Irresponsible acts led to shooting

The George Zimmerman trial was terrifying.

A man shot an unarmed teenager who was doing nothing wrong. A major news organization doctored a recording to make it look like there was racial profiling when there wasn’t. A prosecutor filed charges even though there was no evidence to refute the defendant’s claim of self-defense. Jesse Jackson claimed that the jury’s decision was flawed because there weren’t enough black men on the jury.

The entire case is a terrifying lesson for us because it is a story of dumb people doing irresponsible things.

We have met the enemy, and he is us.

Lloyd Lim
Makiki

Zimmerman didn’t need to kill Martin

George Zimmerman may have been found not guilty of murdering Trayvon Martin, but he was responsible for Martin’s death. If Zimmerman had followed instructions and not left his car, Martin would not be dead.

Mark Doo
Nuuanu

Right to self-defense prevails in court

The verdict in the George Zimmerman murder trial reaffirmed that under both the United States Constitution and the concept of natural law, every person has the right to stand their ground and, if threatened, to defend themselves by every means available.

The race-baiting cabal of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and President Barack Obama and their hacks in the media were slapped down hard by an all-woman jury — as well they should have been, since women are frequently the targets of violence.

Hopefully other Americans, especially women, will take note of this and be more cognizant of their legal and natural rights and avail themselves of means of self-defense.

The Sunday Honolulu Star-Advertiser apparently doesn’t agree, since it donated only three-quarters of an inch on its front page to the Zimmerman verdict while devoting the other 20 inches, plus a four-page special section, to a local class-action lawsuit ("Kalima v. State: Left with nothing," Star-Advertiser, July 14). While important in its own right, it is of little consequence to the other 320 million Americans who have a vested interest in this decision.

Jack M. Schmidt Jr.
Kailua

Smoking ban is ill-conceived

"(Kirk) Caldwell said he hopes that smokers will be discouraged from lighting up in the water by peer pressure being placed on them by non-smokers" ("Opponents plan to exploit loophole in park smoking ban," Star-Advertiser, July 13).

The mayor is advocating resolution to the issue by means of confrontation between two citizen groups. Confrontation, especially by means of "peer pres- sure," is a disaster waiting to happen. Does he hope for might to be right?

The ban of smoking is an ill-conceived attempt to satisfy people who believe the myth of secondhand smoke. Also, if the anti-litter laws are enforced, people would be less upset by a few whiffs of smoke than they are about the beaches looking like giant ashtrays. Can we please stop trying to make Hawaii into a little California?

Tom Baca
Mililani

Journalists’ rights need protection

I am gratified that President Barack Obama has directed Attorney General Eric Holder to release revised guidelines making it more difficult for the government to infringe the rights of journalists ("Justice expands protections for reporters’ records," Star-Advertiser, July 13).

However, I do not agree with the concept that the president has to "strike a balance between the news media’s First Amendment protections … and the nation’s national security interests."

National security is indeed a legitimate government activity. But the Bill of Rights was originally adopted as a condition for ratifying the Constitution so that none of our substantive, unalienable rights would be infringed by any of our government’s activities.

These rights are absolute. They were never intended by our Framers to be endowed with some sort of cushion to make it easier for the government to discharge its obligations.

Eric Szarmes
Kaimuki

Consumer choices drive globalization

David Chappell blames corporations for driving globalization, which means shipping U.S. jobs overseas for good ("Greedy corporations driving globalization," Star-Advertiser, Letters, July 14).

The real culprit is the U.S. consumer. Yes, that person seeking the lowest possible price for just about everything he or she buys. U.S. corporations have to compete by offering the lowest price too, and that usually means goods manufactured overseas. The consumer who buys 10 T-shirts made in Bangladesh for $20 instead of one made in the U.S. for $10 is the true culprit.

That consumer gets more shirts, but in many cases they are unwearable after only a few washings, while the U.S.-made shirt may still be going strong for more than a year. The U.S. manufacturer has to pay his employees $10 to $15 per hour making the shirts while the foreign manufacturer is probably paying its employees only $2 per day. U.S. corporations do this because it is absolutely necessary to survive in an intensely competitive world.

Jim Pollock
Kaneohe