“The movement must not stop with this verdict but continue on until each and every young man of color in America can walk the streets in any of our nation’s neighborhoods unafraid, knowing not only that he is safe, but that his country walks beside him.” –Judith Browne Dianis, Co-Director, Advancement Project
This is part of her piece on the Huffington Post saturday evening.
I’m not sure where to begin. The whole thing could and should have been avoided. Whenever there is a “trial of the century,” those of us watching at home can never be too sure what gospel gets handed to a given jury. But you can’t help but be stumped at a notion that an individual can instigate a confrontation, kill the other person in said confrontation, and walk away. Standing your ground? Well, not if you have to invent the ground to stand on.
You worry about the reaction, the long term effects, yet one more way of differentiating between people, that we cross the street to avoid each other, that stopping to buy skittles and ice tea is a life altering experience, that some moron with a gun won’t take the sound wise advice of a 911 operator, that he will shoot his way of an fight he started, and that he will get away from it. It sounds like the prosecutors couldn’t bring it home beyond a reasonable doubt and when that happens, you have this.
As a parent of a good kid (well, three actually), I used to worry in stages. He would catch the school and toward the end of grade school on his own, and should be able to walk where he choose. By in large, that happily is the case, but just the possibility that this is how we treat each other, and that the state could essentially endorse that treatment is scary and is a reminder that we don’t get to relax.
Standing your ground shouldn’t be mean gun toting balloon heads get to go looking for trouble.
And that is a crappy commentary on us