Does it matter to you what actually happened, though, or only the "oppressed and hunted young black man" agenda?
The truth is that Martin chose to try to beat down somebody who was annoying him, and that person happened to have a gun. Accepting the probability that Zimmerman was being intrusive and annoying, that still doesn't give you the right to beat somebody down, nor to expect somebody that is getting his head bashed on the concrete won't shoot to protect himself. It doesn't take Saint Zimmerman to make this true.
All Martin has to do is to take the 30 seconds to walk (or <10 to run) to his father's door, and he's still alive today. Or, just don't beat the guy down, however much you think he "deserved" it. Just tell him: "Yeah? You called the cops? Good. When they get here you can explain how an adult was harassing a teenager in his own neighborhood. Tell them I'll be right down there at my dad's house. You can see it from here. Address is [etc.]."
Trayvon was not really a thug, you're right. But you do understand a lot of that was in reaction to the media's potrayal of him as a nonviolent, saintly honor student who, when he was killed, still looked like the 13-year-old in the standard photo of him that was unrelentingly circulated by media outlets who refused to update it, an image that contributed to the idea that there was no way that cherubic kid was beating anybody down that night, so Zimmerman must have gone "hunting for a harmless black child to kill."
Point is, both sides owe accuracy. In fact, that might be the thing to get past the idea of "sides" in the first place.
reply
share