How inclusive of him to be willing to step into the ring with a Black man. His people say it has nothing to do with “the incident.” No, it’s not racial at all. He’s doing it for charity and the money to be made from turning himself into a media connected punching dummy.

Did anyone tell him he can’t take his gun into the ring? Did anyone tell him that his judicially connected father won’t be allowed to cover his ass in a one on one confrontation in front of everybody?

They may let his brother be at ringside in the corner, but he can’t cross the ropes to help out either. Bro looks like he does more talking than fighting anyway…More Bundini Brown to Georgie’s Ali.

Has anyone explained to him the difference between a fair fight inside a ring instead of a street fight on the front lawn with an unarmed kid?

Now according to the article, which you can read here, Zimmerman says he is comfortable in the ring, because he’s boxed before. He likes it like Mikey likes it. Helps him drop the weight.

Compton, California rapper, The Game, has already answered the challenge, says he’s willing to beat his ass for Trayvon. I’ll bet there are a lot of others willing to step up too. Oh, and did I mention it’s a pay per view event. We don’t know which charity is gonna benefit. We do know that George is gonna get paid, but he won’t how much.

“Float like a butterfly
Sting like a bee
I’ll take a punch
If you pay the fee”….

If this happens, somebody please…please knock that smirk off his face and beat the Black, brown or yellow off his sorry brown, yellow, white ass..

Trayvon still needs some justice…

The post Boxing? George Zimmerman, Sit Yo Punk Ass Down! appeared first on Madness & Reality.

This from Tampa Tribune:

TALLAHASSEE — Proponents of a special session on Florida’s “stand your ground” law are losing by a more than 2-to-1 margin along party lines in a legislative poll.

“No” votes are leading “yes” votes 55-25, according to results released Tuesday night by the Department of State. The deadline for legislators to vote is Monday.

At this rate, Democratic lawmakers seeking the special session may have won the battle but lost the war.

They were able to muster enough support to trigger the poll, but Tuesday’s count suggests they won’t reach the three-fifths supermajority needed out of all 159 sitting legislators.

Proponents still need at least 70 of the 79 outstanding votes to reach three-fifths, which is required under state law.

With Republican majorities in both chambers that think the law is fine as is, getting that supermajority was always a tall order.

So as it stands right now, the only hope for opponents of the state’s controversial law is to secure huge Democratic gains at the ballot box. It’s apparent that Crump and company are well aware of the resurgence of youth activism sparked by the death of Trayvon Martin. And as Crump lays out in his piece, the success of an amendment lies in the youth voter turnout. This is good strategy especially when said turnout is historically low in midterm elections. So as far as strategy, this is a good move. However, considering that we’re a long way away from November 2014, I’m cautious that the current momentum will be lost. By the time midterm elections roll around, there’ll be no talk about stand-your-ground laws.

But hey, I can’t blame Crump for trying:

Why is it critical to amend stand-your-ground laws? The Trayvon Martin amendments are common-sense legislation that would alter such laws to prevent the initial aggressor in a confrontation from being able to later claim self-defense. Stand-your-ground laws were not enacted to allow aggressors the opportunity to get away with murdering an innocent person, although this is, unfortunately, what has happened. Law enforcement officers initially cited Florida’s stand-your-ground law in their refusal to arrest Trayvon’s killer, Zimmerman, in February 2012. In large part, this law permitted Trayvon’s killer to walk out of the courtroom and back into society. Passing these amendments would prevent this type of tragedy and protect others, especially children, from being profiled, pursued and killed by aggressors.

In asking the United States to start a conversation about the tragic circumstances of Trayvon’s death, President Obama expressed his concerns and the need to review stand-your-ground laws. Sen. John McCain and other prominent Republicans have joined Obama in questioning stand-your-ground statutes. Even former Florida governor Jeb Bush, the Republican who signed the state’s stand-your-ground legislation into law, has voiced concerns. Regarding the shooting of Trayvon, Bush said in March 2012, “ ‘Stand your ground’ means stand your ground. It doesn’t mean chase after somebody who’s turned their back.”

Here’s the problem with Crump’s commentary above: The law currently does not allow for someone who is the aggressor in an altercation to receive immunity. I’ve explained this in full detail recently, and if anything, I find this misrepresentation of the law to be especially egregious when coming from an attorney licensed in the state of Florida. So why id Crump doing this? If I had to guess, it’s all about money.

Yes, it’s the only explanation for him comparing Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till and Medgar Evers. And I’m sorry, I don’t see Trayvon’s death in the same light as I do that of the aforementioned. Clearly, the death of those individuals were racially motivated. Trayvon Martin’s death on the other hand? No. I know the idea of his death not being racially motivated is hard to accept by many. But hey, if you have evidence to support this idea, iot would’ve been nice if you would have come forward with it before now. Chances are, there would’ve been a conviction if you did.

Throughout history, positive change has come from tragedy. Society has learned that with time and through action, protests and national movements, change is possible. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 began in large part because of the brutal murder of another unarmed black teenager, Emmett Till, in Money, Miss., in 1955. It took nearly a decade before this tragedy resulted in the passage of the historic civil rights legislation. Emmett’s mother, Mamie Till Mobley, eventually got to see something positive emerge from something very painful: an acknowledgment that her son’s death was not in vain.

