Blame the Victim, Blame the Hoodie? Excuse the Killer? Arm the fuddy duddy fashion police?

I'm wearing a hoodie today. 
Not because of solidarity with Trayvon Martin particularly; I'm wearing a hoodie for the same reason that Trayvon Martin wore a hoodie on the night he was shot to death. 
It's chilly and it's raining outside. 
I'm not "identifying with gangsta's", and I don't have my sweat pants hanging down low either (I mentioned, it's cold - not that I would anyway.)  I'm also not male, I'm not a teen, and I'm not black.
There is absolutely NO indication that Trayvon Martin in wearing a hoodie was emulating a gangster; there is no indication that he was wearing his pants what is sometimes called skater style, a style that stereotypically could as accurately be called plumber style.
Juan Williams was wrong about Muslims and their ethnic clothing.  The Fox Nuts village idiot, Geraldo Rivera, is wrong about his assumptions based on clothing and stereotypes.  That such messages that clothing can get you shot, or running can get you shot, or standing too close to someone else can get you shot is a terrible thing for any person of color to learn for survival.  The CORRECT response is that such stereotypes are WRONG, not the response that we must conform to them.
It is no different than the message about women and clothing given by Hilary Clinton recently, that I wrote about here.  Like the message that it is wrong for Iraqi conservatives in that country to react fearfully to teens wearing Emo style clothing in a youthful rebellion by stoning them to death, it is as equally backward, intolerant and reactionary to assert that there is any manner of dress - Emo, Goth, or Hoodie, or ethnic or something other - and equally it is wrong to justify a violent reaction or otherwise to hold a significantly negative prejudgement about people, much less act on one destructively.
I learned an important lesson some years ago about fear, and the perception of strangeness.  A very wise old man, Professor MAR (Phil) Barker who for a number of years was part of, and headed the now disbanded University of Minnesota South Asian studies department described his experiences as a young man from the United States, armed with nothing much more than a sense of adventure and a linguistics degree, exploring remote parts of India back in the 1950s.  He encountered a group of people who were previously unknown, the kind of experience we associate with remote parts of the Amazon in South America.  He couldn't speak to them and they could not speak to him; they had no common language.  Each appeared as foreign, as different as it is possible to seem to the other, and neither had expected their encounter.  There was no one to act as interpreter.
Phil did not wish to appear aggressive, and he did not wish to appear fearful.  Customs in what is expressed by body language,  particularly gestures, can have dramatically different, even insulting, meanings from one culture to another.
So in a moment that was inspired he did something brilliant.  He did not approach closer, for fear of appearing aggressive.  He did not run, for fear of being seen as either fearful, or worse as someone who was guilty of doing something bad or wrong.
He simply sat down where he was standing when he saw these other people, and let them approach him.  They came to accept him, and he studied their language and their culture, the first person from 'outside' their small and isolated world to do so, a personally and academically enriching experience for Phil, and for the study of anthropology and linguistics. 
Phil died on March 16, 2012, and I am grieving for him as I write this.  But what lives on for me from Phil was his courageous, gentle example when faced with a frightening unknown.  What lives on for me is a love of languages, and of adventure, and of encountering people who are different than myself.
George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin had a common language, a generally common culture of origin.  They should have had everything that was necessary to communicate with each other, to clarify misunderstanding.  What got in the way of that happening was fear, and worse than fear, prejudgment and stereotypes rather than facts, and a willingness to act violently on them.
Trayv0n was frightened because George Zimmeman behaved in a way which reasonably concerned him; and he tried to walk away.  George Zimmerman in his fantasy of avenging angle vigilante apparently chased Trayvan, giving him further cause for fear.  And George Zimmerman was so afraid of his stereotype of black men that he confronted Trayvan Martin which he did not have the authority to do, apparently initiated a physical confrontation, and then shot him.
I can't help but wonder what would have happened instead, if Trayvon Martin had just sat down when George Zimmerman approached.  Given the prejudgment that Zimmerman had, from the numerous 911 calls where he saw every black man as a criminal, I'm skeptical if that or anything else Trayvan could have done would have averted the shooting.
All of the violence was avoidable, and the first step in avoiding that violence was not to jump to the wrong conclusion.  The second step would have been to be slow to violence without a clearer threat, which the Stand Someone Else's Ground law in the Gunshine State makes too easy, with too little consequence.
Not all of the faulty thinking of George Zimmerman were based on his fear of black men.  Just carrying a gun contributed to his perception.  From an MSNBC.com article "Holding a gun may make you think others are, too"
In the study which was carried out well before the shooting, undergraduates at Notre Dame and Purdue glimpsed scenes of people holding objects and had to decide quickly whether the object was a gun. The results showed they were biased toward thinking so if they themselves were holding a toy gun, rather than a plastic ball. Just having a gun nearby didn't make a difference, researchers found.
Why is that? Brockmole said people are primed to act in the world rather than just passively see it. So their minds have to contain information both about what they see and what they might do in response. Evidently, each kind of information can influence the other, he said.
He said the work is not intended to support gun control, but it suggests that people should know that when they hold a gun "that might change how you're going to interpret what's around you."
Brockmole's findings make sense, said Evan Risko, who studies perception and attention at Arizona State University. "Our perception is influenced by a number of different factors, and that can have important consequences," he said.
Dennis Proffitt, who studies visual perception at the University of Virginia, said there are many reasons why one person might think another is armed, such as if he is worried about his own safety or if he thinks the other person is a robber. The effect of holding a gun oneself "could be part of the story" in Florida, he said.

