Missing the point in Zimmerman case
As a longtime gun owner, I considered the results of the George Zimmerman trial with sadness. Trayvon Martin is dead. Zimmerman will never again be the person he was before he shot and killed Martin. He will forever be that guy who killed an unarmed teenager.
And why did this happen? I think many people are missing the point. I would only ask: Suppose Zimmerman had not had that handgun?
Sure, some will think that he would have been beaten to death. More likely, I think, Zimmerman would not have gotten out of his car in the first place, the police would have come as summoned, and things would not have gotten so obviously out of hand.
Never miss a local story.
So maybe we ought to look at what made the situation what it was. Maybe we should think about a law that lets people carry loaded handguns concealed under their clothing, and how such a circumstance affects their behavior.
If you were carrying a loaded weapon concealed under your clothing, would you be more or less likely to confront an individual you believed was causing a problem? Would you be more or less likely to use that handgun, rather than engaging hand-to-hand, if an unarmed individual physically attacked you? Would you really be capable in such circumstances of reasonably deciding whether or not you were in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm?
PHILIP H. SCHNEIDER
George Zimmerman didn’t have to confront Trayvon Martin; that is what the police are for. Martin didn’t have to respond to Zimmerman; that is what the police are for. Martin could have kept on walking, or he could have run away. He certainly did not need to fight with Zimmerman.
An eyewitness testified that Martin was beating Zimmerman, who had the injuries to prove it. Zimmerman had the right to defend himself. Police officers will shoot a suspect if the suspect assaults them. Why shouldn’t a citizen have the same right to defend himself?
Some complain about the jury being nearly all white. The prosecution and the defense choose the jurors.
Just because justice doesn’t match what your idea of justice should be doesn’t mean justice didn’t prevail, because it did.
I cannot believe all the insensitive and, frankly, racist comments I’ve been reading on Facebook and Twitter regarding George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Many of these hateful remarks have come from white parents like me. Do we have to be of the same skin tone to feel empathy for fellow parents worried for their sons? Are we that far removed?
If a large number of African-Americans feel time and again that the justice system, and overall society, has failed them, maybe there’s something to that. I know enough about history and current events to know that my fellow citizens, African-Americans, are truly validated in their feelings. There is a strong historical underpinning behind their distrust of the system.
Instead of invalidating the feelings of those in the African-American community and denigrating their intelligence for feeling that way, why not try to understand them? Instead of viewing our neighbors as “the other,” why not show compassion for parents and fellow citizens who feel slighted by the system?
I’m appalled. People have revealed their true colors, exposed exactly who they are, and it ain’t pretty.
Agree with Green
Not everyone agrees with “Dictating views” (July 6 Letters to the Editor). Maybe Hobby Lobby founder David Green is successful because of his beliefs and moral convictions. Maybe his employees work for him because of those beliefs and want off on Sundays so they can go to church or worship God in their homes. Give his employees a little credit; they know whom they are working for.
Have you ever noticed how nice the customer service is there? This is why I have given Hobby Lobby my business for the past 25 years.
As a patron and a Christian, I share Green’s views. Find something more important to complain about – such as our government, which has left God out of about everything. How is that going?
My friend and I think we know when a movie is good, and we often agree with the star ratings given by movie critics in The Eagle. But this time I must write about the useless, deplorable and shockingly numerous obscenities in a 3 1/2-star movie, “Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain.”
Giving the film 30 minutes to show why the reviewer thought it was hilariously funny, we had to listen to sentence after sentence using the B-word and the N-word – in a world where we are tired of tromping through the worst examples of our use of language. I wished The Eagle’s movie guide had warned us that it wasn’t merely “sexual references” and “pervasive language.” It was bloated with crudity, and the subjects were victims – and we’re all supposed to laugh at it? How about letting all people say that to all people all the time – and let the public laugh itself to tears?
I wish that, besides getting up and leaving before we became sick, I would have asked for our money back and tried another 3 1/2-star movie.