Obama gave his response to the Zimmerman trial, calling on all his “bruthas” and “sistas” not to resort to violence since “a jury has spoken.” He said this whole trial was about the need for more gun control, and if we’re to honor Trayvon Martin appropriately, we should do it by “stemming the tide of gun violence.” Here’s what Obama said:
“The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. 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. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that’s a job for all of us. That’s the way to honor Trayvon Martin.”
If only Zimmerman didn’t have a gun. But then we might have ended up with a dead “white Hispanic,” which would have only been reported in the obituary section of a local Sanford, Florida newspaper. If that.
It’s like what they say about journalism rules; what should be news and what shouldn’t be news. “Dog bites man” is not news. But “man bites dog”…now there’s a news story for you. There’s nothing newsworthy about a black person shooting and killing another person. But when a black person is killed by a person with a different skin color and ethnic background, the media can capitalize on that for a year. At least.
So, while Obama and the rest of his team think the Zimmerman trial has been some sort of teaching tool about why we need more gun control, there’s some new data out that show that the states with the most restrictive gun laws have the lowest gun deaths. The Examiner reported:
“The top ten states with the most restrictive gun laws had 2,002 gun deaths, versus the ten states with the least restrictive gun laws, which totaled 696 gun deaths. The state with the fewest restrictions on firearms (and therefore the lowest scored), Utah, has had 29 gun deaths since Sandy Hook. If the top state for gun deaths, California, is removed entirely from the equation, the total number of gun deaths would fall to 1,325 for the states with the most stringent gun control laws, which is still a significant difference from the tally of 696 gun deaths from the top ten least restrictive gun states.”
Do they want to really “stem the tide of gun violence” or not? It seems that those states that have taken Obama’s advice have more problems with gun violence than those that haven’t taken his advice. But then again, gun control was never about keeping anybody safe, now was it?