The 1963 murder of Medgar Evers, another unarmed African American, led to positive change. During his life as an activist, Evers organized voter registration campaigns, demonstrations and boycotts to end Jim Crow laws in Jackson, Miss. His death was an influence for the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Even as we fight today for change, and may expect it to manifest immediately, it is important to understand that this process will take time. We should not, however, allow that to be a discouragement. We Trayvon voters must maintain a united front againststand- your- ground laws and continue to fight even at times when our efforts feel overlooked. No matter how seemingly impossible the task, if Trayvon voters remain steadfast, Trayvon’s parents, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, will eventually see something positive come out of something very painful : an acknowledgment that their son’s death was not in vain.

As I’ve said before, the death of Trayvon Martin was tragic.Yes, he should be alive right now. However, to blame his death on Florida’s stand-your-ground law when it was never invoked at anytime during George Zimmerman’s trial is ridiculous (read here). The truith is that even without the law, with everything being equal, Zimmerman would have still been acquitted like he was. Why? Because his case was one of simple self-defense.

And as I’ve pointed out before, there was no need to invoke stand-your-ground by his attorneys because given the evidence, Zimmerman was not able to retreat while in the process of getting his ass beat. To me, the real tragedy is in someone with a law degree like Crump taking advantage of Trayvon’s parents. But hey, maybe once the DOJ indicts Zimmerman for violating the civil rights of Trayvon Martin, y’all can tell me I’m wrong.

The post Benjamin Crump Op-Ed Makes Case for Stand-Your-Ground Amendment appeared first on Madness & Reality.

The issue is largely dedicated to Trayvon, but its pages feature larger conversations considering the notion of race in contemporary America, with an article about racial profiling, interviews with the cover subjects detailing how they approach the topic of race with their sons (who will likely be profiled.) The issue even features a poem dedicated to Trayvon, written by spoken work artist Jill Scott.

As woefully expected the covers did not sit well with those who still blame Trayvon’s death on Trayvon himself as seen on Twitchy, a right-wing news site owned by Michelle Malkin. This is what they said about this issue’s covers:

It’s much easier to slap on a hoodie and pretend to fight for social justice than to recognize a black American is more likely to be murdered by another black American than some “White Hispanic” man.

That comment alone was enough to spark a rumor throughout social media that the Tea Party plans to boycott Ebony. It was big enough to prompt Ebony’s editor-and-chief Amy Barnett to respond accordingly:

“We simply cannot allow the conversations on this issue to come to a standstill. As the leading source for an authoritative perspective on the African-American community, at Ebony we are committed to serving as a hub for Black America to explore solutions, and to giving readers the information and tools they need to help ensure a bright future for all of our children.”

Even though the rumor was shown to be a colossal farce, it’s still a punch in the gut in the conversation we need to have. Since day one, the response from numerous people over this tragedy is that the black community should stop obsessing over Trayvon’s murder, and that we all should collectively focus on black-on-black crime which – in their inarguable opinion – a much more important problem.

Here’s how it is when it comes to the usual narrative from the right: Interracial crime where blacks are victims are incredibly rare. However, intra-racial crime is major. Sometime they will take a step further, interracial crime does happen, but the biggest criminals are black while their victims are white. The usual lesson to the black community is to take care of its rampant crime problem, and those who give that good talking-to are always white people and middle-class blacks who’ve likely never visited black neighborhoods.

But the lesson is deceitful and fallacious. Most of the people who feel it is their “duty” to tell blacks how to think and what to think believe that in some way we are a childlike people who need the guidance of “good” people who are usually and utterly clueless about what it means to be black in America.

The histories and current state of the black community in a nation that has yet to admit its own pathology is always omitted from the conversation. It’s a crooked way to avoid the reality of racism, personal and systematic, that is significant not only in the murder of Trayvon Martin, but all murders of black life no matter who the killers are.

Intra-racial crime in the black community is just as big an issue as interracial crime. It always has been on our radar for a few decades, and it has not gone out of range, not for even one second, since Trayvon’s murder or the murders of Sean Bell, Oscar Grant, Rekia Boyd, Aiyana Jones, Remarley Graham, Kenneth Chamberlain and anyone else. The common denominator is that black lives are being snuffed out, and this nation – as we’ve seen with George Zimmerman’s verdict – doesn’t give a damn about it.

Sure, one can argue that it’s not white people who are putting guns into the hands of trigger-happy, pistol packing individuals. No one is saying such a thing. However, those who sit by and do nothing but scold us are just as much at fault as the ones behind the violence whether it happens in black or white communities trying to act concern while scapegoating all of their precious nation’s problems onto the negro population.

Many of us scoff at such false compassion done to derail and demean. If you really want to help, why not first address the problem of violence in its entirety – from front to back, inside and out, and not just pin this as a “black” problem only black people need to fix? Why not recognize the problem within your own neck of the woods committed by “good” white folks, particularly the gun enthusiasts? Why not study and learn all the causes of violence and not just blame it on hip-hop and unwed single mothers as if it makes you sound profound and caring? More importantly, why not actively support and invest in programs that will help remedy violence?