Geraldo Rivera is wrong.  The fault is not in how someone dresses, or the way they wear their hair and jewelry, the style of slang speech they affect or the language they speak.  It is just as wrong for Rich Santorum to tell the people of Puerto Rico that they need to learn to speak English.  The answer is not uniformity and conformity to what is comfortable for a lot of old conservative mostly white men (or women).
The solution is a more open and inquiring mind, the answer is better critical thinking instead of blind ;violent fear response.  The answer is more individual courage, and less violence.  Without those things, George Zimmerman was simply an execution waiting to happen to someone he feared because of a hoodie, or a skin color, or a gender.  He was predisposed, he went out into the night looking for it, chasing that execution as a vigilante neighborhood watch captain, over and over, until he finally did it.  Worst of all, he believed the gun 'nut' fantasy that shooting a bad guy would make him a hero.
It did not; it proved him a coward who shot an unarmed kid on his way home. 
Those like Geraldo Rivera who are sycophants to the message of the NRA have to find some way to excuse Zimmerman and blame Trayvan Martin, no matter how distorted, twisted and wrong their reasoning.
I wonder what Zimmerman would have done if Trayvan Martin had just sat down, and waited for the police?  I wonder what would have happened differently if Zimmerman had known about the adventurous real life of someone like Phil Barker.  The real solution to preventing the many instances of gun carriers shooting people lies in the power of ideas and concepts and better ways of dealing with confrontations, not the force of bullets through the barrels of guns, powered as much by ignorance as combustion.
Rest in Peace Phil; with a little effort and a lot of luck, your lesson lived will live on after you.

Every Person George Zimmeran Reported to Police as Suspicious Was a Black Man

Race plays a major role in how Stand Someone Else's Ground laws play out, as does gender to a lesser extent.  It is one of the reasons that the use of deadly force by ordinary citizens rather than police presents a spectrum of problems, especially when those citizens operate under less accountability for their decisions to use deadly force than law enforcement does.
I found this paragraph in the Florida News Journal about the many 911 calls to the Sanford police to be interesting, although I would prefer the slur quoted below to be verified by lab efforts to make it more clear if the words quoted are what is really being said, as that part of the recorded speech is muffled, before representing it as conclusive:

Zimmerman has a long history of calling police on "suspicious people", in fact each of his calls over the last year were to report someone who was black. In his recent call to police over this incident he was record using the words "F***ing Coon" while describing Trayvon Martin.

The Sanford PD released this 47 page report of the calls made by George Zimmerman confirming Zimmerman's odd obsession with black males.
When one of the news stations inquired if the reports of crimes being committed by blacks claimed by Zimmeran in the gated community where the Martin shooting occurred were accurate, the local police department did NOT support that claim made by Martin and his fellow neighborhood watch co-captain.

