Trayvon, Looking Back

It's been several weeks since the George Zimmerman verdict of "Not Guilty" was handed down. I've invested too much of my time watching testimony both during the trial, and researching testimony after the trial. I've had exhausting arguments on social media and elsewhere on the topic. Now, for some reason I feel compelled to sum up my feelings and opinions on the matter.

First the undisputed facts. George Zimmerman, in the role of a neighborhood watchman, was suspicious of a young black teen walking through his gated community. He took a loaded handgun and followed the teen. He called the police who told him not to leave his car; advice he chose to ignore. He pursued the teen on foot, a scuffle ensued, resulting in Zimmerman sustaining injuries deemed insignificant by the medical examiner. Zimmerman then shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

Days of testimony revealed other circumstances that led the jury to conclude George Zimmerman acted in self defense in the last few seconds or minutes prior to the shooting. The most convincing testimony may have come from Zimmerman's video taped walk-though of the events with investigators the day following the tragic event. That description was George Zimmerman's side of the story. All the first hand evidence was that of George Zimmerman's.  He never took the stand and therefore was not subject to cross examination. The jury never heard the events through Trayvon Martin's eyes.

The difficult burden of proof on the Prosecution, the slanted evidence favoring Zimmerman's side of the story, and the Florida laws as they were presented in the instructions to the jury (including Stand Your Ground), left little opportunity to convict George Zimmerman of murder. 

This statement sums it up pretty accurately (Allen Clifton-Forward Progressive);

 "(Zimmerman's) “not guilty” verdict wasn’t as much a declaration of innocence as it was a decision based upon the specific charges the prosecution sought against him. But it’s indisputable that George Zimmerman stalked, provoked and then killed Trayvon Martin." 

In other words, George Zimmerman got away with murder. Those that choose to defend the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial based on existing laws and how they were applied are a shameful reminder of those that justified racist treatment of minorities (e.g. lynchings, police brutality, segregation) using Jim Crow laws in the South. One has no choice but to accept the not-guilty verdict, but all fair minded people should be outraged at a legal system so terribly tainted by predjudice.

Here is some music, from harpist Brandee Younger, inspired by the tragedy of Trayvon Martin that you may want listen to and meditate on.

About the 2nd Amendment

Let's get one thing straight about the 2nd Amendment. It clearly states that the right to bear arms is for the purpose of "a well regulated militia". I'll spell it out for you; "WELL REGULATED".

Regulated as defined by Miriam-Webster; Control or supervise by means of rules and regulations. 

That regulation was re-affirmed in the 2008 Supreme court decision DC v Heller where it was stated, "the right [to bear arms] is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose". 

The 2nd amendment was not intended to guarantee your right to stockpile obscene numbers of dangerous assault weapons and deadly ammunition. It's not there for you to satisfy your perverse need to wield power over your adversaries. It's not intended for you to fantasise about your Tea Party militia overthrowing "Tyrant" Obama. 

The more the NRA and pro-gun advocates try to bully the rest of us with their irrational arguments, while putting our society and our children at risk of death and injury, the more it becomes apparent that gun regulation is necessary.

NRA, Liars and Hypocrites

In press conferences and Sunday talk shows the NRA and supporters falsely claim that any laws limiting the sale of guns violates their second amendment rights. Instead, they self-righteously advocate for law enforcement to use existing laws to "keep guns out of the hands of criminals".

However, there is nothing in the NRA's actions to substantiate that they have any desire to do so. Their recent opposition to universal background checks or registration of firearms contradicts any sincere desire to help law enforcement accomplish that goal.

Even now, in the aftermath of the Newtown tragedy and increasing public sentiment in favor of passing gun safety legislation, the NRA has successfully lobbied congress to push through laws that will hinder law enforcement in tracking down weapons used to commit crimes. This was done as riders to the spending bill recently passed to keep the government funded.

As reported by Tamara Kieth from NPR,

"There was very little discussion," says Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky. Rogers is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee... "These are not new. These are general provisions that we've carried for a long time," Rogers says.

