Various commenters are opining about the race hustlers ginning up anger in the black community over the Zimmerman verdict. Some feel as though the race baiters need to do this to remain relevant, and to keep money coming in. There is no doubt that both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have made untold millions from there ability to scrape the scab off the wound, and little has been written about how specifically that has been accomplished. But the IRS is unlikely to look into or leak the details of Rainbow/PUSH or to leak its donor list. They are too busy asking of conservative groups about the content of their prayers. I see this as partly true, in that the race baiters are doing what comes naturally, all hoping for a pay off from the civil suit they are likely to file.
Then there are those who frame the race baiters actions within the framework of the Left. They point out that the Left, who claim the mantel of tolerance, diversity, and compassion, are almost always the intolerant haters. A piece in the American Thinker today makes the case that the only hate crime committed in the Zimmerman case was that of the left in Hate Crimes, Indeed by Jeffrey T. Brown. I find again a partial truth, in that the Left is doing what comes naturally, making up "facts" to fit a narrative, and not letting the truth interfere with their narrative. In this narrative, Zimmerman is "white," not Hispanic. In their story line, every white person is born with the original sin of racism, and it is this that drove Zimmerman to shoot Martin in cold blood out of malice and spite. And of course, the enlightened ones of the left know so well the dark heart of the average American.
But I think ultimately, the real goal of the left can be found in this article from Townhall.com. The Left has been "gunning" for "Stand Your Ground" laws ever since they were first passed by Florida. Stand your ground does two things. First, in a self defense case, you no longer have a duty to retreat. In many cases, one is attacked fast and from an angle the defender was not looking. The attacker is on the defender and keeping him off balance. There is no opportunity to retreat, and this can be used by anti-gun prosecutors to persecute someone for the "crime" of carrying a gun. In some jurisdictions, every gun death was prosecuted as murder. Some managed to get off, but many were caught up in a smoke and mirrors cloud of theories of whether or not they had retreated as far as they could before they finally took action. Literally, your back must be against the wall, with nowhere to go, and your attacker is on you before you can begin to defend yourself. It gave both the criminal, and the anti-gun prosecutor (but I repeat myself) a huge advantage.
The victim in all this, the guy who used a gun to defend himself was victimized three times before "stand your ground" became law. The first time when he was assaulted. The second time by the criminal justice system, and the third time by the civil courts. Often the crook's family would file a civil suit asserting wrongful death. In civil court, the plaintiff does not have to prove his case, the defense must prove his innocence of the charges. No wonder the plaintiffs often win, ruining a person. Of course, the only person getting rich in this are the lawyers.
I believe the real goal of the Left is becoming clear. Keep the citizens distracted and upset, while going after and repealing "stand your ground." The fact that Florida has recently reconsidered these laws and decided not to change anything seems to have no bearing on their opinion. the Left wants this even though blacks disproportionally benefit from "stand your ground." They want to go back to the days when they could harass gun owners under color of law. How great was that?
19 minutes ago