The murder of Trayvon Martin further serves to have a serious reflection as to the state of race relations and the violence  – physical and institutional – that comes with it from those still trapped in pre-1960 America. And how this country treats or mistreats black life it is a testament to how far this society needs to go in order to truly call itself “post-racial”. It’s useless to argue that intra-racial crime in black communities deserves more outrage and attention, especially when it already has for years. It holds no weight due to the fact that no matter how the life of a black person is viciously taken, this country still sees it as expendable, no matter who takes it.

The post Ebony’s “Trayvon” Covers and the Black-on-Black Crime Argument appeared first on Madness & Reality.

In the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict, as you can imagine, polling shows that there’s a huge split along racial lines. With 57 percent of whites and 37 percent of blacks supporting stand-your-ground laws which exist in one form or another in at least 38 states. One can conclude that at least for black folk, results of the poll shows that many black folk are of the opinion that there appears to be racial bias in the laws application.

And why wouldn’t they? After all, it took 44 days before Zimmerman was arrested for killing an unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin after admitting to doing so. Never mind that Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense for the shooting and killing of Martin was still being investigated by the Sanford, Florida Police Department. All that mattered to many was that an unarmed black teen was dead at the hands of a “white man” and there was no arrest. It was then and only then that we were introduced to Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute, which seemed racially biased given the circumstances. Yep, Zimmerman not being arrested for killing Trayvon Martin, just reeked with the smell of racism to many.

If you’ve been following this blog for the last 6 years, you’ll know that I’m, a black man. And, you’ll also know that as far as politics, I consider myself a progressive. Yes, I’m a bona fide racism-chasing progressive blogger and I’m not ashamed of it in the least. However, having said that, it may shock you to hear that I support stand-your-ground self-defense laws. Yes, even as polling shows the widest split among partisan lines with 75 percent of Republicans supporting such laws, with just 32 percent of Democrats supporting it as well. I believe that much of this disparity cab be attributed to a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. Much of which, id due in large part the racial polarization of the Zimmerman case.

In the court of public opinion, the law is characterized as a “shoot first ask questions later” law. This characterization has led many to believe that the law gives an individual a license to kill. What it overlooked and hardly mentioned, however, is what I deem to be the centerpiece of the law. That would be, the removal of the required “duty to retreat” so as to be justified in the use of deadly force to defend one’s self if attacked. So let’s take a look at how having to fulfill a “duty to retreat” versus not having to impacts the lives of individuals in the judicial system.

Lets say that a defendant is facing the risk of death or serious bodily injury even while being the recipient of as ass-whoopin as Zimmerman was (or rape or kidnapping or, in some states, robbery or some other crimes). And let’s say that the defendant…

1. is not in his home or other property that he owns or his place of business,
2. is in a place where he may lawfully be,
3. is not engaged in the commission of such crime, and
4. has not attacked the victim first or deliberately provoked the victim with the specific purpose of getting the victim to attack or threaten him.

In states that require a “duty to retreat”, the defendant isn’t legally allowed to use deadly force to defend one’s self. If the jury concludes that the defendant could’ve safely avoided the risk of death or serious bodily injury (or the other relevant crimes) by retreating. Plain and simple, the defendant will be convicted. Yes, end of story — go straight to jail and do not pass go. That said, let’s look at a case down in Houston, Texas.

This from ABC 13:

Shanequia Nicole McDonald, 24, was soft-spoken and even wept while speaking to reporters.

 

The confrontation happened Sunday night at a Gulf gas station on Cullen near Ward. Investigators say McDonald shot and killed Lewis Daniel after the two got into an argument as McDonald was filling her vehicle with gas. Police tell us Daniel made sexual advances toward her and continued to do so even though McDonald repeatedly told him to go away.

 

Eyewitnesses say they saw Daniel come at McDonald with a knife. After that you see on surveillance video that she went into her trunk and retrieved a rifle. She appeared to fire to the ground first, and then after Daniel took a swing at her, she apparently fired several more rounds at him. He died at the gas station.

 

“I just went to the gas station to get gas,” McDonald said. “I didn’t go out to hurt or harm anyone. I was just protecting myself when it happened.”

Watch the video below:

Well that may have been true of the victim, but clearly he wasn’t killed for playfully swinging a knife at Ms. McDonald because she refused his sexual advances. Forget the fact that the incident was caught on tape and that there are witnesses to the altercation. The next question, should she be arrested for committing a crime? If so, what crime? What, not avoiding the confrontation?

Okay, so I see the wheels turning in your head. Yes, and I know that at this very moment you’re thinking: But RiPPa, this is nothing like the Zimmerman case. No, she didn’t stalk her victim like Zimmerman did Trayvon Martin. True, but whether you like it or not, Zimmerman broke no laws when he got out of his vehicle or “followed” Trayvon Martin as some of you would like to think.

But hey, if you can find any law on the books that makes his actions illegal, please feel free to share it with me. To help you out, however, see Gibbs v. State, 789 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). In it you’ll find that words alone do not constitute provocation. Yep, walking up to someone and asking, “What are you doing here?” In no way is legally seen as provoking an altercation in most states; and, certainly not in the state of Florida. Yep, and I’m willing to bet it isn’t anywhere else.

