Our Articles On Trayvon Martin

trayThere has been a large backlash against the article I wrote a few days ago on Trayvon Martin (“Is the Zimmerman Case Really Open and Shut?”) and also against Arnold Ahlert’s piece in today’s Frontpage (“Framing Trayvon”). About 95% of the comments, maybe more, have attacked the writers of the pieces and in the process disregarded the point both articles were trying to make that like Zimmerman, Trayvon has been turned into a political symbol and the person behind the mask has been lost. The adverse reaction has also served to confirm that a large segment of the conservative community is arguing not only that Zimmerman is innocent of the charge against him, with which Frontpage has no quarrel, but also that Trayvon Martin was a young black thug who deserved to die.

Let me begin by acknowledging that we made some mistakes in framing our pieces, and that I in particular did. Most importantly I should not have given the impression as my title and some of my statements did that I was writing about the legal case and what the verdict should be. Many of the points that were critical of my article referred to the malicious prosecution of Zimmerman and the points of the law that supported Zimmerman’s right to defend himself. These were correct, and on some of those points I stand corrected. I have no disagreement with any of them. I am not a liberal gun controller (as I have been accused of being). I just think it’s a bad idea to arm Neighborhood Watch guards who are not trained as policemen.

What I was writing about – what was important in my view – was that however much Trayvon may have been responsible for the fight that resulted in his death, his portrayal in conservative quarters as a vicious thug are wrong and unjust. In fact he appears to have been a decent teenager with an ambition to go to college and become a pilot. whatever minor trouble he may have gotten into is not too difficult to understand as a child of divorce and growing up in the poisoned racial atmosphere the left has created.

For making this point, which was designed to stimulate some internal second thoughts among conservatives and that shouldn’t have ruffled so many feathers, I have been subjected to a rash of personal attacks. One of them by Debbie Schlussel is quite malicious, even lunatic, and replete with made up “facts” about what I have said and done. Even more puzzling is that all of the attacks seem to be oblivious of the fact that Frontpage generally and I personally have for more than a decade been on the forefront of those opposing the racial arsonists of the left and the civil rights racists whom I have described as a lynch mob with a cracker mentality.

Only two weeks ago I co-authored a piece with John Perazzo on Paula Deen, titled “The Progressive Lynch Mob Claims Another Victim,” (June 26). Just a day before the piece on the Martin-Zimmerman case, Frontpage reposted an excerpt from the pamphlet I wrote with Perazzo this spring called “Black Skin Privilege” which is about the racism of the civil rights left, the free pass that black racists and black criminals get, the unreported epidemic of black crime, the racial preferences that blacks receive, and — the injustice of the attacks on George Zimmerman. I don’t believe anyone else among conservatives or commentators generally has had the temerity to use the phrase “black skin privilege” although that is an accurate description of what thirty plus years of racial intimidation by the left has achieved.

Given these facts I was unprepared for the heat of the attacks directed at me personally, or for the obliviousness of my conservative critics to the contributions I have made in resisting the racial assault on our country by the political left. I wrote the Trayvon article (and commissioned the Ahlert piece) because I thought it was important that conservatives not develop a mob mentality of their own, and second that conservatives remember that there are more than 30 million black Americans the majority of whom are not criminals and who are 95% the victims of black crimes and who need to hear the conservative message. After all, the cities where black crime is rampant and black poverty epidemic are cities like Chicago, Detroit and Washington DC, which are controlled Democrats and progressives, and have been for more than fifty years.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Outtahereasap

    Your theory doesn’t quite match up with evidence or witness calls to police. Phone Witness claimed that voice (Zimmerman) was “far away in the distance” when he responded to Martins question. That indicates Zimmerman was looking but keeping his distance.

  • Tom Kaye

    As I am sure you know, David, the person who vilifies you today probably didn’t even know of you yesterday. Although I disagreed with you regarding neighborhood watch, I nevertheless gave you every benefit of any doubt vis-a-vis gun control, racism and rushes to judgment.

