Sometimes I write nuanced posts assuming readers will magically know what I mean. The intent of my July 15 posting of various hundred+ year-old laws that required the on-the-spot murder of innocent African-Americans by ordinary citizens was to chastise those among us who in various ways justify the Zimmerman verdict relying on the “law” and/or the judge’s instructions. The “law,” more specifically the laws in play in the Zimmerman trial are not edicts from some supreme supernatural power; they are a reflection of the Florida legislature and voting citizens. Laws that promote private handgun ownership, concealed carry, stand your ground, etc., (many of which are heavily influenced by powerful gun lobbies) are reflections of social norms and/or powerful and influential special interests. Given the laws in many states, and the instructions given to juries on self-defense and “reasonable doubt” it was unlikely Zimmerman would be convicted. But laws are not sacred. It was also the “law” that denied black people the use of most public facilities; the opportunity to eat in restaurants; rent hotel rooms; vote; or attend public schools. It is also the law that provides the road map and justifications for black males being disproportionately arrested, tried, and convicted on drug crimes despite the fact that proportionally speaking, Blacks no more than whites, and whites no more than blacks, commit drug crimes. It is also the law that denies same sex couples equal rights, and that increasing denies women control of their own bodies. So, applying Florida self-defense laws (including the stand your ground provision) does not convince me that justice is served. Sadly, on many issues of race (and gender) in America, the “law” is no defense against injustice. The history of racial animus by some against black and brown people in the United States, the impact of gun laws and urban gang violence, coupled with other laws like stand-your-ground that operate to embolden racial profiling suggests that increasingly there is no place for black men to live, nowhere, no community, no neighborhood, that our innocent black sons are not more likely than everyone else in this county to be profiled, stopped and frisked, demonized, followed, stalked, devalued, terrorized, killed with impunity and denied the protection of the criminal justice system.
Home » Uncategorized » But the jury was following the law part 2
Recent Posts
- Protected: 46 The Implications of Intersectionality on Southeast Asian Female Students’ Educational Outcomes in the United States: A Critical Quantitative Intersectionality Analysis
- Protected: 45 Gender, Ethnicity and Political Agency South Asian Women Organizing (book with 7 chapters, pick one chapter)
- Protected: 43. South Asian Women’s Identities: A Media and Personal Narrative Analysis
- Protected: Critical Race Theory (CRT)
- Protected: “You’re So Exotic Looking”: An Intersectional Analysis of Asian American and Pacific Islander Stereotypes
Recent Comments
- Renata Winchell on Protected: Obergefell v. Hodges 2015
- Roma Macpherson-Wilson on Protected: 1740 slave code
- Roma Macpherson-Wilson on Protected: 1712 slave code
- Roma Macpherson-Wilson on Protected: Act XVI
- Roma Macpherson-Wilson on Protected: Act VIII (VA 1669)
Archives
- February 2025
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- November 2020
- June 2020
- March 2018
- July 2015
- June 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- June 2014
- February 2014
- November 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- April 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- July 2012
- April 2011
Thanks a Lot