But beyond all of this, the bottom line is that stand-yoir-ground had nothing to do with the outcome of the Zimmerman trial. Hell, it was never invoked by the defense; and it’s not the reason why Zimmerman was acquitted. That said, to rally against and ask for a repeal to Florida’s stand-your-ground seems silly to me. I mean why do this when it had no impact on the outcome when it was a simple self-defense case to begin with?

I know it’s hard for many to accept, but most crimes (especially homicides) are intra-racial and not interracial. I’ve explained before why the assertion that stand-your-ground laws are racist are egregious (read here). Yes, according to FBI data. only 3 percent of all homicides in America are white-on-black. And in those instances, only 34 percent of them are found to be justified. As a father of four daughters, it is the circumstances surrounding the McDonald case above that makes it hard for me to go against my states stand-your-ground law.

The law as I’ve pointed out before has its roots in the protection of women outside of their homes. So, while I can understand why the parents of Trayvon Martin are dedicated to having that law repealed (as are the Dream Defenders who are occupying the Florida state capitol). I just wish someone would explain to them how the law actually works. Why? Because people in the 19 states which requires a “duty to retreat” are at a disadvantage. Don’t believe me? Just ask Shanequia McDonald if she would’ve liked having to fulfill that obligation while she faced a knife-wielding perv. But hey, maybe we should have a march or protest in the interest of justice for Lewis Daniel. After all, McDonald should’ve ran; and, she has yet to be arrested.

Watch the surveillance video below:

The post Stand-Your-Ground: Majority Support Law, Do You? appeared first on Madness & Reality.

I know this young man, and I know others like him, some are very similar and some are quite different. I know different kinds of young black males, and almost none of them are robbers, rapists or baby daddies with colonies of kids. Some were and are honor roll students. Some participated in community service. And some were young leaders.

They also share another common theme. They are all purposely invisible.

I thought about Trayvon Martin’s murder and the quest of George Zimmerman’s supporters to turn the young man into a thug. Anything that was used to paint the picture of Trayvon Martin as a wannabe thug was perfect to crucify him in the public’s imagination. Even if it was as simple as wearing a hoodie, the end result was that Trayvon Martin ultimately got himself killed.

There were two Trayvon Martins. One was the thug who caused his own murder. And he was on trial. He was never the victim or the defendant, because that Trayvon Martin didn’t exist in the minds of Zimmerman or the Sanford court.

Yet, the second Trayvon, the real version, was there. It was this version his family, relatives and friends knew and loved. It was this version that many people mourned for after hearing about his death. It was this version that was a regular teen, a human being like anyone else with his faults and talents. This Trayvon Martin was in school with big dreams that will never be realized. He was someone’s child who did nothing to warrant his killing.

Yet, this is the Trayvon Martin that a lot of people don’t see, and it’s pathetically because he is a young black male.

Being black in America, you are seen as a threat first and a human being last, way last. For young black men, the image of the heartless black brute is so strong that it is hazardous to their healths. It can literally get you killed, even if you’re no threat to anyone. They see what they’ve been taught by their families, friends and the media, assume the worse and justify it way before they will see a human being the same way they see their white friends.

Of course, in this land of color coding, the problem works in reverse. The image of the good white man comes before the mass murderers or serial killers. Sometimes that image is followed by the usual “mental illness” excuse or utter disbelief of what went down. “He was a good man. I don’t know what happened. Why?” I digress.

The portrait of the broken, dysfunctional, crime-ridden black community is so well-founded that certain people actually believe that most black Americans are screwed up through no one’s fault but their own.  And many people prefer to see that portrait and present it as an accurate depiction of Black America. They use it to support their own prejudices and racism. They see it as “proof” to the inferiority archetype of the African American. And they encourage every single black American to fix it all on their own.

It is the black America they want to see almost all the time.

They don’t see us as a diverse group of human beings. They don’t see the middle and upper class – not most of the time. They don’t see the honor roll black students, the black scholars or the young black geniuses. They don’t see stable black families. They don’t see black fathers and black mothers being responsible to their children.

They don’t see any of that and a lot more because it’s invisible to them. It’s not existent even if it’s right in front of their faces. But make no mistake, the truth is out there in plain sight.

The post Black Males: They See Us As They Want To See Us appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Is that not the way with black pathology?

Forget about the Middle Passage and the petty theft that was slavery and what some call the raping of a continent. Yes, never mind that minor infraction as a contributing factor. What’s important to promote, for some, is that black people killing black people — because their aren’t any other crimes beside murder — is a much deeper contributing factor to our collective demise. And, if we black people could just simply get it together and solve that major problem, racism — whether systemic or otherwise — will all fade away like the sound of old Negro spirituals in cotton fields.

In the federal system black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crime.

Sounds silly? Considering that some have identified the root of the black-on-black crime problem to be out-of-wedlock births in the black community, yes. Okay, so maybe it’s a contributing factor to poverty in already impoverished communities. But let’s not kid ourselves: said impoverished communities exist as a product of a system enforced by public policy that renders economically disadvantaged people somewhat hopeless. Just ask anyone from the hood if given a chance would they love to live in a much nicer neighborhood. I’m willing to bet that in most cases they would say yes. Why? Because the sad truth is that to live in poverty is a very expensive existence.