    And in light of the Dunn case (Dunn who?) I can see there might be a need to clarify just where and when you may use deadly force to Stand Your Ground. Can the legislatures agree on what level of threat constitutes “reasonable”? (By the way, how about doing a report on why the media/Left is ignoring a white-on-black killing which may well have been racially motivated – the Michael Dunn case?)

    Regarding rushes to judgment, I remember the morning I first heard about the Marin/Zimmerman case. The first bit of information we had was totally against Zimmerman and everyone I knew in the office (most white, one black), Zimmerman was a crazed vigilante and needed to be put down as soon as possible and oh, that poor black child!

    Then the facts started to come out. And people were fired for refusing to violate their conscience and their oath office, and politics were played and political correctness took hold and the decree came down: the brown white man must be sacrificed for the good of race relations.

    I exaggerate.

    Except I don’t. That is what happened.

    What is America coming to?

    Keep up the good fight, David. You are appreciated. In spite of the false things said about you in your wikipedia entry! You might want to check that.

    • Kyle Davis

      I think initially , when you shoot and kill someone, there will always be an unfavorable perception of you period. When dealing with a person of color race is always a element . You see the Media and our legal system doesn’t really try to establish truth. The prosecution wants a conviction and the defense wants a acquittal and the intention are to discredit any witnesses . May I ask you ,why don’t you think martin was a good kid. I ask because I’ve noticed you’ve said nothing about Georgie’s character and his back ground..Oh but wait the the public didn’t know Zimmerman had run in with the laws himself , domestic violence and assault by a police officer . Not to mention Daddy being a retired judge , his mom a clerk for the count and a uncle that is a active deputy. In my opinion Martin sounds like a typical teenager in America. People jump to the conclusion that he Martin had 2 ingredients that are used to me a cocktail called Lean. So skittles and a Arizona can automatically established that someone is using Lean? Well the ingredient that makes lean work is cough syrup . Where was that @ hoe come it wasn’t on Martin and why where there no traces of that in his autopsy .Oh but wait Martin was going to walk home where his dad , dads girlfriend and son where at ….and use it there instead right ..Thats like saying I’m not going to smoke weed while I’m out side by myself ..I’ll wait until I go home where my family is to smoke ….This is a typical American procedure.. Start creating something out of nothing to justify a action..

  • RCraigen

    Hi David. I shrugged off your piece as having been a bad day for you, but returned to it, and now to your explanation, after the whole blowup over Diana West has interested me in how your mind works.

    You say, “I just think it’s a bad idea to arm Neighborhood Watch guards who are not trained as policemen.” But I’m not sure who of any repute is arguing that we should do so, which makes me wonder why you use this to characterize your position. On the other hand, your prescription for rewriting Stand Your Ground reads like an argument for DISarming them, which is quite a different matter. I hope this is not the intent of your suggestion there; NW guards ought to have precisely the same rights to bear arms as other citizens, in my view, and if in the line of their duties they feel a slightly higher tendency to take such precautions for their own safety, I don’t think our instinctive reaction ought to be to discourage this. They are not trained officers but they are citizens, and among that class licensed concealed-carriers and those who volunteer for organizations like NW have a general tendency to be more responsible actors and better trained in the appropriate use of such weapons than the general public. We ought not to use shades of language that suggest they are anything like footloose vigilantes.

    I have long felt you have the pulse of the issues you write about, but this one left me scratching my head. In particular, why would you bring up the Stand Your Ground issue as if it were somehow central to understanding this case? You, of all people, should understand that SYG was no more than a red herring in this story. It was not part of the court case, it did not enter into the charges against Zimmerman, nor into the defence case. It was not part of the determination of the police on the night of the shooting. Self defence was and is the critical issue, not SYG. I don’t believe it was wise to dignify the diversionary leftist tactic of introducing SYG into an issue in which it has no part. “Shifting the debate” in this way should not be in the Conservative toolbox. Don’t go chasing red herrings. Or to use a broader metaphor, while there’s one fox up a tree don’t call the dogs off to chase another one.

  • AKFreedomLover

    I don’t understand the racial fallout over this case at all. Zimmerman isn’t white.