What is new is that the continuing resolution makes four of these riders permanent. One rider prevents the Department of Justice from requiring gun dealers to conduct an inventory to see if guns are lost or stolen. Another requires the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to make it clear that any data from criminal traces on guns can't be used to draw broad conclusions about firearms-related crime...

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., says the provisions "restrict inventorying, information gathering, other practices that combat gun violence." Blumenthal is pushing for new gun controls and changes to make it easier to enforce current laws. He's no fan of these riders. But he voted for the continuing resolution anyway. 

Democratic Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York has been fighting these provisions for years, but she, too, voted for the spending bill. "What's tough on this particular vote is do we shut the government down?" she says.

This shows the NRA to be liars and hypocrites. There is really no interest in keeping weapons away from criminals or the insane. Claims of "protecting second amendment rights" are disingenuous. The NRA has but one motivation. That is to lobby for the gun industry to sell more guns. They have been relentless (and successful) in that pursuit. The power of the NRA will continue as long as we have a system that lets Congress accept bribes in exchange for access and influence, even while putting our nation at risk for further tragedies like Newtown.

Of Guns and Budgets

Last week was a momentous flop for the Republican Party. Are they in complete denial of the 2012 elections? Are they so entrenched in their ideology of the far right that they have forsaken the will of the people? Has the Tea Party put a stranglehold on the Republican leadership? On one hand, the party is trying to reach out to minorities and the middle class, but beyond the rhetoric, its the same old policies that have driven those groups away in droves.

Take, for example the recent negotiations surrounding gun safety legislation. If there is one issue that Congress could agree on, you would expect it to be on Universal Background Checks for gun purchases. On this single issue, there is no suggestion of banning weapons or ammunition, no confiscating guns from law abiding citizens. Just keeping new gun sales out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Isn't that what everyone says they are striving for? Yet, not one Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted for universal background checks, despite polls showing 91% of the people support them. Republicans have put the interests of the gun industry and the NRA above the will of the people. The GOP clearly has shown themselves to be a party of special interests ($$) and obstructionism. No wonder nothing can get accomplished in our Congress.

And now the Republican House has put forth their budget as authored by defeated VP candidate Paul Ryan. A recent Bloomberg editorial summed it up best. 

... it’s hard to view this latest budget as anything more than a holding pattern for a political party caught between its past and its future. Like the fiscal outlook, the nation’s politics have shifted. Ryan’s budget pockets the savings from Obama’s health-care plan while calling again for its repeal. As Jim Nussle, a former Republican congressman and budget director under George W. Bush, said to CNBC: “I think we fought that battle.” Pretending otherwise is silly.

Similarly, the last Ryan budget was fully vetted in the 2012 presidential campaign. Afterward, Democrats won the White House and picked up seats in the Senate and House. Republicans can keep offering the same platform of spending cuts, but they seem unlikely to achieve different results.

...It is crucial that policy makers find ways to bring down medical costs, but there are ways to do this without leaving the elderly and poor with inadequate health care. Medicare could, for example, raise premiums for high earners, reduce payments to drug companies or drive competition by making public the prices it pays for drugs, devices and medical services... The latest Ryan budget, like its predecessors, is an artifact of the era.

Republicans may try to put a kinder and gentler facade on immigration, healthcare and cuts to valued safety nets (entitlements), but their actions on guns and budgets this week show where they really stand. As the saying goes, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". 

Responsible Law Abiding Gun Owners. Really?

It's getting a little tiring hearing about how proposed new gun laws only punish the law abiding, responsible gun owner. Every single gun owner I have had this discussion with tells me about how responsible they are, how they have taken a gun safety course and learned how to shoot from a professional on a range. Every one. How do I know know they are responsible? Am I just supposed to just take their word for it? How do I know that everyone in their household is responsible, that their friends are responsible? I'll bet that Adam Lanze's mother said the she was responsible, and look how easy it was for her deranged son to get a hold of those weapons (no one seemed to even know he was deranged).

The chances are far more likely that those "safe and legal" guns will result in an accident, suicide or fall into the wrong hands to be used in a crime, than they will actually be used for self defense. Why should we as a society accept that risk.

