Published: Sunday, Aug. 11, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
To all who advocate that the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin incident was a hate crime, now that Mr. Zimmerman has been acquitted: Please feel free to do the same for Antonio West, a 13-month-old white, who was shot point-blank in the face, allegedly by De'Marquise Elkins, a 17-year-old black, in Georgia.
Please sensationalize the racial elements of this crime with the same vigor as witnessed with 17-year-old Trayvon. Please ignore all of the facts, circumstances and evidence surrounding the case involving De'Marquise and Antonio with the same indifference applied to the Zimmerman-Martin trial. Concentrate only on the perceived racial profiling that substantiates the sensationalizing of hate.
Also, explain why Attorney General Eric Holder doesn't abhor the Georgia law that precludes De'Marquise Elkins from capital punishment as he does the self-defense law that resulted in Zimmerman's acquittal. Explain to me why President Obama doesn't advocate gun control when a white 13-month-old is shot in the face.
Lastly, explain why Al Sharpton doesn't express fear over innocent white children being shot in their strollers by blacks under the age of 18.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Prevailing wage downsides I
- Prevailing wage downsides II
- Lies and disrespect I taught …
- Hero at rest
- Choosing judges II
- Choosing judges I
- Christians must vote
- Media’s mass hypnosis
- Legacy: All lose
- More overreach
- Us & them