Letters: Trayvon Martin, race and justice

Re “Zimmerman not guilty,” July 14

I would love to believe that Trayvon Martin’s death is not in vain. I would love to believe that his death will cause Americans to look inward and ask ourselves some hard questions.

I would love to believe that Martin’s death will force us to deal with race issues. I would love to believe that people of all colors, backgrounds and genders can put aside our differences and reach out to one another. I would love to believe that parents, no matter their ethnic backgrounds, will hug their children more and grieve with Martin’s parents.

I would love for us to realize that as a country, we are bigger than this and will learn and grow from this. I would love for us to realize that a person of color’s death impacts us all when it is done unjustly. I would love to believe that something good will come out of this.

But in the end, the cynic in me says that when the next big news story comes along, all that will be left is a grieving mother and a father trying to figure out why this happened.

Shawn Johnson

Highland

A relatively minor altercation resulted in a tragedy. Who really knows who was the aggressor and who was the defender?

But what is clear is that the gun used by George Zimmerman escalated what should have been a relatively minor altercation. Without the gun, Zimmerman and Martin would have exchanged a few blows and then been on their way.

This is another example of why firearms do not make us safer. It is insanity to arm the populace. Arguments that should end by both parties walking away with bruises now end with one party being taken away by the coroner.

Jim Stetson

Torrance

I’m surprised about the obvious for/against split in the reactions to the verdict. Given the decision the jury had to make — between murder or manslaughter and acquittal — the verdict was correct.

I’m sure at the moment when, as Zimmerman claimed, he was on his back with Martin on top of him slamming his head on the concrete, he was in fear for his life and acted in self-defense.

My problem is the charge of second-degree murder. Why was there no middle ground?

I absolutely feel that Zimmerman should be held responsible for causing the situation in the first place. What he legally could be charged with I don’t know, but there should be something. One could even argue that by setting the bar too high, the prosecution asked for an acquittal.

Stefan Belger

Palm Springs

This is a miscarriage of justice. The prosecution spent too little time on Zimmerman and too much on Martin. Certainly public expressions of remembrance of Martin and recognition of his innocence were and are appropriate, but in court, there should have been a greater focus on Zimmerman’s wrongful behavior.

Zimmerman was the initiator of the conflict and, therefore, the aggressor. His wrongful pursuit of Martin was aggravated by his failure to heed the advice of authority and not follow the teenager.

Zimmerman’s voluntary acceptance of the implicit risk, and his deliberate injection of himself into this situation, in my mind constitute a waiver of any self-defense claim. If anyone had justification to claim self-defense, it was Martin, as was amply demonstrated by the sad outcome.

Carroll Slemaker

Mission Viejo

ALSO:

Letters: Religion’s blinders

Letters: Napolitano’s challenges at UC

Letters: Immigration reform shouldn’t be personal