Statistically, there are greater problems, as was noted in this New York Times article for black males than for example, black women as a group.  As a sometime student of criminal justice studies, Zimmerman may have felt that this gave him the justification for his suspicion of all black males.  The problem of course is that people are individuals, not statistical aggregates.  What is true of a group is not automatically true of every individual who has something in common with a group.  There are as many false representations of facts about groups as there are accurate ones; a case in point is the notion that there are more black men in jail than in college.  This is false, as documented at African American Demographics, quoting U.S. Department of Justice data.  That is the problem with belief and assumptions, that a person's information may be incomplete or inaccurate, in addition to a generality not being true in the specific.  Zimmerman wouldn't be the first person to be suspicious of black men, but that is precisely why arming people and giving them a greater rather than lesser license to use those weapons violently is not safe.
But the greater problem lies in the ambiguity that is at the core of the Stand Your Ground,  Stand Somebody Else's Ground,  Chase Somebody Down Ground, Shoot First, Make My Day law, which only requires someone reasonably believe they were in danger, not that they in fact objectively WERE in danger.  The wording was intended only to separate out those who acted in the heat of the moment from those who acted in a premeditated fashion.  The law was intended to remove the second guessing of people who were not there, and to give effective carte blanche to people to act with little if any accountability.  The problem is that with that wording, objectivity is removed, and people are unfairly put at risk because of someone else's belief, someone's subjective reaction.
It SHOULD be a decision when you use deadly force that you can support with objective criteria.  It should be a decision you make with the greatest trepidation.  You SHOULD be concerned that you will be in trouble if you make the wrong decision that injures someone or ends their life.  Removing that concern has resulted in an increase in homicides, mostly in shootings, and in many of the victims being found to be unarmed.
Further, we are too quick to give the benefit of the doubt that people exercise good judgment when carry permits for guns are issued too easily.  Clearly, good judgment is, like common sense, not so common.  The judgment of people who carry is affected by bias, prejudices, and inaccurate assumptions like the false assumptions about black males attributed to George Zimmerman.  Other people's lives should not be at risk because of that judgment, particularly when there is not a good justification or necessity for the carrying of weapons.
We do NOT live in a country with a crime rate out of control.  There is no justification for vigilanteism.  There is no necessity for every person to go armed in fear of their lives.
Some residents of the gated community who were black noted that they themselves resembled the stereotype description of suspicious individuals that George Zimmerman circulated in an email to community members, and claimed that Zimmerman's assumptions about black people in that regard made them uncomfortable.  This would suggest that despite the assertions that George Zimmerman, the vigilante who shot Trayvon Martin, believed in a stereotype in which black males were consistently viewed as criminals.  While Zimmerman may not have regarded black children in a racist way, or black women, the fact that he appears to have regarded all black males in this way does suggest a type of racism in the unfair assumptions he appears to have held about blacks, if only towards adult male black individuals.
The prevalence of anti-black beliefs was not unique to George Zimmerman.  That there is racism among the pro-carry gun crowd was documented in the comments made by pro-gunners in response to the Trayvon Martin shooting on the blog of NRA election coordinator Keith Milligan of PA, and the Koch Brothers Cato Institute Clayton Cramer's blog, shown with screen captures of the comments
:
Commenting on a post at "Shall Not Be Questioned" (a blog authored by NRA Election Coordinator Keith Milligan of Langhorne, Pennsylvania), several pro-gun activists expressed thoughts which speak for themselves. First up was "mobo," who wrote, "OMFG, not that this has anything to do with anything really, but 'TREYVON' was this kid’s name? What on Earth is the matter with people? How is a kid supposed to get a respectable job when he grows up when the first thing the employers see is 'Treyvon' on the top of the resume?" He couldn't even be troubled to spell the deceased young man's name correctly. But "Heather from AK" didn't care. She replied, "That’s actually one of the more normal names, these days." Mobo added that no name "scream[s] 'ghetto' like Trayvon ... I guarantee you at least one juror will be inclined to aquit the shooter in part because of the victim’s name."
"dustydog" then suggested that Trayvon Martin got what he deserved, writing, "Kids, it is wrong to beat up armed people. As the unofficial motto of DS [Defensive Shooting] says, “The defenseless victim deserves what he gets.” Whether or not Martin "beat up" Zimmerman is unknown. Regardless, the notion that Martin deserved to be killed because he was not carrying a gun is grotesque.
Pro-gun activist "emdfl" was also quick to blame the killing on Martin, writing, "IIRC from the story, that poor, innocent, (17yo)chillin was visiting his stepmother/father(?). Probably from up north where it’s perfectly acceptable to smart mouth/attack older white people asking you what you are doing in their neighborhood. Unfortunately, Treyvon forgot he wasn’t in the disarmed-victim zone he is used to working in." Martin was actually from Miami, Florida and had no criminal record. Zimmerman, on the other hand, has been arrested for assaulting a police officer.
Next up was the following comment from "Moshe Gintel": "I think the young negro was stopped by Zimmerman, and the kid strong-armed Zimmerman. The kid probably took off on Zimmerman’s race and if he was alive, the kid should be charged with a ‘Hate Crime’ Horrid case of anti semetism. Jews should congratulate the Sanford police chief for not arresting Zimmerman." One of the many problems here is that George Zimmerman is not Jewish.

