt secure, and call police.

With the law in place, he could use deadly force anywhere he had a right to be, provided he felt threatened with death or great bodily harm. He had no duty to retreat from danger.

Stewart left his wife inside with their baby and stepped outside, gun in hand.

Kuch put his hands up and asked for a light.

"Please don't make me shoot you," Stewart said.

Kuch, then 23, says he might have stumbled. Stewart, then 32, told police the unarmed man took three steps forward.

The bullet ripped into Kuch's chest, nicked his heart, shot through his liver, in and out of his stomach, through his spleen, then out his back. He felt like his body was on fire.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/article1128317.ece

If you love justifiable homicides, then Stand Your Ground is just the law for you

FAST FACTS
Florida Statute 776.013 (3)
"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Justifiable homicide
Reports of justifiable homicides in Florida
200032
200133
200235
200332
200431
200543
200633
2007102
200893
2009105
2010 (through June)44
Source: Florida Department of Law Enforcement

[shcrane71]

32. I had no idea that Stand Your Ground laws were ALEC sponsored.

Why am I not surprised.

It should be called Legally Justifiable Homicide law.

[sikorsky]

18. I'm certainly inclined to think Trayvon would like to have had the -option- to exercise it.

I guess you think it only works in one direction.

[MrScorpio]

21. Oh… So, you're saying that he shouldn't have brought Skittles to a gun fight, right?

Well, that's at least one opinion.

[sikorsky]

22. I won't laugh because you might actually be serious.

good grief

[Chorophyll]

34. So what *were* you saying then?

Should the 17-year-old have been armed too? Should my ten-year-old have a gun every time he leaves the house, just in case? Should everyone be walking around with concealed weapons? Where would you draw the line -- at the visually impaired?

[dmkinsey]

36. Exactly, that's the NRA's dream

that everyone will carry a gun everywhere, always.
They want to live in the wild wild west and they're bummed they were born too late. Bunch of John Wayne wannabe's

[Taverner]

28. It strangely reminds me of the Soviet NKVD under Beria

He would give them quotas to bring in dissidents. If they didn't meet their quota, they were killed. So anyone with a neighborhood grudge would 'inform' on their neighbor, and they would be gone the next day.

Leave it to us to cut out the middleman...

[baldguy]

27. By the preponderance of the available evidence, it has.

The fact that there is very little evidence left is due primarily to the incompetence and/or bigotry of the police.

[siligut]

10. I hope something good can come out of this tragedy.

It would help if the truth came out, Zimmerman was put in jail and made an example of to warn others.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

11. So very, very true --

I live in SF , in a very multi-ethnic, multi-everything neighborhood. We all know each other, we all keep an eye out for each other.

One night, a young woman coming down the hill hit a neighbor's truck with her car. We all heard it, all poked our noses out the window to see what was up. The driver was freaking out and trying to restart her car and back up the hill to leave -- she was very young and sounded a little drunk. The neighbor whose truck she hit was begging her to shut her car down, because every time she tried to back up she just ended up hitting his vehicle again. Before you know it, another neighbor who is in a rage comes round the corner and walks up to the driver side door of the car, points what looked like a 9mm at the girl and screams and order for her to get out of the car. I am shocked as shit to see this kind of escalation over a frickin' dented fender and especially shocked at who is holding the gun. I knww this neighbor to be a pot-smoking, ultra laid back school teacher, not the snarling freak I was looking at. I grabbed the phone and dialed 911 (turns out cops were on the way anyway, but they hit the sirens when they were told a firearm was involved) afraid that the guy was going to lose his cool and shots were going to be fired. Neighbors start yelling at him to stop, but he rips open her door and grabs her by the hair to pull her out of the car.

There were at least 10 people either watching from the windows or standing nearby the vehicle and we were all but frozen -- not one of us knew how to handle an angry nut with a gun. That girl was one click away from going the way of Trayvon Martin.

Thank the gods the sirens freaked the guy out and he let her go -- he went back to his house, perhaps afraid of being questioned by the cops about what the hell he was doing.

As you said, that story could happen anywhere and -- as in this case -- under a variety of circumstances.

Fear+anger+gun=potential for major disaster

[EmeraldCityGrl]

20. Chilling. n/t

[sikorsky]

19. Taking a huge risk to post this here

I'm not sure I can even make these comments without being wrongly labeled a racist or worse, but please don't confuse the messenger with the message.

There's obviously no justification for this shooting if reports are accurate, so what I will be saying here isn't meant in any way to excuse it but rather to demonstrate how events can create the kinds of mindsets that lead to this
and similar tragedies. I doubt anyone here thinks opinions and prejudices arise by themselves without some impetus from others...after all, how many children are born hating -anything-?

Things happen and those things influence what and how people think about others. People tend to viscerally react to external stimuli, it's just human nature.

There was a lot of attention to this particular event
http://www.newson6.com/story/17171733/female-victim-in-home-invasion-dies-at-tulsa-hospital-police-name-suspect

When these things make it into the 'news', the take-away for some is they can be the next victim and their sociological attitudes and perspectives are thus influenced according to that (unfortunately real) possibility.