But no, if black women would just listen to white men like Bill O’Reilly and stopped f*cking, all would be well in black America. It’s as though out-of-wedlock births do not exist in dominant culture, hence their civility and our lack of humanity. The irony of this is that at one point in time, black women were raped encouraged to have children so as to provide that cheap… oops, I meant free labor, to drive the engine of America’s economy. But I guess with the prison industrial complex booming, nothing has changed.

In the aftermath of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous of the NAACP are calling on the black community to rise up in national protest.

Yet they know nothing is going to happen.

“Stand-Your-Ground” laws in Florida and other states are not going to be repealed. George Zimmerman is not going to be prosecuted for a federal “hate crime” in the death of Trayvon Martin.

The result of all this ginned-up rage that has produced vandalism and violence is simply going to be an ever-deepening racial divide.

Consider the matter of crime and fear of crime.

From listening to cable channels and hearing Holder, Sharpton, Jealous and others, one would think the great threat to black children today emanates from white vigilantes and white cops.

Hence, every black father must have a “conversation” with his son, warning him not to resist or run if pulled over or hassled by a cop.

Make the wrong move, son, and you may be dead is the implication.

But is this the reality in Black America?

When Holder delivered his 2009 “nation-of-cowards” speech blaming racism for racial separation, Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald suggested that our attorney general study his crime statistics.

In New York, from January to June 2008, 83 percent of all gun assailants were black, according to witnesses and victims, though blacks were only 24 percent of the population. Blacks and Hispanics together accounted for 98 percent of all gun assailants. Forty-nine of every 50 muggings and murders in the Big Apple were the work of black or Hispanic criminals.

New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly confirms Mac Donald’s facts. Blacks and Hispanics commit 96 percent of all crimes in the city, he says, but only 85 percent of the stop-and-frisks are of blacks and Hispanics.

And these may involve the kind of pat-downs all of us have had at the airport.

Is stop-and-frisk the work of racist cops in New York, where the crime rate has been driven down to levels unseen in decades?

According to Kelly, a majority of his police force, which he has been able to cut from 41,000 officers to 35,000, is now made up of minorities.

But blacks are also, per capita, the principal victims of crime. Would black fathers prefer their sons to grow up in Chicago, rather than low-crime New York City, with its stop-and-frisk policy?

So what does this have to do with white-on-white crime? For starters let’s just say that attempted to shift focus away from a conversation on race and the criminal justice system is indeed racist. And sadly there are many black people who do us no favors by running this conservative playbook. Take conservative commentator Crystal Wright for example. Wright recently wrote that if George Zimmerman was black, very few in the black community would care; and, there would be no collective national outrage. To be fair, this is an argument with which I agree. As I’ve written before, conservatives aren’t interested in solving gun violence. And neither is Wright herself is interested in fixing the problem. What she is interested in is using statistics to point fingers at the black community to reinforce her position in conservative circles as an exceptional Negro.

Sadly, this trial wouldn’t be receiving wall-to-wall national media coverage if Zimmerman was black. That’s what we should be talking about.

Startling statistics reveal that between 1980-2008, African-Americans were six times more likely than whites to be victims of gun violence and seven times more likely to kill with guns than whites, according to the Justice Department. African-Americans represent a mere 13% of the US population yet more than 50% of federal prisoners are black. You can claim racial bias in the judicial system, but that doesn’t explain all of it.

Why aren’t so-called black leaders outraged and marching over therecent shooting rampage in Chicago. During the 4 July holiday weekend, including the Wednesday leading up to it, 62 people were wounded by gun violence in Chicago and 12 others killed. The holiday shooting spree raised Chicago’s homicide tally to 200 for the year. Last year about 500 people were killed, and most of those killing and being killed in Chicago are black. According to the Chicago Tribune, “blacks make up about 33% of the city’s population, they accounted for nearly 78% of the homicide victims through the first six months of 2012”

You see, unlike Wright, I would point out that though the numbers may be correct, things aren’t that much different on the white side of town. Because as Jamelle Bouie recently pointed out: “Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders.” Now if I were hell-bent on advancing an agenda that says something like liberalism has done nothing but destroy the black community as many conservatives often do. Like Wright and others, I too would never mention that 86% of white victims of homicide were killed by someone white. If I were a conservative I’d focus on black-on-black crime so as to stoke the fears and racial resentment of an aging loyal voting block who are overwhelmingly white. Yes, I wouldn’t advance any sensible arguments to explain that crimes in the black community are a component of poverty, opportunity, and proximity. Or the fact as Demos has pointed out recently: By race, overall, crime has been on a steady decline. But hey, being the habitual line-stepper I bring you facts.

Black on Black Crime Facts

• Black on black homicides have decreased by 67% in 20 years, a sharper rate of decrease than white on white homicide.
• According to FBI statistics 7361 Blacks were killed by fellow African-Americans in 1991. In 2011, it dropped dramatically to 2447 African-Americans
• Among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are the lowest in more than 40 years.

Don’t get me wrong, crime in the black community is a serious issue. As a black man living in the city of Memphis, TN. please believe that I know all too well how crime wrecks the community (read here). However, it’s important to understand that many discussions on black-on-black crime (especially in right-wing media circles) only seeks to deflect from the very real issue that is the inequality that exists in the criminal justice system.

