Not a fan of it. The piece doesn't have humanity just a man with a gun shooting. the artist should have done just a face filled with facial features from different ethnicities. I give him a C- not exhibition material.
Not explicitly, but there are many here who often point out what Zimmerman could have/should have done, as if that makes their Murder case any stronger. So while it was technically directed at you, it was meant more as a general accusation of the Martin supporters. This "mural" is nothing but antagonistic propaganda. There was no racial theme in Zimmerman's behavior as deemed by the FBI, and this artist is insinuating that Martin was shot in the back, that Martin's behavior had nothing to do with why he was killed. Which happens to be a recurring theme among the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and crew. There is only one explanation when a black person is killed by a non-black person, racism. The victim's are never responsible for their actions. Zimmerman was a victim that night too, he was attacked too, and while yes, the gun is mightier than the sword, that doesn't excuse Martin's response. No one thinks Martin should have died that night, but it's not like Zimmerman murdered him in the sense that he purposefully shot to kill, but rather all evidence appears that he shot in a struggle (with Martin above him, not in the back), and Martin died from his injury. I don't see how anyone -- black, white, Hispanic, Asian, old, or young -- can look at this case and deem Zimmerman a murderer, not from any evidence I've seen. Again, not all directed specifically at you, but rather a response to the general narrative put forth by Zimmerman opponents.
I think Zimmerman should have been charged for manslaughter and tried on those grounds (not the farce of a trial that happened). That painting is stupid.
I had a friend that's a very OCD helicopter mom that almost never lets her kid play in public parks or go to amusment parks, etc, citing the fear of sexual predators. I told her that the way she was raising him was more likely to create a sexual predator than protect him from harm (which obviously didn't go over well). People worry too often about their children being victims one day and not nearly enough about them being perpetrators of wrongdoing. Every criminal had parents. Also, no matter what the intent of the artist was, the painting is awful.
So Martin Luther King Jr is more important than any 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 or 19 year old? So if Satan said you could bring back MLK Jr. by offering the life of a teen, you would do it?
