BBM
And we've heard ad nauseum what any reasonable person would have done in Zimmerman's situation. And in this instance, any reasonable person would not have stood around after feeling compelled to run from an individual they perceived to be aggressively following them.
You can't really have it both ways.
It is fair to ask what a reasonable person would have done in GZ's situation, since he is the one who chased this kid down and ultimately shot him. It is perhaps, as you say, also reasonable to ask what a reasonable person would have done in TM's place. First let's review what he DID do.
He ran, and when he thought he had left the creepy stalker behind him, he went back to talking to his girlfriend. He was killed about fifteen seconds jog from his front door. We can reasonably conclude that this is what he did because both his girlfriend AND GZ agree that the boy ran away. Did he have some obligation to run, other that to escape his stalker?
According to some, yes he did.
These folks believe that GZ had the right to follow black kids around in his car, phoning the police every time one of them struck him the wrong way. They believe that GZ also had the right to jump out of his car any time he felt like it and chase after these black kids. They believe GZ had the right to stop and question these kids. And finally, they believe that if any of these kids were startled or offended enough to try to defend themselves, they believe that GZ had the right to gun them down. GZ, according to these folks, had all these 'rights' and probably more.
The folks who grant all these fantastic rights to GZ assign an entirely different set of rights and obligations to the black kids he hunted, his prey.
According to them, a black kid has no right to walk around his own apartment complex or neighborhood without being suspected, reported to the police, followed by private citizens, stopped at the whim of these private citizens, and questioned. According to these folks, the black kid has no right to mind his own business without being harassed, he has no right not to be stopped and questioned.
He has no right to wear his hood in the rain, no right to walk slowly enjoying his evening, no right to stand outside talking to his girlfriend on the phone. He has no right to flee if strangers in cars begin following him, no right to feel fear if strange adults aproach him on foot, and if a black kid does flee he must then sprint madly for home not stopping until he is safe behind a locked door.
According to these folks, if a black kid does become so frightened that he defends himself (as we teach our privileged white kids to do), he has no right to WIN. Self defense is a right that black kids don't get, that right is reserved for whites. A black kid must allow himself to be beaten and perhaps even killed. If he does happen to win he will be arrested. If a black kid loses and is killed, his corpse will be tossed in the morgue with no effort made to identify it. No one will bother to investigate the killing of a black kid who tries to assume the same rights that a white kid gets.
Now, I am not saying YOU believe these things. I am saying that there are many many Americans who do, and they have been quite vocal in this case. And what's more, these same fine people who believe that whites and blacks have entirely different rights and rules, get offended and accuse you of playing the 'race card' when you point this double standard out to them.
