Monday's Special Edition: When Not Guilty Does Not Mean Innocent: A Nation Struggles With the Zimmerman Acquittal

Thought for the Day: I could not simply write a Motivational Monday post today as if the George Zimmerman acquittal had not happened. I must admit I thought about it & delayed writing till after 10 AM today. However, I felt compelled to share some thoughts on the trial from a psychological & personal perspective. Many people across the United States are struggling with mixed feelings about the decision in Florida that George Zimmerman was found to be not guilty of murder or manslaughter. The jury decided that they could not determine beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was not acting in self defense when he killed 17 year old, unarmed Trayvon Martin. Although the jury may have had no choice other than the not guilty decision, it simply feels wrong. It makes me fearful this decision will reinforce the vigilante-like actions & racially profiling tendencies which appear to have motivated Zimmerman to go after Trayvon in the first place. Even if Zimmerman feared for his life at the second before he pulled the trigger, as a society are we reinforcing behaviors that increase the chance for violence, prejudice & injustice? What do you think? How can the system be improved? Did it work properly or is it flawed?

There have been protests around the nation calling for action by the Federal Government''s Department of Justice to try Zimmerman for Civil Rights violations. The government has reopened their investigation in light of the protests. Our president, Barack Obama, acknowledged the strong feelings this case has evoked, "but we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son." 

Both my parents were lawyers who taught me to respect laws & the legal system on which our nation was founded. They were also political activists, who ingrained in me a responsible citizen's obligation to do whatever I could, legally, to change a law if I felt it was unjust. Lawyers tend to see things in black & white. Psychologists, on the other hand, see all the shades of grey, in addition to the rest of the colors of the rainbow. In complicated situations like this one, the restraint of accepting the verdict as the law of the land, helps me. However, it does not stop me or any citizen in this great nation from speaking out to reform laws & procedures which may lead to unjust policies.

I believe that we all must acknowledge, reflect & speak up about our feelings. If we feel things are wrong, we can protest & search for creative ways to change the current reality in our society. Over the weekend I received an e-mail from Sharon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action Against Gun Violence. She wrote: 

"Today, we are all Trayvon Martin’s mother. Trayvon, a 17-year- old victim of gun violence, was sadly one of the children and teens shot and killed every 3 hours and 15 minutes in America. Gun violence is a public health crisis of epidemic proportions in our country and, unchecked by Congress and many state legislatures, continues to spiral out of control. The lack of regulation of guns in America is a grave danger to all of our children....It is time for the 80 million mothers of America to stand our ground and demand new, common-sense gun laws and policies that will protect our children and honor the tragic shooting deaths of youths like Trayvon Martin. Collectively, we can use our votes and our voices to change policies and laws that will help keep American children out of the line of fire."
One way to do something about how you are feeling about the verdict is to Join Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense In America TODAY. 

There are other things which you can do in response to the feelings this case has conjured up. If you feel that racial profiling played a part in this tragedy, get involved in programs that teach tolerance of differences & work to eliminate prejudice. I have written in the past about programs & organizations that are working towards this goal (see recent series of posts on bullying: Part I,  Part II,  Part III, &  Part IV). Get involved & advocate for their inclusion in our schools & communities. 

I would love to hear your thought about the decision & any ideas you have for reform of the legal system, jury selection you may have.

Photo of Trayvon Martin from Moms Demand Action

Bullying Part VI: Can Stricter Gun Control Laws Prevent Tragedies Like Aurora?

AP Hearbreak in Aurora

Thought for the Day: I am saddened by the madness & escalation of violence in our country. My initial thought that the violence might be in the hands of another victim of bullying, may be wrong, but The Aurora Massacre raises serious questions for our society. There are no simple solutions, but the use of common sense in developing better gun control laws & ways to detect signs that someone may be planning a violent act need to be explored.

When my eldest daughter was about six years old, I was living in Israel. There was a terrorist attack at the Lod Airport not far from my home. When my daughter heard about the attack her reaction was, "If they get guns and attack me & my family, I'll just get a gun & kill their families." As a pacifist & parent living in a war torn nation, I was horrified to hear my innocent child's response to the terrorism. I told her that the army was there & had responded to defend it's citizens, but that we do not go out & commit terrorist attacks against defenseless women, children, and tourists as retribution. Fortunately, my daughter grew up to be a sensible law abiding citizen & parent with views closer to my own. The terror in Aurora brought back memories of that day.

How can anyone advocate for allowing people like Holmes the freedom to accumulate an arsenal of weapons without raising any red flags? When our forefathers advocated for weapons for self defense, they also gave us all inalienable rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Someone must fight for the rights of the victims who went to a movie & were denied their right to live. I am not a politician, just a psychologist  believing that tragedies like the Aurora massacre, Columbine & other similar attacks could be prevented with restrictions of automatic weapons & supplies that are used to develop explosive devices.

Sarah Palin, former Alaska Governor & vice presidential candidate's sounded more like my six year old daughter with an over simplistic approach when she said, “The bad guys, the criminals, don’t follow laws and restricting more of America’s freedoms when it comes to self-defense isn’t the answer. Not when you consider what the reality is. Bad guys don’t follow laws.” She described the shootings as "a manifestation of evil. It appears that Holmes, the alleged shooter, was not only evil but also mentally ill. He is not the first person with serious mental illness to go on a rampage with automatic weapons. I am not expecting a gun dealer or the internet gun suppliers to be psychologists, but the laws & automatic internet devices could raise red flags when anyone tries to purchase automatic weapons or large supplies of ammunition designed for combat, not simple self defense. Does the fact that criminals don't follow laws mean we should make it easy for them to obtain weapons?

Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson's statement was also overly simplistic when he said that, "...it's certainly one of the rationales behind conceal and carry, where criminals actually have to be a little concerned before they commit a criminal act that maybe somebody could stop them. And I think that is the truth. That somebody, a responsible individual had been carrying a weapon, maybe -- maybe -- they could have prevented the death and injuries." A concealed pistol in the hands of a novice shooter could not have stopped the onslaught of automatic weapons. Criminals know there may be someone with a gun & therefore they have escalated their choice of weapons to more powerful automatic & semi-automatic weapons that most people do not take with them to a movie theater.

We should not ignore the problem like Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper who weighed in against stricter gun control, telling ABC that Holmes would have been able to create terror even without access to firearms.  James Holmes had over 30 grenades in his apartment. How can anyone in the United States buy grenades without someone wondering why they would need them?

I agree with New York mayor Michael Bloomberg who questions both Obama & Romney's failure to advocate for stricter gun control, “This really is an enormous problem for the country, and it's up to these two presidential candidates. They want to lead this country, and they've said things before that they're in favor of banning things like assault weapons. Where are they now and why don't they stand up? And if they want our votes, they better."

After I posted this, I saw that President Obama did speak out for changes. Although he supports the right to carry guns for hunting & self defense, he "also believe(s) that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals. That they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities. I believe the majority of gun owners would agree we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons, and we should check someone's criminal record before they can check out a gun seller."

In addition, he called for new restrictions that would bar mentally unstable people from purchasing weapons. He stated that, "These steps shouldn't be controversial, they should be common sense." These changes should be supported across party lines.


We all need to take a stand & confront the these complex questions. Where do you stand on this issue? I would like to know your thoughts.