In response to this survey about the murder trial of George Zimmerman, I composed some thoughts on managing threat-perception and response.
If
we all got what we deserved, life as we know it would not exist. I am
not personally eager to alter the decision of the court (which I support
as an institution even when it renders individual decisions that I or
others might dislike).
I
don't say that Zimmerman had no right to be where he was, doing as he
did (even). But to Marc's point, I think he might have done better
(either by checking himself before he exited the truck or by being
better prepared to defend himself with appropriate force: he relied on
the gun too much, I think, and too little on the body manipulating it).
What
interests me here is thinking about how my behavior will play out in
future, as I seek to avoid being either Zimmerman (the man who can only
defend himself by killing people) or Martin (the man who tempts fate by
putting a coward's back to the wall: in calling Zimmerman a coward here,
I am not saying he is a bad person). There will always be people who
see me as threatening and have occasion to overreact to my threat (even
if it is entirely imaginary, as I am not sure it was in this case). How
do I "play it smart" so as to minimize the likelihood of my (1) sending
threat-signals and (2) overreacting to what I perceive as someone
else's threat-signals.
(2)
Zimmerman was on alert because of recent burglaries. He was
understandably anxious to make sure none occurred uncontested on his
watch. His mistake was being poorly trained in effective violence. I
personally believe that violence is sometimes necessary, and that every
able-bodied person who accepts the responsibility of carrying weapons
simultaneously takes up the responsibility of learning to use them
appropriately (i.e. only when they are really needed). Zimmerman should
have been "good enough" at fighting hand-to-hand not to kill Martin, I
think. This does not make his killing illegal--or deny that it was most
unfortunate. For me it means that we (i.e. ordinary citizens with
weapons, not lawmakers or the legal system) need to do some work
dispelling the myth that merely carrying a weapon makes anybody safer.
The best weapon is a fully engaged human CNS.
(1)
The media played the racist card here, but I confess I see that as a
red herring. Racism is one of those issues (like gender) that is
undoubtedly important at the level of communities: I don't deny that.
Its role in individual encounters, however, is hard to define: in this
case, all the evidence I see points away from its being significant.
(And I admit I am biased by my own experience here, experience which
tells me that I always prefer my friends--black, brown, yellow, red, or
white--over people I don't know, especially in charged situations where I
fear crime. Zimmerman was afraid of Martin because he was an unknown
dude loitering in a neighborhood plagued by recent burglaries, not
because American society as a whole has issues with racism. This
appears clear when you consider Zimmerman's own history of peaceful
engagement with black folk.)
The
real issue is how to avoid sending threat-signals. First, it is
necessary to notice that you cannot turn them off entirely. People will
always feel threatened by you at some point, not always because you are
really dangerous to them. Martin's mistake appears (to me) to have
been escalating a bad situation. When I see a Zimmerman lurking in my
rearview mirror, I will remember Martin and refrain from jumping him
(since he might have a gun and not know how to avoid using it). Looking
over Martin's life-history (imperfectly summarized in the link above,
among other places), it seems he had an unrealistic idea of what
fighting means. For him, fighting was something males do to show
dominance (e.g. the dude he mentions roughing up after school). He
didn't pause to consider that not every man out there is always going to
"duke it out" in the manner of rams in rut (boxers in the ring,
wrestlers on the mat). He misread Zimmerman (as Zimmerman misread
himself, putting himself in a position too vulnerable for his fighting
capability).
To
me this case provides an opportunity for me to revisit how I construct
my persona (the threat profile I project into the world) and my response
to others' personae (the threat I perceive from other people in my
vicinity). I cannot make myself appear universally unthreatening (nor
would I want to, honestly: the world has some bad people in it, and I
would rather they fear me). Nor can I correct the error in judgement
that nature has built into my own threat-perception: the species
survives because we are paranoid, seeing danger that isn't always there.
That said, I can prepare myself to act responsibly on the reality that
my environment presents constant threats. I can become more effective
than Zimmerman in dealing out appropriate violence (starting with the
rule that I don't charge in with my only defense being "kill the other
guy!"), and more effective than Martin in allaying the threat others may
feel from me (starting with the rule that I don't jump people who tail
me).
No comments:
Post a Comment