With all the guns in our society, how often do you hear of an instance where a gun has been used to fight off an aggressor in an act of self defense? According to the FBI there were only 201 justifiable homicides using a gun in 2011 versus over 30,000 gun related deaths from murder, accidents, suicides, robberies, and assaults.

Do you walk around with a loaded handgun? Do you keep a loaded firearm "at the ready" while at home? If you do, you are not following the prescribed safety measures of keeping your firearm locked away with the ammo in a separate hidden location. If you do follow these safety measures, its not likely you can have the quick access to your gun needed for self defense. So what is the point? You have a false sense of security. You are far better off getting the family out of the house and calling 911 than you are of having a vigilante gun fight with an intruder, and society is better off with one less gun.

As for the defense against a tyrannical government... oh please, that is a childish Tea Party fantasy. We have a democracy with checks and balances. We have a means through our democracy to "overthrow" our government every 4 years. Do you think that Obama is planning this tyrannical takeover? Are you thinking that another government will invade and your "private militia" are better prepared to defend us than our military? Will this Tea Party militia defend us against an army's bombs, drones, fighter planes, tanks etc? Let's get real!!!

The fact is that country's that have actively reduced the number of guns in their society have far less gun related deaths. Japan, UK, Sweden, and nearly every democratic government sees gun deaths in the dozens. We count them in the 10's of thousands. NYC has seen a sharp decline in gun violence by strict enforcement of gun regulations. The silly notion that having more guns will reduce gun crime is just a fantasy perpetrated by the NRA to foster a gun culture. This only benefits the manufacturers and retailers that make millions off the sale of these deadly firearms. So don't be under the delusion that the NRA is here to protect your "second amendment rights". That's just BS.

Perhaps my outrage is because I still haven't gotten over the murder of 6 year old Ana Marquez Greene, daughter of Jimmy (and Nelba Marquez-) Greene, loved and respected members of our Hartford Jazz community. I am angered over Ana's death and the 19 other 1st graders and their teachers murdered last month at Sandy Hook Elementary School in my home state. This tragedy likely would not have occurred if not for the easy access to assault style firearms that were used in this and so many other massacres like this. I don't think I have heard ANY of the survivors or their family members advocate for more guns. The victims close to these tragedies (like Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Gifford) all advocate for more gun control; for less guns in our society. I also feel strongly that those that take the NRA's position that more guns are needed in our homes and schools are putting me and my children at greater risk of injury or murder. So, when I argue about this and I am told not to get personal, sorry but I guess I do take it personally.

(this blog is not affiliated with Sandy Hook Promise, but I do support their efforts)

Thoughts on the New Year

2012 was truly a year of some wonderful highs and troubling lows. As I look back, it was a real roller coaster of a year. It is very disconcerting to see the year end with such tragedy and cause for concern. We have some serious political, economic and social challenges going into 2013. While the re-election of our President was cause for optimism for a better America, the forces that are fighting against change seem ever more determined to undo the will of the people. Let us hope that the forces of peace, justice and equality prevail over those that wish to obstruct change.

HOPING FOR A HAPPY NEW YEAR !

Those "obstructionist" forces are on the wrong side of history; the conservative right, the NRA, and the Republican congressional leadership to name a few.

Tragedy in Newtown

Today tragedy struck in my home state of Connecticut. 26 people were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown, CT, about 60 miles from my home. Twenty of the deaths were elementary school students, 4th grade and under. This tragedy follows recent other incidents in a movie theater and another in a shopping mall. There is something wrong in a society where guns are so prevalent. Not only are they so easily obtained, but they are glorified in movies, television and video games.

If today's events don't provide the impetus for much tougher restrictions on gun ownership, I don't know what can. None of these tragedies would have happened if guns were not so ubiquitous in our society. I'm sure everyone of these perpetrators felt they had a constitutional right to own their firearms.

All I can say is shame on the NRA and the politicians that defend them. Many of those politicians have sold out to the NRA for 'generous' campaign contributions. In some small way, this blood is on your hands. Some of the blame must also lie with our entertainment industry that uses gratuitous gun violence in movies, television and especially video games. If only that industry would show some responsibility instead of simply appealing to such base instincts in order make their big profits. But I suppose that is asking too much.