1.  “Walking While Black.”  This is close to Driving While Black that many of my African-American friends tell me about.  As a middle-aged, white male with silver hair who often dresses in suits and ties, I’m never stopped for anything–which goes to show that this concern by people of color is true.  Certainly, we all have to be careful for our safety, but for this profiling to still be a problem in America is sad and frustrating.

2.  Gun Groups.  Although they express sorrow at the death of Trayvon Martin, they still insist that it’s the individual, not the law, that is the problem.  The stand your ground law in many states simply tries to even the playing field between criminals and innocent people–giving the innocent person legal protection if they shoot to kill.

3.  Anti-gun Groups.  These people disagree and say the new laws give legal cover to the fringe of crazy people who are intent on harming others.  Under previous law, there certainly was a right to self-defense.  However, you couldn’t use more force against the attacker than he used against you.  For instance, if you were attacked by an unarmed person who wanted to punch you, it would probably not be self defense if you pulled out a gun and shot him.  That would be using force out of proportion to the threat.  The new stand your ground laws throw the idea of equal force out the window.  Now, by simply saying that you acted in self defense, you escape legal liability.

During the research for my new novel, Fallout, I studied some of these fringe groups, vigilantes, and armed militias in the U.S.  If you think they were scary before the stand your ground laws, this gives all these nuts legal cover to act on their fears of rampant criminal activity and intrusive governments.  I think we’re in for scary times…

What do you think?

The post Trayvon Martin Becomes a Symbol appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

It appears that Mr. Zimmerman was a local “watch captain” carrying a gun, who thought Trayvon was “suspicious.”  Even though the 911 operator advised Zimmerman not to interfere or follow the young, unarmed man, Zimmerman did and confronted him.  They argued until Zimmerman shot Trayvon, saying he did it in self defense.

Of course, the public outcry is huge, demanding justice for the victim which most people see as Mr. Zimmerman being charged with homicide.

Why wasn’t that done immediately and will it be done soon?

Three issues affect this decision:

1.  Racism.  Many people accuse the local law enforcement of racism–if the shooter had been black and the victim Hispanic or white, homicide charges would already have been charged.  Could be.

It’s impossible to speculate on this, but it’s important to remember that the police don’t charge a crime like this.  Felonies are typically investigated by police and then reviewed by a lawyer/prosecutor who actually makes the charging decision–if he thinks a crime has been committed and he can prove it.  That decision is still pending but will be heavily affected by the following issues:

2.  Evidence.  If Mr. Zimmerman is charged with a homicide, the government would have to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before a jury, if Zimmerman demanded a trial which is his right.

What evidence does the prosecution have to do this?

Not much.

Apparently, there were no witnesses and the 911 recordings only reveal an argument with Trayvon yelling for help before the shooting–suspicious but the government will have a hard time proving it was a homicide without more evidence.

3.  Stand Your Ground Law.  In Minnesota, the legislature recently passed a bill similar to the law that exists in Florida.  The Minnesota governor vetoed the bill–perhaps worried about situations exactly like this one.  Here’s the difficulty such laws make for prosecutors.  (In Minnesota many police departments and prosecutors testified against the new law)

Prior to this law, if someone shot another person outside of the shooter’s home, the government and a jury would look at the shooter’s behavior from the objective perspective of a “reasonable person.”  Which means, “what would the average person do in a similar situation?”  Usually, that would mean not getting involved in the first place or, if threatened, first trying to get away and only, in the end, if deadly force was threatened, could the average person kill in self defense.

The new law uses a standard that’s not objective, but subjective–if the shooter feels threatened, that gives him the right to shoot and kill.  Even if no one else faced with the same situation would have reacted that way.  That’s exactly what Mr. Zimmerman has done–saying he felt threatened and acted in self defense.  Even though the victim was “armed” with only a bag of Skittles and an iced tea.

I know the political pressure and Rev. Al Sharpton who will travel to Florida to urge prosecution and justice will be strong,.  Still, the prosecutors are hampered by both the lack of evidence and the law which the Florida citizens passed.

I don’t expect charges will be filed.  Let’s see what happens.

The post Guns + Violence=Justice in Florida?? appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.