Skip to main content

Insensitive Facebook comments follow the George Zimmerman ruling

I've been a tad confused in recent days since George Zimmerman was found not guilty in the Trayvon Martin case.

Many people whom believe Zimmerman should have been found guilty of at least manslaughter seem to think Zimmerman's actions were at least partially motivated by racism. So in response to the jury's ruling this past Saturday night, I've read many articles and social networking posts from far-right conservatives regarding other murders which involved an element of racism and claiming that these murders and the element of racism in them were far worse than in the case of George Zimmerman killing Trayvon Martin.

I'm not here to say which way I lean on whether or not Zimmerman's following and killing of Martin was at least partially influenced by racism. However, I do think it's quite ridiculous for people to write and post about these other murders and basically say, "You see? Zimmerman wasn't too bad. Look at what this guy did! Now that's racism right there!"

What does that prove? Absolutely nothing. These are living, breathing humans' lives we're talking about here and some people are comparing them just to try and make a political point, or so they think. I honestly don't even know what that political point is they're trying to make.

We can spin the stories as much as we'd like, but the fact remains Trayvon Martin is dead. These other murder victims which have been posted about are dead. These victims' friends and families will forever be haunted by their loves ones' demise. I find it incredibly insensitive to compare these murder victims as if they're pawns in chess. Whether a person believes George Zimmerman should have been found guilty or not is irrelevant. Trayvon Martin is still dead. The least we can do is show a little respect to all those grieving from this tragedy and the elongated, emotionally-draining process which ended on Saturday night.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...