Yes, it's stereotypical, but do stereotypes exist for no reason? I don't think so, I'm a gay man whose appearance, mannerisms, behavior and indeed my "lifestyle" aren't even close to those often associated (especially by homophobes - the stereotype) with those attributed to gay adult males.

But I certainly know many who DO fit that "mold", so I can see where the prejudice comes from as well as how irrational it is and I have to admit that in this area, the behavior of some of
my gay friends often comes under the heading of "with friends like this..."

To me and to many others, excessive PDAs (to denote one aspect of public behavior) are off-putting regardless of the genders involved, not that I would ever condone harm to anyone for it but the
sad truth is that they sure don't do us any favors politically.

Doesn't it explain how some people are afraid of certain others who happen to be dressed and acting in some particular way? After all, isn't racism (like homophobia) simply embracing stereotypes as fact and a rationale for discrimination? I can't think of any way to stop them except
by just disappearing any perceived excuses for them.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

24. Not sure I fully understand your point...

but my understanding of your last paragraph is, you attempt to project a public image
that will make those who would tend to be homophobic more comfortable. Is that what
you are expressing by stating "I can't think of any way to stop them except
by just disappearing any perceived excuses for them.?"

Speaking personally, if I have a problem with PDA's, how someone is dressed, anything
they are entitled to do that is constitutional, enhances their life and makes them happy,
that is my problem. At that point I would need to self check and question within my own
mind why I'm judging that particular person. The person(s) I may be judging have no
responsibility to make me more comfortable with who they innately are.

I have a very hard time tolerating republicans especially when they are justifying their
politics. I will always have that problem and when dealing with them try to stick to some
common ground regardless how insufferable they are. But even in that case it's my issue
and their right to believe what they want. I'm entitled to promote and work to accomplish
my own agenda keeping in mind they have the same right.

I guess I'm trying to say is, you shouldn't have to "disappear any perceived excuses for them."

[sikorsky]

26. I didn't explain it well at all because I didn't differentiate between tawdry and unlawful acts.

Some people are more offended by the salacious than by the criminal but the bottom line is that they get offended either way. I was trying to explain the -reasons- without equating them to -excuses-. Where does racism come from, if not from history?...I don't know for sure but, as I said before, I don't think any child is born hating anything (or even believing anything, for that matter)...and if that's the case, where does it come from? There are some who assume absolute guilt because of their race and there are others who assume absolute innocence for the same reason...I think we are seeing both here.

[MrScorpio]

29. To set your mind at ease...

Last edited Thu Mar 22, 2012, 06:33 PM - Edit history (1)

I'm quite sure that you won't be profiled as a danger to the community by someone like a gun toting Zimmerman for walking while gay right off the bat. In that someone like Zimmerman will accuse you for being "up to no good" and about to commit some kind of crime just by looking at you, a gay man.

The issue here between you, gays and lesbians from young black males are quite different when it comes to profiling… and I can tell you for a fact that some of those young black males which are being profiled are, in fact, GAY! But their gayness is NOT the point of contention of those who are doing the profiling, their color is.

When people start thinking that you are an existential threat to persons or property by the mere fact of your gayness, that's when I think that you'd have a valid point here.

I know that it's bad enough having to deal with bigotry against gays and lesbians in this country, but this is a different issue.

[Chorophyll]

33. Very well said, MrScorpio.

Thank you.

[lunatica]

35. This tragic incident has forced this country to examine itself

There is hope. We must all stand together as human beings against racism and violence and what I'm seeing on the talk shows on MSNBC is finally an open and honest dialogue happening.

I'm also seeing an open and honest dialogue regarding misogyny and we've just been through a couple of years of open and honest dialogue about gay rights. Things are changing because of these open and honest dialogues.

I'm sorry it takes a tragedy to bring us together, but at least we're working on it as a country.

[FarCenter]

37. Open carry is better than concealed carry; people with guns should not grapple with others.

The state that I grew up in allowed open carry, but concealed carry was against the law. Therefore, if someone was armed, it was obvious to others. I've see men carrying holstered revolvers at church picnics. Not a problem.

If you are carrying a weapon, you should never get close enough to someone else that there is a possibility that they could disarm you. Closely following or challenging someone physically while armed is extremely poor judgement.

[shcrane71]

38. Thanks. This is a thought-provoking post.

My previous neighborhood is predominantly African-American. We all thought that there might be a few right-wing nutters in the neighborhood. One of the crazies gave himself up when he hired a plumber. The plumber drove his Bubba truck complete with several right-wing, racist bumper stickers into the neighborhood, and parked it in front of the neighbor's house.

Within 30 minutes, a half a dozen, elderly African American men wearing business suits were standing around that plumber's truck, pointing at his swastika bumper sticker that equated the Nazis with Obama. I had never seen most of the elderly gents in the neighborhood, but I'm happy that they came.

It was surprising, to me, to see how scared the plumber (white guy that towered over the other guys) looked. I understand that prejudice is based on fear, but I've only witnessed racism being acted out in an angry way. Never saw the plumber again, but I hope the well-dressed men were able to change his mind.