". . . Men hate each other because they fear each other; they fear each other because they don't know each other; they don't know each other because they can't communicate with each other; they can't communicate with each other because they are separated from each other . . . "
-Martin Luther King
Other Ray Jozwiak Offerings
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
The George Zimmerman trial has consumed the American public the past two weeks and certainly for good reason. I may as well weigh-in on it like everybody else because, hey, I'm not above it. As a matter of fact, no one is.
First, the obscene quote and knock-knock joke by the prosecution and defense respectively were totally out of order - especially the joke. On one hand, seeing photos and film of Zimmerman and hearing comments from his parents, I can't help but think that Zimmerman sorely regrets what he has done. He just appears to be a bit tortured. (It's just a feeling I get.) But that doesn't mean that what he did wasn't wrong and that he should not pay some penalty for taking an innocent, human life. You can't antagonize someone to the point of confrontation then pull out a weapon and kill him in the name of self-defense. That appears to me to be exactly what happened.
It also seems that by strict letter of the law, in a trial for 2nd degree murder (or manslaughter), one and only one thing has to happen. The prosecution must prove that Zimmerman killed for reasons other than self defense. And the prosecution must convince the jury that Zimmerman killed for reasons other than self defense beyond a shadow of a doubt. The defense only needs to place that doubt in the minds of the jurors. And that is exactly what, I believe, happened in that courtroom.
So I do believe that by the time that George Zimmerman pulled that trigger, he did feel that his life was in danger. Trayvon Martin was by that point very angry. Trayvon Martin was provoked. Trayvon Martin felt that his life was in danger. The trial did not broach anything remotely close these questions.
The trial also failed to address the series of events that occurred prior to that pulling of the trigger that led to that awful, crucial moment. The trial failed to address how Trayvon Martin must have felt when he finally, and mistakenly, confronted George Zimmerman. Sure, it would have been better to walk away. But it was not the absolutely-required thing to do.
Finally, if we learn anything at all from the Zimmerman debacle, it is that the contention of the NRA that the more guns we have in society the better off we will be is sheer and utter nonsense. No one should have to fear the prospect of a loaded gun being carried by another human being who is foolishly taking comfort in a
law that is cartoonishly named the "Stand Your Ground" law.
I
could be wrong, and I certainly am no lawyer, but it seems to me that
in the George Zimmerman murder trial, some of the defense's arguments
are just plain missing the point. If Trayvon Martin actually texted
someone in the past about purchasing a weapon, does that mean he
deserved to die?
If Trayvon Martin actually had traces of
marijuana in his system, does that mean he deserved to die? If Trayvon
Martin was on top of George Zimmerman at some point in the scuffle, does
that mean he deserved to die? George Zimmerman was intentionally
following Trayvon Martin for a period of time. When the two finally
clashed, Trayvon Martin actually put up a fight. Does that mean Trayvon
Martin deserved to die?
In many photos of George
Zimmerman, he appears to be introspective to the point of remorse. The
entire situation was most certainly unfortunate, to say the least.
Maybe the prosecution was overzealous in seeking a second-degree murder
charge?
And without a doubt in my mind, Florida's
'Stand Your Ground' (or as I prefer 'The Cowboy Law') is one of the most
stupid laws of which I have EVER heard!
Listening to the World Cafe radio program on NPR of pre-recorded interviews with George Martin, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr and playing Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.
People frequently refer to artists, musical and otherwise as 'brilliant' or by some other such superlative; and that's fine, except that they and their listeners must remember that the 'brilliance' to which they refer is merely subjective.
George Martin, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr (also the late John Lennon and George Harrison) may be referred to by some as brilliant, and that's fine, but it is a superlative and it is subjective.
All these people are extremely gifted, talented and creative individuals who happened to exist at a specific period in time during which there existed one particular and specific music industry complete with technological and structural elements that were unique to that time and which all working together and interacting as a business and cultural influence produced and distributed the product that resulted from the interaction of all the aforementioned factors in one particular time and space.
It cannot be duplicated or replicated ever again.
It was indeed CREATIVE. But was it brilliant? Maybe. Maybe not. But it happened. And we have a record of the fruits of the labors of these unique creative individuals for our personal and professional gratification.
Do we still have brilliance, creativity, gifts, talents and creativity? Will we continue to recognize, appreciate and reward it? I can only hope so.
What do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html
Download
your
very own copy of
ANOTHER SHOT
by Ray
Jozwiak
