7-15-13 Candlelight Vigil

This is not the post I prepared for today. You will see that tomorrow. At 8:45 I discovered that there would be a neighborhood candlelight vigil for Trayvon Martin at West Harlem Piers Park which is at 128th Street and the river. So off I went. It was indeed primarily a neighborhood vigil, organized out of one of the big apartment buildings near the park. It was very inter-racial, very peaceful, very much pointed at Stand Your Ground and gun laws and not at George Zimmerman. “He is a symptom. He is not the cause.” I had dashed out of the house and did not have my off camera flash so I was pushing the camera and lens very hard. Here are some faces from the vigil.

Boro Walk

Advertisements

9 responses to “7-15-13 Candlelight Vigil

  1. I don’t “support” Trayvon Martin any more than I support George Zimmerman. But I believe that ‘Stand Your Ground’ is a terrible law, and as I understand it, is on the books in some form or another in about 30 states. The problem with the law is that is puts the concept of ‘threatened’ into the hands of the individual, and that’s a very subjective thing. And by that I mean that I might feel threatened or in danger in a given situation, and another person might simply be scared. IMO, no law should give an individual the right to mortally wound another just because they felt threatened.

      • Zimmerman should never have been tried in the first place. The objective evidence showed a clear case of justified self defense. That is what the original prosecutor found, before he was replaced by a politically motivated prosecutor.

        The politically motivated prosecutor _refused_ to call a Grand Jury to determine if charges should go forward (undoubtedly because she knew a Grand Jury – based on the evidence – would not rubber stamp her politically based show circus of a trial).

        The actual case showed just how weak the prosecution’s case was. It was pathetic where the prosecution would call witnesses and they would turn out to be more of a benefit for the defense than the prosecution, over and over again.

        So the injustice is that Zimmerman was put through an unnecessary show trial based on political ambitions, that people were stoked to hate him so he will be in danger of being killed, and his life has largely been ruined.

        And it is not over yet. The Justice Dept. may bring civil rights charges and there is the possibility of civil damages.

        I don’t know that I like Zimmerman personally, he is kind of a fat little guy who voted for Obama – that latter making him less than an ideal candidate for a good chat with me – but justice was served to some degree when he was found not guilty. At least the American principle that a jury can override politics and politically correct prosecution was upheld.

        Not guilty by the way does not mean “innocent.” It only means the jury could not find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

        I feel sorry for Martin, but the fact is he was a dope smoking punk into Mixed Martial Arts fighting (based on his phone messages not allowed in court before the jury) who apparently fought a lot, and enjoyed fighting. He was not the sweet looking 14 year old boy the picture of which everyone is displaying to invoke sympathy. He had been caught in school with burglary tools and a burglary tool was found in the bushes only feet from where he died. I am guessing Zimmerman was right to see him as suspicious.

        I do feel some sympathy though. My youngest son had brushes with the law and bad influences in high school so I can see how it can happen. I saw the picture of Martin dead on the scene and I could mentally imagine my son being there, if he had kept going in a bad direction.

        Fortunately my son is still alive and a machine gunner in the Marine Corps. I have to thank the Marines for doing a lot to straighten him out.

        lwk

        • As I said, most of these people were there because they find the Stand Your Ground Law to be an abomination (as do many cops I have talked to who have all said in that situation at a minimum they would have lost their jobs and their right to possess firearms). I do have to ask you, as I do everyone who tells me the system worked – do you think it always works or did it work because in this case it supports your idea of what happened?
          After all, many people believe the system worked in the OJ case as well.
          I personally think both decisions were wrong but I was not in the courtroom or on either jury. I do know it is a damn strange law that Stand Your Ground means follow someone and shoot them even though they didn’t approach you to begin with but does not mean be in your home, fire a warning shot above your abusive husband’s head.
          See case of African American woman (also in FL) convicted and sent to jail for 20 years for NOT shooting her abuser (Jury decision in 12 minutes).
          Clearly something is at work, be it race or class or just lousy judges instructions – but to which jury?

          • “As I said, most of these people were there because they find the Stand Your Ground Law to be an abomination…”

            I don’t agree and wrote on the subject here:

            Stand Your Ground and Self Defense

            http://free2beinamerica2.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/stand-your-ground-and-self-defense/

            I live in Texas and we have a version of Stand Your Ground and I am licensed to carry a loaded and concealed handgun, so the issue is of some concern to me.

            “After all, many people believe the system worked in the OJ case as well.”

            It might very have worked in the OJ case. A lot of people believe he was guilty and he may very well be. But I am satisfied if the standard of “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” is followed. The law is not supposed to guarantee that all guilty people are convicted. It is supposed to guarantee – and often doesn’t – that people who are convicted are indeed guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

            “I do know it is a damn strange law that Stand Your Ground means follow someone and shoot them even though they didn’t approach you to begin with but does not mean be in your home, fire a warning shot…”

            I don’t see that as an objective description of what happened, at least not based on what we actually know. There is no objective evidence that Zimmerman did anything to start a fight.

            “…but does not mean be in your home, fire a warning shot above your abusive husband’s head.”

            In that case the black woman – based on what little I know – was unjustly convicted and _that_ is the sort of case that black people should really be focused on, focused on correcting a clear case of wrongful prosecution.

            lwk
            free2beinamerica2.wordress.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s