"Sage Thrasher" made it clear what his "gut reaction" was to the shooting: "You’re right about state of mind. If you’re walking in a strange neighborhood and a car starts shadowing you really slowly on the sidewalk is your first thought going to be 'neighborhood watch' or 'drive by'? Same if you see a teenage walking through your neighborhood: kid buying snacks or mugger? No matter how open minded you are, your reaction is going to depend partially on both your race and the race of the other person; much of that driven by statistics, probability and your own life experiences. (Personally, if I’m minding my own business walking back from a store and car starts following me, my first thought probably isn’t going to be 'somebody wants directions' unless it’s a very nice neighborhood.) In the same way, many of our (and I’ll admit, my) gut reactions to this story are based partially on the age and race of the two participants in trying to decide who the actual 'victim' was in this case."

Finally, Clayton Cramer, the author of a new report for the CATO Institute entitled, "Tough Targets: When Criminals Face Armed Resistance from Citizens," drew the following conclusion on his blog: "Zimmerman, the shooter, had a bloody nose and blood on the back of his head. Based on what the witness said, it sounds like he was getting hit pretty hard by the 17 year old. Regardless of how bad a decision Zimmerman made in confronting Trayvon Martin, once it reached this point, shooting was the right decision."

The deplorable and mistaken assumptions in these comments, by those who carry guns and are eager to use them without legal impediment illustrates precisely why both of those things must be more difficult.  We can't outlaw stupidity and hatefulness, but we certainly don't need to arm it or make it easy for those who engage in it to shoot people.
It will be interesting to observe if the statements from neighbors who were black and felt that Zimmerman targeted people like themselves, prior to the shooting of Trayvon Martin, in conjunction with the reporting of only black men as suspicious will be sufficient for the threshold of a violation of Trayvon Martin's civil liberties.
It should also be a contributing factor to repealing the problem law in Florida and other states that emulated Florida, and a good argument for more restrictive gun laws, particularly as relate to open and concealed carry.  It is better to err on the side of fewer trigger happy well intentioned killers.

Police Chief in Trayvon Martin case steps down - temporarily

This was overdue. The announcement was made here by MSNBC.com:

Police chief steps down temporarily over handling of Trayvon Martin case

Bill Lee, chief of police in Sanford, Florida, announces that he will be temporarily stepping down from his position as the investigation into the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin is conducted.

By NBC News and msnbc.com staff

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee Jr. said Thursday that he would temporarily step down from his position over how the Trayvon Martin shooting case was handled.

On Wednesday, the Sanford City Commission voted 3-2 that it had no confidence in Lee over how the case has been handled.
Velma Williams, the city’s only black commissioner, said she spent 15 years trying to bring together the black community and white community, and the Martin episode has taken an emotional toll. “And now this. It’s a national embarrassment," she said.

---

Commissioners Patty Mahany and Randy Jones supported the police chief, who came on the job last May.

"I would not want to see someone tried in the court of public opinion without all the facts," Jones said.

Mayor Jeff Triplett sounded a similar theme, though he voted against Lee. "We only have a very small piece of the puzzle right now," he said.

Commissioners cannot fire Lee, as he reports to City Manager Norton Bonaparte Jr.

Amid growing outrage over Trayvon Martin, Sanford's city council passed a vote of no confidence in Police Chief Bill Lee for his handling of the murder investigation. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell asks Sandford city manager Norton Bonaparte if he plans to fire him. Plus, MSNBC's Al Sharpton weighs in.

Williams implied that if Bonaparte doesn't fire Lee, she would review his contract the next time it comes up for renewal.

More from NBCMiami.com on the no-confidence vote

She nearly fainted after the vote because she became so emotional, and had to be treated by a paramedic.

Residents then took to the podium to say their piece.

The Sanford City Commission passed a vote of "no confidence" in police Chief Bill Lee Wednesday night over his handling of the Trayvon Martin shooting. Meanwhile, hundreds of demonstrators assembled a "Million Hoodie March" in New York City to call for the arrest of Martin's killer. NBC's Lilia Luciano reports.