Racial Inequality in the Criminal Justice System Facts

• African Americans were 2 times as likely to be arrested and almost 4 times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.
• In the federal system black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crime.
• 5 times as many Whites are using drugs as African Americans, yet African Americans are sent to prison for drug offenses at 10 times the rate of Whites
• African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of Whites
• African American juvenile youth are about 16% of the youth population, 37% of their cases are moved to criminal court & 58% of convicted African American youth are sent to adult prisons.
• Controlling for other factors, including severity of the offense and prior criminal history, white men aged 18-29 were 38% less likely to be sentenced to prison than their black male peers
• African American women are 3 times more likely than white women to be incarcerated
• African American defendants are 21% more likely to receive mandatory-minimum sentences than Whites and are 20% more like to be sentenced to prison

Though you may not agree with anything I’ve said to this point, it’s important to know that the facts are quite clear. Inequality along racial lines exists, and it is an all too real experience for many people of color. In my opinion, we didn’t need the Zimmerman verdict to serve as proof of this.

Why?

Because as Jamelle Bouie also writes:

If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

Because many of us have been having these discussions for “donkey years,’ as my Trinidadian mother would say. As long as this blog has existed we’ve attempted to bring to you stories that highlight this issue. Heck, and there are many not-so-high profile stories that we’ve missed just like the media has. Beyond that, if there’s anything to be learned from this post is that we have the choice to either be a part of the problem, or a part of the solution. To be honest, not telling the truth about crime on both sides of the divide is in fact counterproductive and hinders progress. To that point, I’m glad that left-wing media isn’t concerned with white out-of-wedlock births as a solution to white-on-white crime problem in America. Oh, that’s right, white supremacy ain’t havin’ it, son.

The post Can We Talk About White-On-White Crime? appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Of course we all know how the Zimmerman trial turned out. It’s safe to say that the Not Guilty verdict returned in that trial is fresh in the minds of many. So much so that activists are now lobbying the state of Florida to bring to an end its controversial Stand Your Ground self-defense law. Why? Because to some, it’s clear that the law and it’s application is racially biased. This is a claim that I don’t endorse not with which I agree; and, I’ve shared my opinion on the egregious mischaracterization of the law before (read here). Nonetheless, to some, the law has to go. After all, such a law on the books as it has been in 21 states only encourages violence, and the assassination of black males young and old alike; so yes, it’s about race.

Jude Cordell (Left) and Daniel Adkins (Right)

So what does this have to do with Daniel Adkins and Jude Cordell? Well, given the fact that one of them is dead and the as a result of a gunshot wound and there has been no arrest, one would think it would be a a pretty “big fucking dead,” as Vice President Joe Biden would say. One would think that the media would be whipping up everyone into a frenzy demanding justice. But I suppose when a story isn’t sexy enough to be racialized as was the Zimmerman trial, everything else just falls to the wayside. Yep, I’ve blogged about the Daniel Adkins case before, and it’s unfortunate that none of my left-wing buddies are not using this case to justify their argument that Stand Your Ground self-defense laws are dangerous. So who is Daniel Adkins? Read the following excerpt from my post which introduced his story, on April 9th, 2012 to become a bit familiar.

Well, the victim in this particular case is a 22-year-old white male who as it turns out, was mentally retarded and had the mental capacity of a 12-year-old. The shooter however, happens to be a black man. What I find particularly interesting, is the fact that there is very little talk of justice for Daniel Adkins much in the same way there’s talk of justice for Trayvon Martin. And I find this particularly interesting given the politicization of the incident involving George Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense as it relates to the NRA pushed and ALEC supported Stand Your Ground Law. In case you’ve been under a rock for the past few weeks, the Stand Your Ground Law currently exists in 24 states. Arizona, where Daniel Adkins was killed, like Florida, also has their own version of Stand Your Ground. (read more)

Make no mistake, part of the reason Trayvon’ Martin’s death seemed like an injustice initially, was because Zimmerman was not arrested. We all know the story, there were mass rallies and protests in the interest of justice up until he was arrested 44 days after killing Trayvon. Adkins was killed just a matter of weeks removed from Trayvon’s death, but yet there was no outrage. Adkins’ killer, Jude Cordell, remained a free man and was never arrested for the death of Adkins. Why? Could it be that the shooter in this case being black, made the case less motivated by race?

PHOENIX – It’s been called the “reverse Trayvon Martin” case.

A Hispanic man dead, shot and killed in the parking lot of a south Phoenix Taco Bell. The shooter is black. He told police he only shot in self-defense.

Still, a grand jury indicted Jude Cordell on 2nd degree murder charges. His trial will start next month.

Cordell is facing 2nd degree murder charges, but this entire time he’s been out of jail.

Jude Cordell is on supervised released as he waits for trial. He’s accused of killing 29-year-old Daniel Adkins at a Phoenix Taco Bell. Cordell says it was self-defense. Adkins’ family believes he was murdered.

“I want him behind bars. I want him to pay for this,” says Marina Reyes, Adkins’ sister.

Adkins was developmentally disabled. Last year, he was walking his yellow lab, Lady, down the street. Cordell was pulling out of the Taco Bell drive-thru and almost ran over Adkins. Adkins allegedly hit the car and yelled at Cordell. That’s when Cordell says he feared for his life and pulled out a gun and shot Adkins.

Jude Cordell

Police didn’t arrest Cordell after the shooting. But four months later, a grand jury indicted him.

