imho, the changes in US society that will need to happen for things like this to become less prevalent can be achieved in any meaningful way without fixing the poverty and inequality, and the linked social distance and fear that provided the context in this case. That will have to involve things like a full employment policy, raising of the minimum wage and things like that all these are pretty much race neutral. If the people running this campaign want even to touch the ‘stand your ground’ laws that may have been a factor in why Zimmerman’s used a gun, they will have to persuade a lot of white people that it is a worthwhile thing to do. I think that there is data that you could easily draw on to do this
http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/06/29/standing-your-ground/ as the ‘stand your ground’ laws are, according to the paper quoted they are..

“associated with a significant increase in the number of homicides among whites, especially white males. According to our estimates, between 4.4 and 7.4 additional white males are killed each month as a result of these laws. We find no evidence to suggest that these laws increase homicides among blacks”

(obviously I’m just an internet derp but) I don’t think the kind of sentiment in the OP above is going to help anyone. It is weightless and doesn’t work on people outside narrow liberal circles, you need to appeal to the wider population.There are plenty of rural poor white people who are on the receiving end of similar police policies to the urban poor black people who are commonly badly treated. There are also lots of young people in the suburbs (and their parents who care about them) who are the victims of much softer but ultimately analogous police tactics. Knitting these people together might be enough to make a small change in police policy.

Personally, I’m not sure why anyone would post TAA’s opinion on anything, because he is such a deplorable human being, but suit yourself. Social change, political change, whatever…he genuinely believes that nobody can accomplish anything in this area, because reasons.
And basically, he thinks that this is solely about proof. Colour me unsurprised. Of course it couldn’t have anything to do with terrible laws, or racism, or any of that. Because this is essentially TAA’s answer to everything (except feminism, of course)…”nothing we do is at all effective (citation needed), so why try to do anything at all.” Are you shocked by his apathy? Because if you’ve watched any of his videos, his total lack of compassion for other people quickly becomes very apparent. His idea of an excellent argument is to yell louder and be more obnoxious than his opponent. He thinks he’s some kind of mental giant because he’s figured out that the big guy in the sky doesn’t really exist. Expecting this guy to get it is like expecting an elephant to do jumping jacks.

I’ve read his attempt at defending that position. It is indeed absurd.

By the way, Ben P on the Lousy Canuck’s web site also agrees that, given the state of the law and the jury instructions, the jury made the correct call so I guess he, like Jonathan Turley, is absurd also.

similar to this one: Once when stopped for something (speeding ticket? don’t remember) the cop noticed the collection of license plates in the back seat (I saved all the plates from all the states I’ve lived in). The conversation went like this:
Cop: “What’s with those plates?”
Me: “They’re old plates, I’m keeping them as a souvenir.”
Cop: “Ok.”

Yeah, I’m not sure what to think about that. I responded to it in another comment: http://freethoughtblogs.com/brutereason/2013/07/15/i-am-not-trayvon-martin/#comment-12462

Basically, I don’t know what else there is to do but to say nothing at all so that white people do not become the “center of attention.” But silence sends a pretty shitty message, too.

Also, if saying that you have white privilege IS white privilege, then…well, we’ve got ourselves a catch-22.

http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2013/07/we-are-not-trayvon-martin-tumblr-page-prompts-mass-discussion/

Ya, what really gets me (an old white person with a shock of white hair, living in an area of Michigan in which the most conspicuous non-European ethnos is Odawa-Chippewa) is that “stand your ground” trumps “reasonable man” wherever this kind of law exists (e.g., MI since about 2005). Mr Martin was simply legally lynched, and part of the legislative intent was to enable this and future lynchings. Z’s totally unreasonable behavior–disregarding advice from the PD, for example–would have put him in the slammer under the old rules. Now, these crazy laws imply that all you have to do is turn on an armed stalker and you could wind up dead meat. Me, probably not. Younger relatives–not so sure.

Yea, it’s pretty clear to me that Zimmerman should have gotten involuntary manslaughter. I’m surprised he didn’t. . As for the race angle, I think Zimmerman is partially white but (to me at least, and obviously others too) he appears Hispanic, and really that’s what matters. And since Hispanics are also a racial minority, they’re more likely to be held responsible for the actions of one individual. I’m not saying that means people should stop talking about Trayvon Martin or anything like that… it’s just something to keep in mind. Like you said, it’s probably more productive to focus on the system that allows for (you might say foments) crimes like this- but also, I think there’s an obligation to make it clear that that is in fact what you’re talking about. I diverge from some SJs here, because I don’t agree that “righteous anger” allows for a complete abdication of responsibility for what you say and how it comes across to others. Words have power. A similar example: frothing at the mouth over Zimmerman the psychopath/mentally disturbed killer has implications that the owner of the frothing mouth probably hasn’t considered.