Another Incident of a Florida Gun Owner Who is the Aggressor in a Shooting, Claiming Justification Under the Shoot First law

Another unarmed shooting victim, threatened by an aggrssive gun wielding shooter trying to tell people what they can and cannot do, people who are acting legally, minding their own business. Another case of a belligerant man threatening others with his big bad gun, another case of gun wielding around kids. Another man with a gun who was dangerous and out of control and acting with disproportionate force to the circumstances. Another example where the shooter's version of events don't track with the events reported by multiple witnesses.
This is Florida. This is Shoot First laws in action, the practice, not the theory.  It is bad law that enables bad people to get away with tragic killings of unarmed people.
From the Tampa Bay Times:

Witnesses dispute Trevor Dooley's 'Stand Your Ground' claim in Valrico shooting

By John Barry, Times Staff Writer
John BarryTampa Bay Times Posted: Dec 14, 2011 08:09 PM 
But testimony showed that the boy — besides James' stunned 8-year-old daughter — was the least confrontational people on the basketball court that day.
Arthur, now 15, said he was visiting friends in the Twin Lakes neighborhood. He took his skateboard to the park and asked permission to practice trick moves from James, who was shooting hoops with his daughter. The only others in the park were a couple playing tennis.
But the boy then heard a voice from across the street. It was Dooley, outside his garage, shouting that he should get off the court, that there was a no-skateboarding sign. The boy stopped.
He heard James call out to Dooley, "Show me the sign."
Michael Scott Whitt, practicing tennis serves nearby with his wife, Michelle, stopped to watch.
They testified that Dooley briefly went into his garage, then started across the street with a dark object sticking out of his waistband. They said James threw his hands up and said, "Oh, come on."
Dooley and James argued over letting the boy skate until Dooley lifted his shirt and said, "F--- you," the Whitts testified.
They said Dooley turned and started home, but James caught up with him. "Mr. James said, 'Don't flash a weapon,' something like that," Michelle Whitt testified.
Then, she said, Dooley pulled out the gun and James grabbed his hand. The men struggled, they fell to the ground, and James ended up on his knees as Dooley lay on his side. They still wrestled for the gun.
The gun fired.
"Mr. James looked up at us," Michelle Whitt testified. "He said, 'Call 911. I've been shot.' Then he fell over."
He was shot through the heart. A medical examiner said he probably died within seconds.
Michael Whitt called 911 at the same time the boy did. On his call, Whitt cried out, "Oh my God. All this over a skateboard."
Dooley's attorney, Ronald Tulin, repeatedly got the Whitts to describe the difference in size and age between the men. He had them restate their testimony that Dooley was headed back to his house before the fight.
But when questioned by prosecutor Stephen Udagawa, the witnesses persisted in labeling Dooley the aggressor.
They said James never tried to punch or choke Dooley. They said he only went for the gun. "There were no threats, no fists," Michelle Whitt said.
She stopped looking after the shot. All she could think to do, she said, was run to James' little girl, standing nearby.
By late afternoon, testimony was incomplete. Judge Moody said the hearing will continue on Jan. 12. It's not known whether Dooley will testify.

There was this more recent development in the Trevor Dooley shooting of an unarmed man, reported by local news.
Child terrified to testify near Trevor Dooley, the man accused of killing her father

Tampa, Florida - It's a rare sight to see a child take the witness stand in court.
Testimony in a court case is usually reserved for adults. It can often be frightening for a child with the formality of court, the imposing stature of a judge and the bailiffs guarding the room, monitoring the coming and going of all who enter.
But children are often key witnesses.
On Thursday at the Hillsborough County Courthouse, a little girl bravely walked to the witness stand, sat down and told her story of watching her father die before her very eyes in November 2010.
Danielle James saw her father as her hero.
After all, David, or D.J. as he was known among family and friends, was an Air Force veteran and was a strong man. Danielle adored her father. The two posed for countless pictures in the short life shared with her father.
One of their favorite things to do was play outside. In fact, both father and daughter were on a neighborhood court in Valrico one day when Danielle's dad began defending a skateboarder nearby.
A bus driver named Trevor Dooley lived across the street and began yelling at the young man, saying he couldn't skate on the neighborhood basketball court.
D.J. told him, "There's no sign saying he can't."
The fight between the two men escalated quickly, and deputies say Dooley went back into his home and got a gun. The men continued yelling and fell to the ground, then a gunshot went off as they were tussling on the ground.
D.J. died and Danielle saw the whole thing.
But did Trevor Dooley have a right to defend himself? He says he was being attacked and held down that day. He wants to invoke the Stand Your Ground law for his defense in this case, since he claims he feared for his life.
A judge will now consider that request after a hearing in court where Danielle told her side of the story, what she saw and what she heard.

The little girl told attorneys, "I heard the gunshot go off. [My dad] said, 'Call the ambulance, I've been shot.'"
Danielle was shy at times and admitted that she didn't like to talk about that fateful day. The child did admit that her father was, in fact, on top of Dooley holding him down when they fell to the ground.
It is unclear how that statement could possibly help Dooley in his case for Stand Your Ground, since the child admitted her father was on top of Dooley and wouldn't let him go.
Dooley watched the proceedings from a separate courtroom.
The judge will release her decision in the upcoming weeks.