Jumping on the Bandwagon

I know that moral relativism is meant to be a source of weakness in the modern world. By examining things from all sides, trying to empathize and sympathize, we find ourselves excusing the most horrific behavior. I didn't want to comment on the Zimmerman/Martin debacle until I could do a little research on the facts. Unlike lots of situations where it is difficult to find blame, this situation has one glaring error in judgment that led to a tragedy.

So, Trayvon was no stranger to trouble in school. He was suspended for truancy and was caught smoking pot. You know, teenage stuff. There is one weird incident from his history where he was found in possession of a bag of jewelry and a screwdriver. He claimed it was a gift from a friend (the jewelry) and no one ever reported any missing jewelry. The worst we can assume about Martin is that he was a typical teenager, looking to rebel a bit and probably kind of tired of being hassled by authority figures.

Zimmerman seems like a decent guy with some anger issues. He once pushed a cop when the officer was questioning a friend of his. An ex-girlfriend took out a restraining order on the grounds of domestic violence a few years before the incident in question. Maybe we paint with a broad stroke here and say he had some anger management issues. The community in which he lived was the site of some recent criminal activity. There were some burglaries and the perpetrators were African-American. Once, Zimmerman called the police as he saw one of the burglars casing a house but the police response was so slow, the suspect was long gone by the time the police arrived. The burglar was later caught and identified by Zimmerman as the man he had called about previously.

The back story of where he got his gun is also a little interesting. A wild pit bull had been terrorizing his neighborhood in 2009 and he called animal control multiple times (once after his wife was attacked by it). They advised him to get a gun because there was only so much they could do. A guy with anger management issues (maybe) is living in an area where he cannot count on the police to arrive in a timely manner and there had recently been a series of crimes committed by African Americans. Now, all this adds up to a state of heightened aggravation and aggression, I would imagine.

None of us know exactly what went on that night. Zimmerman was never tox screened, so we don't know if he had alcohol lowering his inhibitions or not. Let's assume not. The conditions I already laid out would be enough to make someone antsy. Martin goes to the corner store to grab a snack and is walking back home (or rather, to the home he and his father were visiting). Zimmerman sees a black youth and becomes suspicious, calling the police (so far, besides some mild paranoia, I can't see that Zimmerman is reacting all that strangely, given the circumstances). The 911 operator tells him not to follow Martin. Zimmerman says something about "these assholes always get away."

This is where I believe the real mistake of the whole thing comes in. While I understand why Zimmerman would not trust the police to arrive in a timely manner, Martin was not doing anything illegal. "Walking and looking around" is the worst Zimmerman accused him of in the 911 call. I understand why Zimmerman felt he needed to act but he should not have. He should have left it to the authorities. Now, if he had seen Martin scaling the side of a house to break in, sure, go to town. But this is a case of overreaction, pure and simple.

After Zimmerman hung up, about two minutes elapsed before the police arrived. Apparently shit went downhill fast. I am guessing Zimmerman confronted Martin, who had started running back towards his house when he noticed Zimmerman following him. Martin was about 40 yards from the house where he was staying when he was shot. Zimmerman had a busted nose and some cuts on the back of his head (and the back of his shirt was wet). This indicated that Martin did hit Zimmerman at some point, knocking him to the ground (which would explain the cuts). As my mom said, Zimmerman went looking for trouble and found it.

I could almost sock puppet the conversation. Frustrated home owner/neighborhood watch guy doesn't want to see another perp get away. He questions Martin, tells him to just wait for the police to arrive, maybe tries to physically restrain him when Martin tells him to piss off. Zimmerman grabbing, touching or restraining Martin would lead to a punch from Martin (which, in this situation might have been the only actual act of self-defense committed). Zimmerman feels threatened now, by this situation he himself has created, and shoots Martin dead.

When I was in grad school, we learned about the doctrine of equal force. Usually, that is the idea that you can only claim self-defense when you are as well-armed as your attacker. That means that, if you are attacked with a deadly weapon (and definitions of this vary) you can respond with a deadly weapon. If Martin was viciously beating Zimmerman (which we have no reason to believe) then Zimmerman was well within his rights to shoot in order to stop the beating. Couple this with the "Stand Your Ground" Law for a moment. That law states that you just have to feel threatened on your property to justify killing someone. Some states say you have to try to flee, and fail, before you can injure an attacker. In Florida, you don't have to try to flee and you don't actually have to be on your property.

So, within the confines of the law, even though he was in a situation of his own creation and he probably goaded Martin into punching him, Zimmerman was protected by the law. I think the first police chief was right not to arrest Zimmerman, because he knew the case wouldn't lead to a conviction. By the letter of the law in Florida, Zimmerman did nothing wrong. Is this justice? No. Is this morally right? Heck, no. Welcome to the U.S. justice system.

Now, maybe all my interpolations and hypotheticals are totally off base. Maybe Martin decided to go buy a snack before ransacking a neighbor's house and, knowing he was caught, tried to flee. Maybe Zimmerman heroically stopped Martin from getting away and was cold-cocked as a result. And maybe the ONLY way to stop this beast of a 17 year old from tearing him apart was by shooting him.

I think my original idea follows occam's razor a little more closely. There was an escalation that did not need to start. Martin shouldn't have punched Zimmerman, obviously. Zimmerman shouldn't have chased Martin and ultimately shot him. Although mistakes were made on both sides, I find Martin's to be the more excusable of the two. Either way, though, Zimmerman is technically not guilty under Florida law.

I don't think justice was served in this case but I don't think justice would have been locking up Zimmerman forever, either. I think the only way to make this a positive is to change the laws. Reform the stand your ground law to exclude protections for people who are playing vigilante out of frustration. Prevent future deaths and maybe this incident will have a redeeming aspect.

I am not convinced Zimmerman is a racist. I think he was acting on recent patterns of crime in his community. This gets into the same debate area as racial profiling. I still believe in "innocent until proven guilty" so I am not a fan of profiling. People who are in favor of it are usually the ones least likely to be the victim of it themselves. I think, on that night, in that situation, Zimmerman was making unfair assumptions about Martin based on his race. I don't feel comfortable hanging the label of racist on the man without actually knowing him.

All this being said, I don't understand people who think Zimmerman did nothing wrong. There are at least two to three instances of poor decision making on his part in this incident. Do people who support him think that Martin was actually committing a crime? If so, on what do they base this? I can see supporting Zimmerman's defense. I can't see supporting his actions that night. If there is info I am not aware of, or details I have omitted that you (dear reader) believe to be relevant, please share them with me. I would like to think I have a pretty open mind.