“If he felt that my brother was threatening him he could have easily just rolled up the window and called the cops,” says Reyes.

One of the conditions of Cordell’s release was once-a-month drug testing. According to court paperwork, Cordell failed a drug test in May. But he wasn’t sent back to jail. He was ordered to take weekly drug tests instead.

Cordell’s trial is less than 4-weeks away. It’s been almost year and a half since the shooting.

“I forgave him for what he did. It’s hard for a father to do but if I hate somebody I’m just as bad as he is,” says Daniel Adkins, Sr.

Cordell is also on 18-month probation stemming from another arrest for possession of marijuana.

Watch the following via myfoxphoenix.com before continuing:

Jude Cordell smoking a blunt,

So here we are well over a year later, and though there has been an indictment by a Grand Jury, no arrest has been made because Jude Cordell isn’t seen as a threat to society. Yep, never mind the fact that he was arrested for weed possession after being pulled over while driving a car with two suspects from a drive-bye shooting as passengers. I could be wrong, but I’d like to think that the circumstances for his arrest would have urged more people to rally for his arrest. But no, I guess since his crime wasn’t deemed to be racially motivated, unlike the actions of Zimmerman, there was no need for national coverage by media outlets (outside of any coverage by bloggers such as myself). That said, I don’t expect there to be a media circus next month when the trial starts. Of course I find this to be very hypocritical. But hey, if it don’t make dollars, it don’t make sense.

If President Barack Obama had a son, he’d probably look like Trayvon Martin. The sad truth that is hardly accepted is that Obama’s son would more than likely be killed by someone who looks like him. To be clear, racial profiling is a very serious issue. And, some may say that the Daniel Adkins case though reversed from that of Trayvon’s isn’t such an issue. My wonder is if many who are of this opinion, are only saying this because the media, as well as many of the so-called leaders in the black community hasn’t told them that it was. Besides, it’s not in racial unless a black person is the victim, right? Yes, and we have the 3.1% of all white-on-black homicides per FBI data, to thank for this well concocted notion. Not to be condescending, but isn’t an injustice anywhere a threat to justice everywhere? Pardon me, but was Trayvon’s life more valuable than Daniel’s?

The post Daniel Adkins “Reverse Trayvon Martin Case” Starts August appeared first on Madness & Reality.

What is it about the deeper and deepest hues of men and boys that make people clutch purses, lock doors, hold breaths with anxious anticipation, clench fists, posture with rigid backs and stiff walks, draw guns, shoot first and possibly ask questions later?

I’ve done it. We’ve all done it. Take stances of defense. Expect the confrontation. Make judgment and carry out sentencing in less than ten seconds. Perhaps that is the impetus that pushes us in these times. Our action and reaction are our penance that is asking forgiveness to the many nameless black male bodies we have condemned.

In the ugliest of truths that many will not say, if quite a few people were in Zimmerman’s situation, they too might have killed that priceless young man regardless of their racial orientation. Indeed, that is not in any way dismissive of Zimmerman’s actions that were undoubtedly infused with racial implications that criminalized Martin and shelved the idea of his boyhood in the tragic confrontation on February 26, 2012. Yet and still, the harshest fact is that in America, black males are valueless; thus unprotected.

On one hand, we are in an uproar for the high profile case of Martin. On the other, we are silent or at best, ambivalent in the cases of other black men who are dropping like flies around the country, especially in areas like Chicago, St. Louis and New Orleans. It is as if those scenarios are disconnected from Martin because there is an undertone that those types of males engaging in black-on-black gun clapping is expected for those types of communities; therefore, not our problem. Consequentially, those black male bodies are fodder for the statistics we shake our head about on Sunday mornings or as we read a news headline during coffee until it comes to our front door.

There is an anxiety, taboo, fear and hate surrounding black male bodies that is so intense that the POTUS has addressed his painful dealings with race and gender in two historical speeches, and is still met with disdain. Though President Obama’s platform is global, the daily discourse around black male bodies is as simple as watching who has the courage of sitting next to a black man on a packed rush hour bus or train; if anyone dares to be seated next to him at all.

It is a daily dance with humiliation that my father, brother, husband and friends have spoken about so frequently, that it seems to not even matter because revoking black males of their humanity has become the convenient order of the day. Their daily doings are somber experiences in which they balance the shrinking of one’s self as to not appear too threatening so that others can see their personhood; along with enduring the hits of being animalized, while posturing for the battle of an alpha ego that comes with the gendered roles of an American culture where über maleness is sculpted by aggression, violence, excessive capital and a domineering personality. It is like shadow boxing with two declarations, “I am a man” and “I man enough.” Resultantly, it is a mark on the soul that has morphed into an ill coping mechanism and has left fissures in the constitution of the nation.

As we fight for justice at the site of yet another black male body, we are compiling our lists of those black men and boys who were slain before. Sadly, we do this ritual about every ten years or so in America. We march, pray, cry, protest, talk and ultimately forget another sacrificial lamb that has absolved us of our sins.

The post Trayvon Martin, Black Male Bodies, & Bloody National Discourse appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Let’s listen to Juror B37 below:

CHARLES BARKLEY: Well, I agreed with the verdict. I feel sorry that young kid got killed. But they didn’t have enough evidence to charge him. Something clearly went wrong that night. Clearly something went wrong. I feel bad for anybody who loses a kid, but if you looked at the case and you don’t make it — there was some racial profiling, no question about it. But something happened that changed the dynamic of that night, and I know — that’s probably not a popular opinion among most people but just looking at the evidence I agreed with the verdict.

Charles Barkley

I just feel bad because I don’t like when race gets out in the media because I don’t think the media has a pure heart, as I call it. There are very few people have a pure heart when it comes to race. Racism is wrong in any, shape, form — a lot of black people are racist too. I think sometimes when people talk about racism, they say only white people are racist. There are a lot of black people who are racist. I don’t like when it gets out there in the media because I don’t think the media has clean hands.

MARIA BARTIROMO, CNBC: I’m glad you made that point.

CHARLES BARKLEY: Obviously I feel sorry that young kid got killed but just judging by the evidence, I don’t think that guy should have went to jail the rest of his life. Something happened bad that night, obviously.

MARIA BARTIROMO: I like what the juror said, they both should have walked away. And if there is a shadow of a doubt, there is a shadow of a doubt.

CHARLES BARKLEY: And let me tell you, Mr. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue — he was racial profiling. I think Trayvon Martin, God rest his soul, I think he did flip the switch and started beating the hell out of Mr. Zimmerman. But it was just a bad situation. And like I said, the main thing I feel bad for, it gives every black and white person who is racist a platform to vent their ignorance.

That’s the thing that bothers me the most because I watched this trial closely and I watch all these people are television talking about it. A lot of people have a hidden agenda. You know, they want their racist views, whether they are white or black —

MARIA BARTIROMO: The bias comes out.

CHARLES BARKLEY: The bias, it definitely comes out. It was a bad situation, we all lost. And I feel bad for his parents. You don’t ever want to see anybody lose a kid. (CNBC Closing Bell, July 18, 2013)

Listen to Charles Barkley below:

Interestingly enough, someone else who expressed an opinion similar to Charles Barkley was former U.S. president, Jimmy Carter. In a recent interview, President Carter expressed his thoughts on the verdict, and made what I thought to be a clear explanation for the verdict.

“I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman and that he was not defending himself and so forth. It’s not a moral question, it’s a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented.” – Pres. Jimmy Carter

Watch the following to understand why Zimmerman was not guilty:

The post Charles Barkley Agrees with Zimmerman Trial Verdict appeared first on Madness & Reality.

But to make such observations is considered wrong for a myriad of reasons, so many to name.

So many articles have made clever and precise observations throughout the whole saga. And I have none to give you. It is very clear that the family of Trayvon Martin lost their fight for justice on behalf of their son. It’s undeniable that George Zimmerman is a free man with a gun as it was handed back to him after the trial. It is conclusive that several news outlets and pundits of a conservative nature did all they could to “thugify” Martin. And it is plain as the nose on your face that the public is still divided. Half of them see this as a mockery of justice while the other half became sore winners. Guess which half I belonged to.

Still, to bring it up is, in one way or another, wrong to do so because the explanation would be that it was in the past (several days ago).

Again, I don’t know what to write in this article that sparks some brain cells because I am too tired to do so. I feel like whiteness has once again ganged up and jumped me in a dirty alley. I feel beaten and exhausted for many reasons. But I’m particularly sick and tired of being told what to think, how to feel and why I’m wrong to think and feel the way I do concerning this case by a neverending parade of grown people with the white racial frame.

Here’s the truth. I naively hoped that the American justice system would come through for Martin’s family. I was disgusted with people trying to paint the young teen as just another typical black thug out to rob or kill. I was angry and disappointed when Zimmerman was acquited. In fact I was in tears. Yet, to some, that would be considered wrong.

I was wrong according to a segment which sees my hurtful emotions as pitiful whining. Trying to explain why is futile as these people will make you feel lower than sewage. They will use every derailing trick in the book to not only shut you up, but piss you off and beat you down. Some will go so far as to make you ashamed to be black pulling the old statistics and black-on-white crime tricks. And all because you don’t think like them do they choose to start arguments. Sure, we don’t all have to agree on everything, but when it comes to race, why not listen to those who are true victims of racial oppression at one time or another instead of just cutting them down for whining because you think you know more about racism than they do? That question particularly goes to some of you white folks.

Nothing you can say can justify why you think and feel the way you did that fateful evening and time thereafter. They simply don’t want to hear it. And they will tear you down in making that point known. Yet, most of those people believe they are “basically good” regardless.Some may refer to themselves as “Christians” or “God fearing”.

Yet, what good person would demonize someone’s child based on old stereotypes and trivial findings and would refer to him using racial epithets? What good person would support a killer of that child, a killer with a shady rap sheet including domestic violence and rape? And what good person would stand by and allow this to continue without speaking out?

I could explain the history of racism against blacks concerning the justice system from then until now. I could explain that this nation still devalues the lives of black people. I could explain why I think justice was forbidden to the family of an unarmed black teen. I could explain why I feel defeated and frustrated over the verdict. But it doesn’t matter.  I would still be logically and emotionally wrong.

The post Exasperated & Wrong: Thoughts About the Zimmerman Trial appeared first on Madness & Reality.